Southpaw Grammar/Maladjusted reissues

[Infatuation]

How can you possibly say all these misguided things?

If trends aren't the dominating factor please tell me exactly how Britney Spears, Take That etc etc etc, are at the top of these prized charts. I'l let you have a guess. Trends, and because its fashionable. Look at the 80's 99 percent of the 'artistes' that sold tremendously aren't even remembered now. Most people even look back with disgust at what they followed, and bought. The reason at the time they bought was because it was fashionable, and because everyone was doing it. It really is that simple. No sacred bond between record and buyer, no, because the majority of people don't care for music.

The same applies to his comeback with the NME shouting from the hills that the 'Mozfather' had returned and telling all their young buyers how great he was. He became fashionable. Numerous bands came out in support of Morrissey, and the bands that did, most were successful and popular bands. The Killers, Franz Ferdinand, The Libertines (all at the height of there success) etc. This caused people to take notice. It's no coincidence that YATQ sold so well. The reason being that he was fashionable for a short period of time. He was also on the cover of more magazines and held more interviews on what you could call 'target audience/mainstream' television in such a short space of time. You could claim this was planned, possibly just pleased some people out there were taking notice, after his horrendous fall from the public view in 1995-1997. This was when Morrissey was V.V.V unpopular. The reason... He was out of fashion, nobody was bothered anylonger, they had Oasis, Blur, BRITPOP, this meant Morrissey was overlooked and seen as unbearably unfashionable.

I find it very naive of you to say such idiotic things as 'belittles the man'. In no way does it. Commercial sales... Sales of any matter don't calculate or measure the worth of art or talent. Morrissey recently has come out and said he is a 'popular artist' saying he despises being called or considered 'alternative' because he believes 'anyone could and basically should like his music.'

It obvious he craves attention and affection. He always has. He has always wanted big record sales without compromising himself. This dates back to The Smiths days. And during the mid-90's his complaints of never being advertised, or marketed well. 'When's the last time you saw the world covered in Morrissey posters'

I find it rather amusing you seem to think that Morrisseys unpredictable record sales are due to fans, just scratching their heads and deciding they'll miss out this album. No, the reason for it is fashion. Fashion always dictates what sells, always has, always will.

70percent of music is bought by an age group 14-9, this means they hold the key to commercial success look at MIlley Cyrus or whatever.

Sales never determine talent. They simply show what was in fashion.

This view...



...echoes this view...



...in ascribing Morrissey's commercial success to trends.

Seriously? Trends? Is this the "stopped clock is right twice a day" argument?

You're belittling Morrissey's past achievements (not to mention insulting most of his fans). If Morrissey believed that his audience ebbed and flowed because of trends he wouldn't give a damn about chart success. He wouldn't give a damn about having his records heard. He probably wouldn't have answered the f***ing door when Johnny came knocking, for that matter. What difference would any of it make?

Morrissey had a hit album and singles during Madchester. He had hits during grunge. Need we dwell on the unlikely commercial success of The Smiths during the mid-Eighties when pop culture was a toxic sewage dump? Don't tell me "Meat Is Murder" hit #1 because it was "fashionable".

"Vauxhall and I" was a masterpiece with one-- one-- memorable single good enough to score high in the charts. "Southpaw Grammar" didn't have any obvious singles to piggyback on "Vauxhall and I". By the time "Maladjusted" came out, with the solid "Alma Matters", he'd been absent from the charts for a few years aside from a brief and frankly bizarre flirtation with boxing. He was also returning with a sound very similar to everything he'd already done in a year that also saw well-received, more contemporary-sounding albums by Radiohead ("OK Computer", for f***'s sake), Bjork, Jay-Z, Spiritualized, Pavement, and Wu Tang Clan among others. Worse, as with 'Vauxhall', "Maladjusted" had only one chart-friendly single on the album.

Moreover, according to the trustworthy Passions Just Like Mine site, between the end of 1992 and September 1997, a span of almost five years, he spent a grand total of forty days on tour. Forty days. In five years. This, despite the obvious correlation between the success of the '91 Kill Uncle tour leading to the triumphs of "Your Arsenal" and "Vauxhall and I". The momentum of the first half of the decade was squandered.

Maybe Morrissey had good reasons not to record albums and spend endless months on the road-- the lawsuit and its aftermath, label switches, managers, the usual stuff-- but for one reason or another he didn't do enough to justify consistent success. It had little to do with trends, fickle fans, and dimwitted record buyers.

The only time he benefited from being fashionable was during the "comeback" year of YATQ, but then again he also had two cracking singles in "Irish Blood, English Heart" and "First of The Gang To Die", easily his best back-to-back singles since "Suedehead" and "Everyday Is Like Sunday" (and don't forget the songs had already created a buzz on the web in their bootlegged iterations for at least a year or two before their release).

