The history of the relationship between Morrissey and 'Morrissey-Solo'

[SparkleBoy]

People can say and twist whatever they want. OK, everyone together now: "Shut up, Kewpie."

 

[goinghome]

Um... able to almost completely distinguish the art from the artist.

Bizarre thread bump too, btw.

...Labour is blossoming or dancing where
The body is not bruised to pleasure soul.
Nor beauty born out of its own despair,
Nor blear-eyed wisdom out of midnight oil.
O chestnut-tree, great-rooted blossomer,
Are you the leaf, the blossom or the bole?
O body swayed to music, O brightening glance,
How can we know the dancer from the dance?

Among School Children, by W.B. Yeats

Or, see Art-hounds

And, that someone describes this topic as bizarre with all going on around us, is, at this stage, kinda cute.

 

[realitybites]

Among School Children, by W.B. Yeats

Or, see Art-hounds

And, that someone describes this topic as bizarre with all going on around us, is, at this stage, kinda cute.

2-J wrote: "Um... able to almost completely distinguish the art from the artist.

Bizarre thread bump too, btw."

I think that 2-J meant that bumping this thread with the particular content you posted was bizarre... not the subject of this thread.

Also, I am curious as to why you need to express yourself through quotes of others. You would be more convincing and contemporary if you were to share your original thoughts--at the very least, paraphrase rather than plagiarize. It may not be as poetic but surely it would be more authentic.

Lastly, art may be all encompassing--making up every facet of the artist--their identity burnished in every stroke of the brush, chord of the instrument, lyric of the song etc. But that does not mean that the art piece itself needs to have the author's identity be known in order to cherish the work. We can be rendered breathless by a painting or song without knowing its creator. It matters not that the artist is white, black, male, female, christian, atheist, vegetarian, conservative, or liberal etc. These qualities of the artist influence their art. But they need not distract the purveyor from appreciating the work.

If you like a painting of mine, will you then convince yourself it is crap once you find out I am an atheist--condemned to Hell according to your Roman Catholic beliefs? Isn't it more likely that one can like my painting and appreciate it's beauty and artistry yet still think my philosophical views are deeply flawed?

If the art cannot be separated from the artist, then art cannot be known at all unless we know everything about the creator of the work. This is both impossible and pedantic.

 

[goinghome]

2-J wrote: "Um... able to almost completely distinguish the art from the artist.

Bizarre thread bump too, btw."

I think that 2-J meant that bumping this thread with the particular content you posted was bizarre... not the subject of this thread.

Both subject and its bump I too understood was meant.

Also, I am curious as to why you need to express yourself through quotes of others. You would be more convincing and contemporary if you were to share your original thoughts--at the very least, paraphrase rather than plagiarize. It may not be as poetic but surely it would be more authentic.

Self-evidently I do both, but why reach for a particular effect here?

Lastly, art may be all encompassing--making up every facet of the artist--their identity burnished in every stroke of the brush, chord of the instrument, lyric of the song etc. But that does not mean that the art piece itself needs to have the author's identity be known in order to cherish the work. We can be rendered breathless by a painting or song without knowing its creator. It matters not that the artist is white, black, male, female, christian, atheist, vegetarian, conservative, or liberal etc. These qualities of the artist influence their art. But they need not distract the purveyor from appreciating the work.

If you like a painting of mine. Will you then convince yourself it is crap once you find out I am an atheist--condemned to Hell according to your Roman Catholic beliefs? Isn't it more likely that one can still like my painting and appreciate it's beauty and artistry yet still think my philosophical views are deeply flawed?

If the art cannot be separated from the artist, than art cannot be known at all unless we know everything about the creator of the work. This is both impossible and pedantic.

Even Yeats broached the dividing line as a question, and I'm sure the debate will go on long after us, and after Morrissey-solo itself is only history.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

goinghome doesn't strike me as a big nose who knows hiding behind his quotes, he's just very well read and shares with us relevant passages that apply to situations. Kind of like me whipping out tarot card to show the relevance of an event, but less crazy sounding.

(Panic, people!!

)

 

[goinghome]

goinghome doesn't strike me as a big nose who knows hiding behind his quotes, he's just very well read and shares with us relevant passages that apply to situations. Kind of like me whipping out tarot card to show the relevance of an event, but less crazy sounding.

(Panic, people!!

)

Much obliged, dear Seer!
Are you still working on your moz-koan?
I liked this fable - http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2011/06/09/insult-the-dea/
Best to you.

 

[realitybites]

Both subject and its bump I too understood was meant.



Self-evidently I do both, but why reach for a particular effect here?



Even Yeats broached the dividing line as a question, and I'm sure the debate will go on long after us, and after Morrissey-solo itself is only history.

Fair enough. Thanks for replying.

 

[2-J]

But it is just a simple fact that many people can completely, or very nearly completely, distinguish the artist from the art.

Doesn't matter how many quotes from Yeats (or whatever) you throw at it.

The answer as to why davidt went to those shows despite the relationship between Morrissey and the site over the years, is, therefore (conspiracy theories aside) very simple.

It's the same reason I can still listen to Morrissey's music despite thinking his action of having david thrown out was wrong, and thinking that most of what he talks about in his public pronouncements these days is complete shite.

 

[Uncleskinny]

But it is just a simple fact that many people can completely, or very nearly completely, distinguish the artist from the art.

Doesn't matter how many quotes from Yeats (or whatever) you throw at it.

The answer as to why davidt went to those shows despite the relationship between Morrissey and the site over the years, is, therefore (conspiracy theories aside) very simple.

It's the same reason I can still listen to Morrissey's music despite thinking his action of having david thrown out was wrong, and thinking that most of what he talks about in his public pronouncements these days is complete shite.

Top post. In my opinion.

P.

 

[realitybites]

But it is just a simple fact that many people can completely, or very nearly completely, distinguish the artist from the art.

Doesn't matter how many quotes from Yeats (or whatever) you throw at it.

The answer as to why davidt went to those shows despite the relationship between Morrissey and the site over the years, is, therefore (conspiracy theories aside) very simple.

It's the same reason I can still listen to Morrissey's music despite thinking his action of having david thrown out was wrong, and thinking that most of what he talks about in his public pronouncements these days is complete shite.

Case closed!

 

[goinghome]

Morrissey is an artist making music. Davidt is neither, but someone who provides an anarchic conduit, that attracts people in using Morrissey's name, for information that includes attacks on both the artist and the art, however he feels about either himself. I don't know how they liked or like eachother but presumably actions and their consequences feed into positions they take. Each has certain freedoms not available to the other to apply either unilaterally or in retaliation if deemed appropriate. Interpretations and opinions will be formed on the episode for some time with certain adaptations following, or not.

 

[2-J]

Morrissey is an artist making music. Davidt is neither, but someone who provides an anarchic conduit, that attracts people in using Morrissey's name, for information that includes attacks on both the artist and the art, however he feels about either himself. I don't know how they liked or like eachother but presumably actions and their consequences feed into positions they take. Each has certain freedoms not available to the other to apply either unilaterally or in retaliation if deemed appropriate. Interpretations and opinions will be formed on the episode for some time with certain adaptations following, or not.

So you have given up trying to suggest David had some ulterior motive in going to see Morrissey shows in Scandanavia? Good.

 

[goinghome]

So you have given up trying to suggest David had some ulterior motive in going to see Morrissey shows in Scandanavia? Good.

I do not presume to know the secret mind of David as well as you apparently do, or of anyone else for that matter. Form and signs give a limited if often useful starting-point. Nor do I have any control over how you translate what I say into certain specific suggestions not originally intended or communicated.

Yesterday I watched the documentary featuring a talk given by James Baldwin which Morrissey twice uses in his video montage. The clips occur about 7mins in, and later 11mins in, both during part 1 of the documentary. Baldwin's composed, sensitive lucidity is amazing and would make you wonder how all the people who were there for the presentation in that room in 1968 were affected and inspired in what they did afterwards. His putting aside of the racial issue as the red herring is very interesting. Instead the fundamental squabble is about power of various kinds, economic, psychological, linguistic, and about attitudes. The message still resonates and has hardly dated at all. For one, it may well speak to a cause of the riots. Things can only be made good, or at least better, he points out, by each person, black, white or other, in pretty much all situations, after some self-examination, taking responsibility for their own place, their own fate, and for moving to repair trespasses inflicted:

Filmed by Horace Ove' - British filmmaker, painter and writer and one of the leading black independent film-makers to emerge in Britain since the post-war period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_Ove James Baldwin and Dick Gregory talk about the Black Experience in America and relate it to that of the Caribbean in contemporary Great Britain. Filmed at the West Indian Student Centre of London.

Baldwin's n*****

Part 1 -

P.2 [youtube]VYBclB1MHvc&feature=related[/youtube]

P.3 [youtube]cPXRQ3lEv9Y&feature=related[/youtube]

The documentary is listed, along with other sources for Morrissey's intermission clips, at http://allyouneedismorrissey.com/topic/4342453/1/

 

[2-J]

I think you were claiming to know davidt's mind - you bumped this thread (ages after discussion had finished in it, for whatever reason) to challenge someone who said "Why would he fly all the way to Copenhagen to see an artist he doesn't like? You're thinking is a bit flawed here... ?" implicitly challenging that davidt even likes Morrissey.

As has been pointed out, given that many (most?) people are perfectly capabale of separating art and artist that allows them to enjoy and appreciate the art of an artist even if they disagree with a lot of what that artist says or does.

Didn't watch the vids or your off-topic rambling btw, and I doubt anyone else did either.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Baldwin's n*****

 

[goinghome]

I think you were claiming to know davidt's mind - you bumped this thread (ages after discussion had finished in it, for whatever reason) to challenge someone who said "Why would he fly all the way to Copenhagen to see an artist he doesn't like? You're thinking is a bit flawed here... ?" implicitly challenging that davidt even likes Morrissey.

I make deductions as others do without having to virtually slam someone up against a wall and force home an intuition. Perhaps David has told you what he feels as you're such a defensive ambassador on his behalf. Even then, people can change the way they feel. Isn't raking up again and again what was a passing observation getting a bit tiresome, no matter the chosen conviction about what I was supposedly claiming? And what's the big deal about bumping a thread that's been inactive for a few days? It happens all the time.

As has been pointed out, given that many (most?) people are perfectly capabale of separating art and artist that allows them to enjoy and appreciate the art of an artist even if they disagree with a lot of what that artist says or does.

This argument is also clearly cherished by you but so what? To repeat, failing to have due regard for someone's good name, which is within a broadcaster's remit, by not just enabling but aggressively promoting all material posted without filtering out blatantly phoney, rigged anti-testimonials and malicious statements, is the crux of it. Morrissey's one of the good guys. Yes, he's human, daubed with papier maché, but he gives 129% or thereabouts. There really is so much destruction all over the world, so why risk supporting stupid outrages that might derail and decomission the likes of him?

Didn't watch the vids or your off-topic rambling btw, and I doubt anyone else did either.

Perhaps the video could seem off-topic. It's not that unusual to block out evidence that challenges an opinion held. A certain amount of open-minded and sustained attention is required to view and process - not for everybody, granted. Baldwin's talk is about trying to understand what's really going on when people have their differences before deciding how best to react, a principle that's sound in general as well as germane here. So you could do worse than watch it, you know.

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

I wonder, if Morrissey has simply registered here as himself, would he have been granted any of the "protections" that it offers?
(well, that it at least use to )
if so, I doubt he would hate this site so
its really a shame that its too late for all that now
especially with the idiotic banning of DT

 

[smiler]

Quote Originally Posted by 2-J View Post
"But it is just a simple fact that many people can completely, or very nearly completely, distinguish the artist from the art.

Doesn't matter how many quotes from Yeats (or whatever) you throw at it.

The answer as to why davidt went to those shows despite the relationship between Morrissey and the site over the years, is, therefore (conspiracy theories aside) very simple.

It's the same reason I can still listen to Morrissey's music despite thinking his action of having david thrown out was wrong, and thinking that most of what he talks about in his public pronouncements these days is complete shite."

Top post. In my opinion.

P.

and here in lies the problem - I don't think most Morissey fans feel this is a "Top post" by any means - really? "complete shite"? - Its seems to me that it is you who has changed, you simply don't get Morrissey anymore and thats fine maybe you have grown up and you are a little embarrassed about your previous devotion and projection

I thought banning the site administrator was such a funny thing to do - poetic justice?

