TTY: New Morrissey T-shirt

- OLink from an anonymous person:

New Morrissey T-shirt - true-to-you.net
15 March 2017



Available at forthcoming Morrissey shows in North America.
Also available on Mporium.


Media coverage:


Related item:
 
Last edited:

Comments

A
It just feels moronic on Morrissey's part. Wearing black could signal a certain type of belonging to certain post-punk sensibilities in the eighties. It was done by a mostly white, middle class audience in the US who wanted an alternative to suburban blandness of Top 40 radio in Reagan's America.

Baldwin wrote the violence of racist America which tries to destroy and imprison black people. This is a blackness that you can't take on and off when you go to the alternative club on Friday night. You can't take it off in part because a racial hierarchy that keeps reminding you of your place in the ladder. So, yeah, it's problematic.

When a Latino man like myself puts on a Morrissey shirt there will be articles and documentaries about how ironic and cute it is that a Latino will want to belong to a club previously occupied by white suburbanites. But a white man (like Morrissey) saying he feels black on the inside (like Baldwin?) is supposed to be an acceptable artistic statement? Please.
Lots of subcultures have worn black like the beats who were closer to baldwins time (baby's in black). I think your reading to much into it and almost a bit racist yourself in saying black people aren't or weren't into post punk. In short I think your reading to much into and projecting your own thoughts into what's most likely a topical connection. I feel it does have a larger meaning it's more likely, and this is stretching a guess, that it's ok to feel black on the inside in either context be it expressing depression (which hasn't always been acceptable) or just expressing your culture and your race. I also don't think people find it ironic or cute that a large number of latinos are Morrissey fans but were rather just surprised and curious as to why
 
Fact mag (who cares what they have to say?) can suck it. It's a f***ing t-shirt, and Morrissey is promoting James Baldwin with his lyrics. What the f*** is wrong with that? Do you really think he would design an image out of racism and hatred with all of his admiration for Baldwin? Really?
 
Somewhere between the 'Supreme' t-shirt and this one lies a reasonable marketing idea.
Can't see any overt racism, but in this fragile age, many will see said as they feel they should.
Quite a lot of black artists did very well selling shirts & music to middle class white kids (most of 90's rap for example) and nobody bats an eye when Timmy is wearing a Public Enemy shirt and thinking they are an S1W. Those kids were completely detached from urban gang behaviour in 'da hood', yet their money put the Ice T's of this world on MTV cribs - they weren't black so how could they possibly identify with Chuck D!? Yet, they bought the t-shirts.
The point being: this type of thing occurs on both side of the race 'divide' - if the image is licensed - then only the outrage brigade are going to bang their fists on a keyboard and shout and some people will just buy it without any more thought.
Regards,
FWD.
 
A
rhetoric lines/lyrics now turned into kerching t-shirts !
It's over and done with once and for all. L O L !

Kiss me all over my face and then kiss me all over again :guitar: :rofl:

Last person out please switch the light off ! Thanks.

Benny-the-British-Butcher :greatbritain::knife: ( told you he was 4kd years ago )
 
I've got a feeling it may be because this shirt will end up being bought and worn largely by the pasty-looking white folks who make up most of Morrissey's audience, who will then be wandering around with T-shirts saying they feel 'black on the inside'. I don't think it's racist with a big R, but I can see how some people would find that idea offensive.
I'm more offended by people's bad taste in music. At least Moz concert goers recognise good music as opposed to the nonsense music coming from 99% of artists (of all color). People these days are looking to be offended. Fuck them. It's just a tshirt and a crap one at that.
 
First, I wrote "mostly white", which means it wasn't all white. Evidently, many of us who enjoyed his music were not white. Second, what's so newsworthy about Mexican Morrissey fans? Why is there article after article trying to understand it? I would venture to say (and yes, it's my opinion) that it's because we're not supposed to enjoy literate styles or melancholy lyrics. In the mainstream imaginary we are supposed to just be gruff workers. Third, I didn't write the word 'racist' in my post. I called him moronic and the shirt I called problematic.

Lots of subcultures have worn black like the beats who were closer to baldwins time (baby's in black). I think your reading to much into it and almost a bit racist yourself in saying black people aren't or weren't into post punk. In short I think your reading to much into and projecting your own thoughts into what's most likely a topical connection. I feel it does have a larger meaning it's more likely, and this is stretching a guess, that it's ok to feel black on the inside in either context be it expressing depression (which hasn't always been acceptable) or just expressing your culture and your race. I also don't think people find it ironic or cute that a large number of latinos are Morrissey fans but were rather just surprised and curious as to why
 
A
Additionally, I think there are a lot of people in this thread who have a hard time understanding that racism exists across a broad spectrum and manifests in many ways beyond straightforwardly "hating" another race.