There's no mystery. Commercially viable music-- in the best, most optimistic sense-- will sell. I know Years of Refusal is a great album that isn't selling well. But if we're honest with ourselves it's an album only Morrissey fans could truly love. Trends aren't to blame. Drummers and bitter journalists aren't to blame. Geoff Travis may be to blame-- he's always to blame-- but that's about it. The world has moved on and Morrissey's talent isn't going to dominate the market any more, if it ever could. C'est la vie.

 

[Worm]

Sales never determine talent. They simply show what was in fashion.

I know you think that sounds like a nice little quip but have you considered that you're not only saying Morrissey's commercial lulls are due to "fashion" but his successes, as well?

You say media hype "caused people to take notice. It's no coincidence that YATQ sold so well. The reason being that he was fashionable for a short period of time". (You're giving the NME way too much credit. Morrissey wouldn't like that.) No doubt the hype helped sales. But as I pointed out above, YATQ had two incredible singles to sell the public along with a recent tour supporting it. "Southpaw" didn't. "Maladjusted" had a three-month fall tour-- right before another two-year "break" from the stage. These factors were more decisive than whether or not Franz Ferdinand namechecked Morrissey in a Q interview.

You say "Morrissey recently has come out and said he is a 'popular artist' saying he despises being called or considered 'alternative' because he believes 'anyone could and basically should like his music'". Yes. Morrissey has always reserved his anger for the gatekeepers of the music industry-- the executives, the radio disc jockeys, the journalists, the ad men, the TV presenters-- and not the public. The public, he has always believed, would like his music, and other kinds of intelligent fare, if they were exposed to it.

So why then do you turn around and insult that same public by saying "Fashion always dictates what sells, always has, always will"?

You might be right, but it depends on which "public" we're talking about.

Trends and fashion are the dominating factor in pop culture if we are talking about Britney Spears and Take That or the target demographic of 9-14 year olds. Believe me, I can easily outduel you in cynicsm about the public at large and the schemes of middle-aged accountants to brainwash little girls.

But we're not talking about the public at large, are we. We're talking about Morrissey and his record sales. There is a relatively small wedge of the record-buying public that could be considered potential listeners. I'd put the number at maybe two or three million in the entire world. It's these people I'm talking about. People predisposed to like the sort of music Morrissey makes. YATQ sold well because he won them over, not because he convinced a girl in pigtails and braces to abandon High School Musical.

Though these people are influenced by wider trends-- as you are, as I am-- they've got minds of their own. They're intelligent and discerning. They bought Morrissey records when Madchester was all the craze and they bought them when grunge was exploding. And they deserted Morrissey for stretches of the mid to late 90s for reasons that have nothing to do with mindlessly following trends. I know. I was there. Morrissey lost momentum. He may have had perfectly good reasons, but he lost momentum. "Southpaw Grammar" and "Maladjusted" were disappointments from the sleeves and some of the uninspired tracks to the weak singles and lack of touring. I tend to think Morrissey would agree with me, too, considering he is re-issuing them with new sleeves and new track listings.

All this talk of "trends" is ridiculous. If we want to moan endlessly that he isn't selling twenty million units because of Miley Cyrus, let's fire up a hot air balloon and toast each other's Great Disappointment In Humanity while we piss on their heads from a great height. I'm free next Thursday. But I'm sorry to inform you that there are plenty of people with good taste who backed off of Morrissey for reasons that are no less legitimate just because you and I differ with them. I'm not going to blame trends when "Roy's Keen" was up against "Karma Police".

In any case your Morrissey-like disdain for the record-buying public would be a lot more convincing if Morrissey agreed with you. He isn't Boethius for God's sake. He enthusiastically courts the very people you shun as fashion monkeys. And he has enough faith in his own genius to know that he, like all the great ones, has the power to set trends, make taste, and create the audience. This idea of Morrissey moping around lamenting "fashion" and "trends"-- I don't recognize that fetus-positioned, frail-minded, simpering dwarf at all.

 

[CrookedLittleVein]

A very entertaining thread... but. None of it really matters. Maladjusted in its original form will still exist. Is Morrissey right or wrong to tamper with the track listing? I don't know. But is it really that different from creating new sleeve artwork?

Why is Morrissey doing this? Rather like the dog that licks its own testicles, doubtless because he can.

Is the new track listing better or worse? I don't know. I suspect track listings go through numerous revisions before the final sequence is agreed upon. Does that mean the at-the-time-of-publication track listing is right? I don't think so.

In this ipod-saturated age, we all skip and edit to suit our own tastes and preferences. I think Morrissey is doing the same. We can all glare skyward and growl, "Is nothing sacred?" but we're all intelligent enough and mature enough to know the answer to that one: of course nothing's sacred. Nor should it be.

Should he have removed Roy's Keen? Doesn't matter to me: I rarely listen to the wretched thing. Should he have added This is Not Your Country? Doesn't matter to me: I'll rarely (if ever) listen to the wretched, droning splodge of a thing.

I've long since realised that Morrissey's songs should be seen as part of a wonderful continuum (and long may he continuum) to be dipped into when the mood takes me (which is most of the time). Is Years of Refusal a good album? I honestly don't know. Is I'm Okay By Myself a thrilling, thumping, all-out-assault of a song? By golly, yes.

When Morrissey brings out a new album, I'm delighted. But not because he's releasing a new long player to be enjoyed as a thing in itself but because there's twelve more songs (not to mention b-sides) swelling that wonderful continuum.

I'm not saying albums don't matter because... actually, I think am saying albums don't matter. And I'm not sure how I feel about that.

I'm not fond of the compare-and-contrast mentality albums seem to (unintentionally?) encourage. The only thing that matters are the songs. Listen or don't listen: it's an analogue decision. Is I'm Okay by Myself better than the utterly heartbreaking I Know it's Over? Of course it is: I Know it's Over is neither thrilling nor thumping. Is I Know it's Over better than I'm Okay by Myself? Of course it is: I'm Okay by Myself couldn't possibly break my heart, although it could give me a fat lip and a black eye.

I don't know much, but I do know this: only the songs matter. Only the songs. The ones I like, anyway.

 

[Johan de Witt]

How can you possibly say all these misguided things?

If trends aren't the dominating factor please tell me exactly how Britney Spears, Take That etc etc etc, are at the top of these prized charts. I'l let you have a guess. Trends, and because its fashionable. Look at the 80's 99 percent of the 'artistes' that sold tremendously aren't even remembered now. Most people even look back with disgust at what they followed, and bought. The reason at the time they bought was because it was fashionable, and because everyone was doing it. It really is that simple. No sacred bond between record and buyer, no, because the majority of people don't care for music.

The same applies to his comeback with the NME shouting from the hills that the 'Mozfather' had returned and telling all their young buyers how great he was. He became fashionable. Numerous bands came out in support of Morrissey, and the bands that did, most were successful and popular bands. The Killers, Franz Ferdinand, The Libertines (all at the height of there success) etc. This caused people to take notice. It's no coincidence that YATQ sold so well. The reason being that he was fashionable for a short period of time. He was also on the cover of more magazines and held more interviews on what you could call 'target audience/mainstream' television in such a short space of time. You could claim this was planned, possibly just pleased some people out there were taking notice, after his horrendous fall from the public view in 1995-1997. This was when Morrissey was V.V.V unpopular. The reason... He was out of fashion, nobody was bothered anylonger, they had Oasis, Blur, BRITPOP, this meant Morrissey was overlooked and seen as unbearably unfashionable.

I find it very naive of you to say such idiotic things as 'belittles the man'. In no way does it. Commercial sales... Sales of any matter don't calculate or measure the worth of art or talent. Morrissey recently has come out and said he is a 'popular artist' saying he despises being called or considered 'alternative' because he believes 'anyone could and basically should like his music.'

It obvious he craves attention and affection. He always has. He has always wanted big record sales without compromising himself. This dates back to The Smiths days. And during the mid-90's his complaints of never being advertised, or marketed well. 'When's the last time you saw the world covered in Morrissey posters'

I find it rather amusing you seem to think that Morrisseys unpredictable record sales are due to fans, just scratching their heads and deciding they'll miss out this album. No, the reason for it is fashion. Fashion always dictates what sells, always has, always will.

70percent of music is bought by an age group 14-9, this means they hold the key to commercial success look at MIlley Cyrus or whatever.

Sales never determine talent. They simply show what was in fashion.

The thing is, Morrissey could very easily have been as successfull in 1994, and years thereafter, as he was in 2004. He WAS 'fashionable', appearing on the cover of various magazines, including NME (without an interview even, "MOZmania" read the cover...) and had his biggest single in years AND his best received solo-album ever to promote. The problem was, he refused to promote the album. All the bands that were happening (Britpop as you say) loved the Smiths, and were in one way or another indebted to them. Moz could have easily had his picture taken with Oasis, Blur, Suede, Pulp or whoever, like he decided to 10 years later with Franz Ferdinand, Killers et al, but he decided to stay at home in Primrose Hill for the entire year.

And a year later he decided he could become a David Bowie opening act...

Those were some of his worst decisions ever, career-wise, and it took him a decade to recover.

 

[alsatianuncle]

If Morrissey would have released the whole bundle of songs as "Maladjusted" back in the day (as the b-sides were equal to if not superior to some of the album tracks), he might not have had to sit and watch from the sidelines for seven years. Although, it is my understanding the b-sides we're not recorded during the same sessions.

IMO, (never mind the track sequencing) the following would have made a very strong Moz album:

Tracklisting:
1. Maladjusted
2. Trouble Loves Me
3. Lost
4. Alma Matters
5. Ammunition
6. The Edges Are No Longer Parallel
7. Wide To Receive
8. I Can Have Both
9. Roy's Keen
10. Satan Rejected My Soul

this would have been and excellent album: heir apparent and he cried on it too. the rest bsides

 

[lottie]

A very entertaining thread... but. None of it really matters. Maladjusted in its original form will still exist. Is Morrissey right or wrong to tamper with the track listing? I don't know. But is it really that different from creating new sleeve artwork?

Why is Morrissey doing this? Rather like the dog that licks its own testicles, doubtless because he can.

Is the new track listing better or worse? I don't know. I suspect track listings go through numerous revisions before the final sequence is agreed upon. Does that mean the at-the-time-of-publication track listing is right? I don't think so.

In this ipod-saturated age, we all skip and edit to suit our own tastes and preferences. I think Morrissey is doing the same. We can all glare skyward and growl, "Is nothing sacred?" but we're all intelligent enough and mature enough to know the answer to that one: of course nothing's sacred. Nor should it be.

Should he have removed Roy's Keen? Doesn't matter to me: I rarely listen to the wretched thing. Should he have added This is Not Your Country? Doesn't matter to me: I'll rarely (if ever) listen to the wretched, droning splodge of a thing.

I've long since realised that Morrissey's songs should be seen as part of a wonderful continuum (and long may he continuum) to be dipped into when the mood takes me (which is most of the time). Is Years of Refusal a good album? I honestly don't know. Is I'm Okay By Myself a thrilling, thumping, all-out-assault of a song? By golly, yes.

When Morrissey brings out a new album, I'm delighted. But not because he's releasing a new long player to be enjoyed as a thing in itself but because there's twelve more songs (not to mention b-sides) swelling that wonderful continuum.

I'm not saying albums don't matter because... actually, I think am saying albums don't matter. And I'm not sure how I feel about that.

I'm not fond of the compare-and-contrast mentality albums seem to (unintentionally?) encourage. The only thing that matters are the songs. Listen or don't listen: it's an analogue decision. Is I'm Okay by Myself better than the utterly heartbreaking I Know it's Over? Of course it is: I Know it's Over is neither thrilling nor thumping. Is I Know it's Over better than I'm Okay by Myself? Of course it is: I'm Okay by Myself couldn't possibly break my heart, although it could give me a fat lip and a black eye.

I don't know much, but I do know this: only the songs matter. Only the songs. The ones I like, anyway.

Post of the month.

oh and i LURVE your signature..

 

[Vauxhall95]

A very entertaining thread... but. None of it really matters. Maladjusted in its original form will still exist. Is Morrissey right or wrong to tamper with the track listing? I don't know. But is it really that different from creating new sleeve artwork?

Why is Morrissey doing this? Rather like the dog that licks its own testicles, doubtless because he can.

Is the new track listing better or worse? I don't know. I suspect track listings go through numerous revisions before the final sequence is agreed upon. Does that mean the at-the-time-of-publication track listing is right? I don't think so.

In this ipod-saturated age, we all skip and edit to suit our own tastes and preferences. I think Morrissey is doing the same. We can all glare skyward and growl, "Is nothing sacred?" but we're all intelligent enough and mature enough to know the answer to that one: of course nothing's sacred. Nor should it be.

Should he have removed Roy's Keen? Doesn't matter to me: I rarely listen to the wretched thing. Should he have added This is Not Your Country? Doesn't matter to me: I'll rarely (if ever) listen to the wretched, droning splodge of a thing.

I've long since realised that Morrissey's songs should be seen as part of a wonderful continuum (and long may he continuum) to be dipped into when the mood takes me (which is most of the time). Is Years of Refusal a good album? I honestly don't know. Is I'm Okay By Myself a thrilling, thumping, all-out-assault of a song? By golly, yes.

When Morrissey brings out a new album, I'm delighted. But not because he's releasing a new long player to be enjoyed as a thing in itself but because there's twelve more songs (not to mention b-sides) swelling that wonderful continuum.

I'm not saying albums don't matter because... actually, I think am saying albums don't matter. And I'm not sure how I feel about that.

I'm not fond of the compare-and-contrast mentality albums seem to (unintentionally?) encourage. The only thing that matters are the songs. Listen or don't listen: it's an analogue decision. Is I'm Okay by Myself better than the utterly heartbreaking I Know it's Over? Of course it is: I Know it's Over is neither thrilling nor thumping. Is I Know it's Over better than I'm Okay by Myself? Of course it is: I'm Okay by Myself couldn't possibly break my heart, although it could give me a fat lip and a black eye.

I don't know much, but I do know this: only the songs matter. Only the songs. The ones I like, anyway.

So, basically what you are saying is, "It is what it is."

 

[Infatuation]

You still fail to understand.
Morrissey can set trends, and has done. But these trends have never been what you would call popular.

The majority of people don't think for themselves, it's evident when you step out of your door and see multiple people scanning the Daily Mail, and listening to the latest indoctrination paragraph about those scary dark-skinned males who are here to steal the milk from your doorstep.

The world we live in unfortunately isn't an intelligent one. You give too much leeway to these people. Surely, you realise the Record-Industry is decaying, its been dead for sometime but now people have taken notice. So if this population of genius that wander around the world buying records according to you, adore music, then why is the industry in such a mess? Its because they don't care for music, music is simply there, a commodity, a trend to follow. A brief test, go up to 10 people out of that selection of people ask them to name a song, then get them to tell you the lyrics from that said song. 9 out of 10 will not be able to name you, because they don't care for music, and download for free. TRENDS.

You give the human race far too much credit. Cut the ties now, collect candles, barricade yourself in a darkened and draughty room. These people are mindless they live there lives being so, its saddening but its true. There brought up that way. Unfortunately. The morbidity of these post has ridden me of any wit. And here comes another destructive comment that will depress me for even typing, but even a misogynist managed to realise...

'They f*** you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.'

I think this applies to the factor called social conditioning. Simple indoctrination. However, if you're unwilling to budge then you're already lost to the pointless masses.

Drop your sunday paper, dont go to work, read proust backward. The length of sentence is bound to cause excitement

If you believe so blindly that people have amazing taste in music, and have such principles and bear brain-cells somewhere in their hair, then you're further gone than expected and it would advisable to see a middle-class GP as soon as possible. However, if this isn't an option simply listen to these words. They will save you.

Morrissey has never been strung high in media favour, even with The Smiths, yes he was on a few magazine covers, showing his gleaming face, but their music was never played on air, on any television, but in comparison to most he was never available or accepted with the media gatekeepers.

Morrissey has a solid following of around 50,000. This lovely following buy his releases, the rest relies upon media output, and reviews by such masterful minds as the NME. USing your same logic, you say the reasoning behind the record sales or YATQ being more than fashion, well explain why Britney Spears has sold 100x what Morrissey has. Because, if people are buying Britney SPears and the other such entertaining whores, for a reason other than fashion and insecurity, then I would find marvelous delight in a good pillow smothering. Simply...

You keep reiterating that by saying fashion dictates trends this waters down Morrissey achievements... Not at all. Its simply a fact. It doesn't test or bring his music into question. Its simply record sales. Its irrelevant success doesnt measure genius.

Look at me an anonymous poster on a Morrissey solo board and I hold more wit, beauty, and genius than the man in question, yet ive sold less than 10million recordings of sound. A Genius is measured through death not sales.

I know you think that sounds like a nice little quip but have you considered that you're not only saying Morrissey's commercial lulls are due to "fashion" but his successes, as well?

You say media hype "caused people to take notice. It's no coincidence that YATQ sold so well. The reason being that he was fashionable for a short period of time". (You're giving the NME way too much credit. Morrissey wouldn't like that.) No doubt the hype helped sales. But as I pointed out above, YATQ had two incredible singles to sell the public along with a recent tour supporting it. "Southpaw" didn't. "Maladjusted" had a three-month fall tour-- right before another two-year "break" from the stage. These factors were more decisive than whether or not Franz Ferdinand namechecked Morrissey in a Q interview.

You say "Morrissey recently has come out and said he is a 'popular artist' saying he despises being called or considered 'alternative' because he believes 'anyone could and basically should like his music'". Yes. Morrissey has always reserved his anger for the gatekeepers of the music industry-- the executives, the radio disc jockeys, the journalists, the ad men, the TV presenters-- and not the public. The public, he has always believed, would like his music, and other kinds of intelligent fare, if they were exposed to it.

So why then do you turn around and insult that same public by saying "Fashion always dictates what sells, always has, always will"?

You might be right, but it depends on which "public" we're talking about.

Trends and fashion are the dominating factor in pop culture if we are talking about Britney Spears and Take That or the target demographic of 9-14 year olds. Believe me, I can easily outduel you in cynicsm about the public at large and the schemes of middle-aged accountants to brainwash little girls.

But we're not talking about the public at large, are we. We're talking about Morrissey and his record sales. There is a relatively small wedge of the record-buying public that could be considered potential listeners. I'd put the number at maybe two or three million in the entire world. It's these people I'm talking about. People predisposed to like the sort of music Morrissey makes. YATQ sold well because he won them over, not because he convinced a girl in pigtails and braces to abandon High School Musical.

Though these people are influenced by wider trends-- as you are, as I am-- they've got minds of their own. They're intelligent and discerning. They bought Morrissey records when Madchester was all the craze and they bought them when grunge was exploding. And they deserted Morrissey for stretches of the mid to late 90s for reasons that have nothing to do with mindlessly following trends. I know. I was there. Morrissey lost momentum. He may have had perfectly good reasons, but he lost momentum. "Southpaw Grammar" and "Maladjusted" were disappointments from the sleeves and some of the uninspired tracks to the weak singles and lack of touring. I tend to think Morrissey would agree with me, too, considering he is re-issuing them with new sleeves and new track listings.

All this talk of "trends" is ridiculous. If we want to moan endlessly that he isn't selling twenty million units because of Miley Cyrus, let's fire up a hot air balloon and toast each other's Great Disappointment In Humanity while we piss on their heads from a great height. I'm free next Thursday. But I'm sorry to inform you that there are plenty of people with good taste who backed off of Morrissey for reasons that are no less legitimate just because you and I differ with them. I'm not going to blame trends when "Roy's Keen" was up against "Karma Police".

In any case your Morrissey-like disdain for the record-buying public would be a lot more convincing if Morrissey agreed with you. He isn't Boethius for God's sake. He enthusiastically courts the very people you shun as fashion monkeys. And he has enough faith in his own genius to know that he, like all the great ones, has the power to set trends, make taste, and create the audience. This idea of Morrissey moping around lamenting "fashion" and "trends"-- I don't recognize that fetus-positioned, frail-minded, simpering dwarf at all.

 

[Worm]

You still fail to understand.

I told you. You're not going to outduel me in cynicism about the public at large. We can talk Philip Larkin or Marcel Proust all you want. Or we can get down and dirty with Marx, Benjamin, and Adorno. Do you want to discuss Nietzsche's Last Man?

Let me repeat myself: I am talking about a small segment of the population that is not quite emptied of humanity. You say the number is 50,000 fans. I'm saying there are maybe 1-2 million more who could potentially buy his stuff. Maybe that's generous, I don't know. But I'm guesstimating there are easily a million or two people on Planet Earth who are not soulless automatons and who have (a) enough disposable income (b) at least one or two Smiths/Morrissey records in their collection already and (c) passably decent taste. Morrissey could win their affection and money if he wanted to and that was as true in the middle and late Nineties as it was when he won them over in 2004.

Q: The abomination that was Brit Pop saw off, or nearly saw off, a lot of groups that had their roots in synth pop but not only did Erasure seem to weather the storm you actually seemed to prosper during this God forsaken time.

A: “Well I think it’s because we have such a great time. We’ve been touring for 25-years and over the years, people have been very loyal to us. I don’t know if you suffer because of the style of your music, you suffer more if you don’t write very good songs.

Jesus, even Vince Clarke gets it.

 

[Vauxhall95]

You still fail to understand.
Morrissey can set trends, and has done. But these trends have never been what you would call popular.

The majority of people don't think for themselves, it's evident when you step out of your door and see multiple people scanning the Daily Mail, and listening to the latest indoctrination paragraph about those scary dark-skinned males who are here to steal the milk from your doorstep.

The world we live in unfortunately isn't an intelligent one. You give too much leeway to these people. Surely, you realise the Record-Industry is decaying, its been dead for sometime but now people have taken notice. So if this population of genius that wander around the world buying records according to you, adore music, then why is the industry in such a mess? Its because they don't care for music, music is simply there, a commodity, a trend to follow. A brief test, go up to 10 people out of that selection of people ask them to name a song, then get them to tell you the lyrics from that said song. 9 out of 10 will not be able to name you, because they don't care for music, and download for free. TRENDS.

You give the human race far too much credit. Cut the ties now, collect candles, barricade yourself in a darkened and draughty room. These people are mindless they live there lives being so, its saddening but its true. There brought up that way. Unfortunately. The morbidity of these post has ridden me of any wit. And here comes another destructive comment that will depress me for even typing, but even a misogynist managed to realise...

'They f*** you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.'

I think this applies to the factor called social conditioning. Simple indoctrination. However, if you're unwilling to budge then you're already lost to the pointless masses.

Drop your sunday paper, dont go to work, read proust backward. The length of sentence is bound to cause excitement

If you believe so blindly that people have amazing taste in music, and have such principles and bear brain-cells somewhere in their hair, then you're further gone than expected and it would advisable to see a middle-class GP as soon as possible. However, if this isn't an option simply listen to these words. They will save you.

Morrissey has never been strung high in media favour, even with The Smiths, yes he was on a few magazine covers, showing his gleaming face, but their music was never played on air, on any television, but in comparison to most he was never available or accepted with the media gatekeepers.

Morrissey has a solid following of around 50,000. This lovely following buy his releases, the rest relies upon media output, and reviews by such masterful minds as the NME. USing your same logic, you say the reasoning behind the record sales or YATQ being more than fashion, well explain why Britney Spears has sold 100x what Morrissey has. Because, if people are buying Britney SPears and the other such entertaining whores, for a reason other than fashion and insecurity, then I would find marvelous delight in a good pillow smothering. Simply...

You keep reiterating that by saying fashion dictates trends this waters down Morrissey achievements... Not at all. Its simply a fact. It doesn't test or bring his music into question. Its simply record sales. Its irrelevant success doesnt measure genius.

Look at me an anonymous poster on a Morrissey solo board and I hold more wit, beauty, and genius than the man in question, yet ive sold less than 10million recordings of sound. A Genius is measured through death not sales.

"A Genius is measured through death not sales." Oh my God, do you sit at the computer with old Morrissey letters and a compendium of meaningless quips? There's nothing witty and beautiful about someone bereft of their own identity needing to cling on to a persona of someone they have never met.

"Morrissey has a solid following of around 50,000. This lovely following buy his releases, the rest relies upon media output, and reviews by such masterful minds as the NME." Your idea of a brilliant record, YOR, is a commercial disaster, yet Morrissey is fashionable, name checked, trendy, YOR was well received by the "main stream media," and Infatuation himself, so what gives? Why did your "brilliant" album fail the same way "Maladjusted" did? They are two disparate albums released into two utterly distinct musical climates: one, [your words] a Britpop climate in which it was impossible for a Morrissey record to be accepted; and two a climate in which Morrissey is the "Mozfather" of contemporary British pop rock.

Perhaps the reason YOR failed to succeed wherein YATQ did was YATQ was a superior album, with superior songs? YATQ appealed to music fans en mass with compelling singles, and hearty filler for the die hard Morrissey fans; whereas the tired, blunt, and lobotomized approach on YOR was met with the following reality: hundreds of artists do dumbed down pop music better than Morrissey.

What Morrissey does that sets him well apart from his competition is his ability to translate the human condition into over the top, saddening, insightful, and hilarious lyrics which make HIM a genius. YOR was a misguided effort to appeal to a larger base. It failed miserably. If people want cornball lyrics they'll buy whatever Top 40 crap is on the charts at the time; it's guaranteed to have a beat you can dance to. If they want something intelligent and wish to be treated like an adult, they purchase a Morrissey record. This is a lesson I would hope Morrissey remembers seeing as he was the one who originally said the words.

 

[newsworthy]

Ur a f***ing idiot. You listen to Pink, so you've lost the convo already.

Morrissey isnt fashionable or name checked any longer that must be apparent to most. He isnt fashionable any-longer, not to mention the dwindling record sales all round.

Whats considered good now, is trite white lies, and the klaxons you f***ing div, not Morrissey.

"A Genius is measured through death not sales." Oh my God, do you sit at the computer with old Morrissey letters and a compendium of meaningless quips? There's nothing witty and beautiful about someone bereft of their own identity needing to cling on to a persona of someone they have never met.

"Morrissey has a solid following of around 50,000. This lovely following buy his releases, the rest relies upon media output, and reviews by such masterful minds as the NME." Your idea of a brilliant record, YOR, is a commercial disaster, yet Morrissey is fashionable, name checked, trendy, YOR was well received by the "main stream media," and Infatuation himself, so what gives? Why did your "brilliant" album fail the same way "Maladjusted" did? They are two disparate albums released into two utterly distinct musical climates: one, [your words] a Britpop climate in which it was impossible for a Morrissey record to be accepted; and two a climate in which Morrissey is the "Mozfather" of contemporary British pop rock.

Perhaps the reason YOR failed to succeed wherein YATQ did was YATQ was a superior album, with superior songs? YATQ appealed to music fans en mass with compelling singles, and hearty filler for the die hard Morrissey fans; whereas the tired, blunt, and lobotomized approach on YOR was met with the following reality: hundreds of artists do dumbed down pop music better than Morrissey.

What Morrissey does that sets him well apart from his competition is his ability to translate the human condition into over the top, saddening, insightful, and hilarious lyrics which make HIM a genius. YOR was a misguided effort to appeal to a larger base. It failed miserably. If people want cornball lyrics they'll buy whatever Top 40 crap is on the charts at the time; it's guaranteed to have a beat you can dance to. If they want something intelligent and wish to be treated like an adult, they purchase a Morrissey record. This is a lesson I would hope Morrissey remembers seeing as he was the one who originally said the words.

 

[Worm]

Perhaps the reason YOR failed to succeed wherein YATQ did was YATQ was a superior album, with superior songs? YATQ appealed to music fans en mass with compelling singles, and hearty filler for the die hard Morrissey fans; whereas the tired, blunt, and lobotomized approach on YOR was met with the following reality: hundreds of artists do dumbed down pop music better than Morrissey.

Ha. Okay. Stop.

This is beocming like one of those Old West saloon brawls where suddenly the barkeep pops up out of nowhere and smashes a mug over the sherriff's head.

Infatuation is correct in at least this much: sales do not automatically determine the worth of an album or an artist (unless we're talking about Andrew Ridgeley, natch). YOR is great but it's not really all that commercial. It lacks an "Irish Blood, English Heart" single. It also lacks a critical groundswell to help it out (lukewarm reviews). More importantly I don't think its outstanding qualities would be recognizable to the general public, being somewhat subtle. As I said above, I think it's definitely an album for the hardcore fans. Some albums are like that. Doesn't mean it's bad.

 

[newsworthy]

ur wrong aswell. and a complete contradiction.

you think he has a fanbase of 1-2m who could possibly buy his stuff, that ludicrous. He thrived during madchester, because people were taking note of manchester and its history of which moz was a big part.

and if this whole thing of enuff people with disposable taste and income then why is the record industry such a state.

why not listen to him, instead of being f***ing stubborn

I told you. You're not going to outduel me in cynicism about the public at large. We can talk Philip Larkin or Marcel Proust all you want. Or we can get down and dirty with Marx, Benjamin, and Adorno. Do you want to discuss Nietzsche's Last Man?

Let me repeat myself: I am talking about a small segment of the population that is not quite emptied of humanity. You say the number is 50,000 fans. I'm saying there are maybe 1-2 million more who could potentially buy his stuff. Maybe that's generous, I don't know. But I'm guesstimating there are easily a million or two people on Planet Earth who are not soulless automatons and who have (a) enough disposable income (b) at least one or two Smiths/Morrissey records in their collection already and (c) passably decent taste. Morrissey could win their affection and money if he wanted to and that was as true in the middle and late Nineties as it was when he won them over in 2004.



Jesus, even Vince Clarke gets it.

 

[Worm]

ur wrong aswell. and a complete contradiction.

I'm also a Sagittarius.

and if this whole thing of enuff people with disposable taste and income then why is the record industry such a state.

Are you talking about a paradigm shift in the production and consumption of music or the "fashions" and "trends" that blinker the masses? Are the Klaxons to blame or digital music? Sort that out and get back to us.

 

[Infatuation]

Ah I fail to recognise anything you say now.

Only morons would ever consider such stumping topics as commercialism and try to verify it as a witty or somehow intellectual response.

Your responses fail to seep through into my body, and I disagree with what you say, but that doesn't matter to you. As your happy living in delusion that the reason Morrissey doesn't sell is because some of his singles arent commercial enough.

Your responses are unfortunately awfully pedantic and pedestrian.

But carry on, just like Peter whom I love dearly (check my small reply about his life) you live your life through the vain hope that on Morrissey solo you seem knowing, without offending anyone. Commercial in every sense.

This is the last post, I will ever type.. OH yesyesyesyesyesyesyesyes

Goodnight and Thank You.

Ha. Okay. Stop.

This is beocming like one of those Old West saloon brawls where suddenly the barkeep pops up out of nowhere and smashes a mug over the sherriff's head.

Infatuation is correct in at least this much: sales do not automatically determine the worth of an album or an artist (unless we're talking about Andrew Ridgeley, natch). YOR is great but it's not really all that commercial. It lacks an "Irish Blood, English Heart" single. It also lacks a critical groundswell to help it out (lukewarm reviews). More importantly I don't think its outstanding qualities would be recognizable to the general public, being somewhat subtle. As I said above, I think it's definitely an album for the hardcore fans. Some albums are like that. Doesn't mean it's bad.

 

[Worm]

Ah I fail to recognise anything you say now.

What do you mean, "now"? You wasted a thousand words responding to an argument I wasn't making.

Your responses are unfortunately awfully pedantic and pedestrian.

If my responses are what you consider "pedantic" I have grossly overestimated your intelligence.

 

[Vauxhall95]

Ur a f***ing idiot. You listen to Pink, so you've lost the convo already.

Morrissey isnt fashionable or name checked any longer that must be apparent to most. He isnt fashionable any-longer, not to mention the dwindling record sales all round.

Whats considered good now, is trite white lies, and the klaxons you f***ing div, not Morrissey.

No, I listened to Pink before I decided that her music was pedestrian. See I'm funny that way: I think for myself. I actually experiment with new artists, so I listen to their music before I form an opinion.

Morrissey isn't fashionable anymore? Funny because YOR received some of the best reviews he's received. As far as the Klaxons, I'm not going to comment on them because I've never heard their music, perhaps that is something you could try?

Your petty insults just show how intellectually incapable you are of debating. I'm sure at his next press conference President Obama will turn to Helen Thomas and say, "In response to your line of inquiry, you're a f***ing moron."

Real clever fella...

 

[Worm]

You "experimented" with Pink? Yeah. You and the New York Giants.

Morrissey isn't fashionable anymore? Funny because YOR received some of the best reviews he's received.

Links please? Did I miss something?

 

[JulieDurham]

YOR is great but it's not really all that commercial. It lacks an "Irish Blood, English Heart" single. It also lacks a critical groundswell to help it out (lukewarm reviews). More importantly I don't think its outstanding qualities would be recognizable to the general public, being somewhat subtle. As I said above, I think it's definitely an album for the hardcore fans. Some albums are like that. Doesn't mean it's bad.

I'm not sure to agree. My husband is not an hardcore fan but he like YOR because it's catchy and powerful. I think YOR is easier to listen to than YATQ or Malajusted or every other solo's album of Morrissey because it's more homegenic, the lyrics are more direct....so I think YOR is the kind of album which could touch a new audience.

 

[Worm]

I'm not sure to agree. My husband is not an hardcore fan but he like YOR because it's catchy and powerful. I think YOR is easier to listen to than YATQ or Malajusted or every other solo's album of Morrissey because it's more homegenic, the lyrics are more direct....so I think YOR is the kind of album which could touch a new audience.

Fair enough, Julie, but how did he come to listen to YOR? Because you bought the album, right?