Brixton was great, one of my favorite Morrissey shows and I've been to many and the new song was breathtaking - and he was funny and charming between songs

However when the moderators from this site (and they all seem to share this view) think Morrissey talks "complete shite" and they "love the (old)art but not the artists" then they will inevitably askew this sites content to that view either consciously or not

If my experience of the crowd at Brixton is right (and watching those short videos gives some idea of the mood) then this "view" is only held by a very small minority of Morrissey fans and yet despite the cries of "free speech and anti-censorship" on this site that small group have a strangle hold on the tone of the content of this website, from davidt down and as a result this site is now warped by that minority view and of course that fine, its his website and he can shape it how he likes but its a shame because he clearly loves or at least loved Morrissey and in so many ways its such a good site and all that effort and work.....

but it all went wrong somewhere for you all (moderators) - you stopped getting Morrissey, stopped taking him with a caty pinch of salt, started folding your arms and giving yourself wringles. - you are the minority. This is no longer a Morrissey fan site its something else, something more personal, its an outlet for a handful of spurned super fans who got too close to the sun realised the sun was their own reflection and still got burned.

 

[Black Cloud]

But it is just a simple fact that many people can completely, or very nearly completely, distinguish the artist from the art.

Doesn't matter how many quotes from Yeats (or whatever) you throw at it.

The answer as to why davidt went to those shows despite the relationship between Morrissey and the site over the years, is, therefore (conspiracy theories aside) very simple.

It's the same reason I can still listen to Morrissey's music despite thinking his action of having david thrown out was wrong, and thinking that most of what he talks about in his public pronouncements these days is complete shite.

I agree.

It is interesting to me that he chose Yeats, however, who was a cracker of a poet but a real pain in the ass (ask Sean O'Casey...use a ouija board).

 

[bhops]

Quote Originally Posted by 2-J View Post
and here in lies the problem - I don't think most Morissey fans feel this is a "Top post" by any means - really? "complete shite"? - Its seems to me that it is you who has changed, you simply don't get Morrissey anymore and thats fine maybe you have grown up and you are a little embarrassed about your previous devotion and projection

I thought banning the site administrator was such a funny thing to do - poetic justice?

Brixton was great, one of my favorite Morrissey shows and I've been to many and the new song was breathtaking - and he was funny and charming between songs

However when the moderators from this site (and they all seem to share this view) think Morrissey talks "complete shite" and they "love the (old)art but not the artists" then they will inevitably askew this sites content to that view either consciously or not

If my experience of the crowd at Brixton is right (and watching those short videos gives some idea of the mood) then this "view" is only held by a very small minority of Morrissey fans and yet despite the cries of "free speech and anti-censorship" on this site that small group have a strangle hold on the tone of the content of this website, from davidt down and as a result this site is now warped by that minority view and of course that fine, its his website and he can shape it how he likes but its a shame because he clearly loves or at least loved Morrissey and in so many ways its such a good site and all that effort and work.....

but it all went wrong somewhere for you all (moderators) - you stopped getting Morrissey, stopped taking him with a caty pinch of salt, started folding your arms and giving yourself wringles. - you are the minority. This is no longer a Morrissey fan site its something else, something more personal, its an outlet for a handful of spurned super fans who got too close to the sun realised the sun was their own reflection and still got burned.

Honestly can I proclaim this post complete shite?

As for the 'not getting Morrissey' anymore part, may I be allowed to quote directly from the 'Sing Your Life' fanzine that David co-published back in 1993.

"And a message to those who want to but haven't had the opportunity to meet Morrissey: as he himself said, ......sometimes it's better to cherish your illusions about people you admire than it is to meet them."

Now that little nugget was written some 18 years ago. I would say David has been acutely aware of the 'limitations' of Morrissey's personality for some time now. I would also attest that it shows David has been more than capable of seperating the artist from the art pretty much right from the get go.

I've been a fan since I was 13 back in 1986 and I have to say that with each album and the public pronoucements that precede and follow it the veneer and mystique of Morrissey crumbles slightly more each time. Do I still have enormous respect for the man? Yes undoubtedly, but by no means do I follow him blindly. There seems to be a segmentation of fans that believe that because he once wrote "it's so easy to laugh it's so easy to hate, it takes guts to be gentle and kind" means he can do no wrong. And to criticize Morrissey is in some way to disavow your loyalty to him.

If that's your point of view then so be it. I guess you would say I don't 'get him anymore.'

But then again I'm not sure I want to.