Okay but to me the point is not whichever particular issue they disagree on. It's like someone you knew in high school following you around on Facebook trying to correct your opinions. Those opinions could be right, wrong, whatever but it's still Marr making himself way too involved in Morrissey's public statements.
And because they have this sort of connected identity in the public eye Marr is encouraged to make these comments, but you don't see Morrissey talking about Marr. Now maybe the reason is that Marr hasn't said anything interesting enough for Morrissey to care to comment on, but we can say for sure that he doesn't need to use Marr's name for publicity. On the other hand Marr really gets an awful lot of mileage out of talking about Morrissey. Every time Marr has a new project there he is showing how to play "This Charming Man" on his signature guitar, or talking about his new record while making a few digs at Morrissey.
Yes, Morrissey says things that do not help him or anyone else. But he doesn't need Marr to get publicity whereas I think it's clear that Marr needs to mention Morrissey.
And part of it for me is that I enjoy Morrissey's way with words and these are the sorts of statements I enjoy most, when he talks about other musicians. Aren't you kind of relieved that it's a break from the "subspecies, where were the parents, immigrants are rapists," typical drivel? I am. Please let's hear more like this. Maybe next month he can say something about Adele or something.
I needed a moment. Of course it is more pleasant (than, for example, advertising For Britain) and also his strength to write this bitchy but friendly text against Marr, which hurts him. But I disagree that he has never talked about Marr in the last 35 years. As mentioned above, during the Vauxhall promo (when interviews with him were still a treat) he talked at length about meeting up but investing in a shared allotment on the outskirts of London rather than making music together. So he also flirted with the fact, that he actually had no direct quarrel with Marr any more (at least before the 1996 court case). Knowing that it only made the critics madder (Why no reunion?)
Morrissey was the voice and the figurehead, but why does he still need to be told in the fake interview to BOT, that a track would sound totally like The Smiths? Isn't this again the recourse to the sound of the Smiths as an argument for buying?
I also maintain, that Marr's tone only became more annoyed when Morrissey flirted with the right. And they are his songs too (not his alone, of course). He created the tunes and so he has to play them all the time in the age of Insta, Twitter and the like, and of course he has to promote his solo stuff. That is also legitimate.
It's like you say, you have to deal with a buddy from school (you can't escape it) but it totally goes against your grain because you've developed completely differently. You talk back, he talks back in his own way, but when you inevitably meet, it works out if you both make an effort. Maybe even a little closeness develops. I know these problems as a 71/72 born, who has to go to 50s birthday bashes all the time, where there are not only people you want to see.
www.vulture.com