For the record, I don't think Morrissey is especially racist. I'm certain he would consider himself a liberal. But he's pretty clueless and his handling of racial issues is deeply naive / ignorant by today's standards. He should have recognized this as a bad idea from the get-go, especially with a track record such as his.
 
A
would a tshirt showing a womans face saying "i wear female on the outside coz i feel female on the inside" be considered misogynistic?
They could do one of these featuring that guy who is on the cover of 'Sheila Take a Bow'.
 
A
I sniff the dumb hand of Sam.

This is an observation, btw, rather than an confession.
 
A
First, I wrote "mostly white", which means it wasn't all white. Evidently, many of us who enjoyed his music were not white. Second, what's so newsworthy about Mexican Morrissey fans? Why is there article after article trying to understand it? I would venture to say (and yes, it's my opinion) that it's because we're not supposed to enjoy literate styles or melancholy lyrics. In the mainstream imaginary we are supposed to just be gruff workers. Third, I didn't write the word 'racist' in my post. I called him moronic and the shirt I called problematic.
True but I'm not sure it's even mostly white. How would you know. Also aren't you saying it's problematic because of its allusion to and insensitivity to race. Why else is it problematic. As for large numbers of Latino fans being interesting I would say that it just didn't seem typical as I don't see that with other bands and wondered why. It's also interesting as it didn't seem to just be American latinos I.e Americans but rather latinos in Mexico and other countries which made it seem like there was a cultural link rather than an American subculture and that made people wonder what it was if one existed at all. I don't know. I live in a city with plenty of black people and where racism for sure exists in all forms and can't see the problem with this shirt. Maybe I'll ask some black people what they think and I'll find out if I'm. Is song something. That being said this is just made for Murray light run of he dears. Also lantern, no I don't think it would
 
A
It could have been worse. At least they didn't use a photo of Morrissey wearing black-face.
 
would a tshirt showing a womans face saying "i wear female on the outside coz i feel female on the inside" be considered misogynistic?
this is the most tasteful smiths-moz tshirt i've seen so far
i dont think it's the same thing. those with a modern non-racist viewpoint would say that we're all the same colour inside and therefore a black person ignorant of the whole black experience wouldnt feel any differently than a white person on the inside. so to say you feel black on the inside can only be a reference to the black experience--which is just that, the black experience, inaccessible to those who aren't black. for a non-black person to say they know what it feels like when they cant possibly, greatly trivializes it.
whereas when you say you feel female on the inside, that could be in reference to many things, most of them not carrying the weight of centuries of abject treatment (ie. feeling "girlish" or "feminine" when you put on a new dress/get your hair done). if by female, you mean to make reference to a specific way in which women have been ill treated throughout the centuries, then some sort of specificity is required: ie. a better comparsion would be a shirt with the statement "i wear battered housewife on the outside because battered housewife is how i feel on the inside", which, if worn mainly by men, im sure would be seen as just as problematic.
 
G
Don't forget the statement about how Obama is white on the inside. That seems significant if we are going to decode this.
I don't think it's racist in an obvious way but it does trivialize what it means to be black as opposed to "feeling black." Johnny Cash "the Man in Black" would have been a better choice but his estate no doubt has better lawyers and someone would have had to be paid for use of the image. Also it would have avoided this "is he or isn't he" question that Morrissey seems to thrive on.
We read a lot about cultural appropriation, white people taking aspects of other cultures that they can market and capitalizing on them, profiting from other peoples' pain and suffering. Sometimes it's a tribute or a raising of awareness but it's often just an example of privilege. This is the vulgar commercial aspect.
On the other hand there is a artistic aspect. The same word "appropriation" is used in art. One famous artist whose work most of us know who used appropriation was Marcel Duchamp. It means to take an object and place it in a new context, generally to see it in a different way. Using an already existing urinal as a sculpture was one of his famous concepts.
I'm going to say that this t-shirt has aspects of both the commercial and the artistic, and that it does function as art in a sense just based on the fact that it will cause discussion and consideration of the subject. I happen to feel that it is "tone-deaf" and I wouldn't wear it. I think that the trivializing of the black experience outweighs the artistic merits. The fact that this image is being used on a commercial product figures in to that. Also, I like the song "Unlovable" but I'm not sure that line qualifies as "art" and I don't think it's one of his better lines. This almost seems like something "Lil Sammy" would come up with for one of his horrible abuses of photoshop.

But that's my opinion and the fact that other opinions can exist and be argued makes it as least somewhat legit. It's kind of ridiculous to call it "racist" but I do think that if you're going to defend it you should consider the different aspects of it. I wouldn't wear it to the Compton Swap Meet but you're probably safe at the Malibu Farmers Market.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom