Re: Could a reformed Smiths (or a Morrissey & Marr) sell out Heaton Park several time
Understandable loyalty to the Smiths cause in many of these responses but there seems to be some delusion about how many people actually like the sound of Morrissey’s voice, even when he’s singing a primetime, genius Smiths song. Remember that in the ludicrously-hyped ‘You Are The Quarry’ era, Morrissey only just managed to sell out the MEN arena i.e. 20,000 seats (with no world tour promised at the time). And you seriously think he and Marr can attract a quarter of a million?
I was looking up the stats at the weekend – amazed to see that none of the Smiths studio albums has even gone platinum (300,000) after all these years, but all the Stone Roses ones have.
Many people strongly dislike Morrissey. As just one component of the Smiths, their dislike for him becomes less important, but his persona and singing voice are still hugely off-putting to vast numbers of people.
You can't really hate the Stone Roses. Ian Brown's voice (in its recorded form at least) is an inoffensive, gentle thing and, combined with John Squire's beautiful guitar melodies and incredibly euphoric choruses, the songs are irresistible to vast numbers of people.
Remember that at festivals where Morrissey plays, but doesn’t headline, there is always a mass exodus of people before he comes on (off to see Radiohead or Razorlight, or whoever) leaving Morrissey with a tiny stub of a festival audience, even though it’s common knowledge that he plays plenty of Smiths stuff. Many, if not most, people into what you might call ‘indie’ music are simply not Smiths fans (although, of course, a fair percentage are).
The profile of Morrissey/Marr is huge in the world of the music media, but their appeal is much smaller in the real world. A reformed Morrissey/Marr would obviously attract a much larger audience than ‘solo’ Morrissey (or Marr Healers) but not on the scale of the Stone Roses.
Anyway, let's hope the unprecedented demand for the Stone Roses concerts causes Marr and Morrissey to reconsider their future, and do something together, preferably in a line-up that does not include Joyce Michael and Andy Berk.
PS Joe Frady, splendid post and, yes, I’m pretty certain Marr/Morrissey could call themselves the Smiths. A promoter actually said as much a few years ago i.e. that from their point of view, a ‘Smiths tour’ need only comprise Morrissey and Marr from the original line up. I don’t see Nirvana as being the key breakthrough act, though. They were an American rock group, albeit a slightly grungey one. Blur were the first British ‘indie’ band to sell a million, and that was back in 2004 (and didn’t Damon bang on about it!) closely followed by Oasis then Pulp.
Understandable loyalty to the Smiths cause in many of these responses but there seems to be some delusion about how many people actually like the sound of Morrissey’s voice, even when he’s singing a primetime, genius Smiths song. Remember that in the ludicrously-hyped ‘You Are The Quarry’ era, Morrissey only just managed to sell out the MEN arena i.e. 20,000 seats (with no world tour promised at the time). And you seriously think he and Marr can attract a quarter of a million?
I was looking up the stats at the weekend – amazed to see that none of the Smiths studio albums has even gone platinum (300,000) after all these years, but all the Stone Roses ones have.
Many people strongly dislike Morrissey. As just one component of the Smiths, their dislike for him becomes less important, but his persona and singing voice are still hugely off-putting to vast numbers of people.
You can't really hate the Stone Roses. Ian Brown's voice (in its recorded form at least) is an inoffensive, gentle thing and, combined with John Squire's beautiful guitar melodies and incredibly euphoric choruses, the songs are irresistible to vast numbers of people.
Remember that at festivals where Morrissey plays, but doesn’t headline, there is always a mass exodus of people before he comes on (off to see Radiohead or Razorlight, or whoever) leaving Morrissey with a tiny stub of a festival audience, even though it’s common knowledge that he plays plenty of Smiths stuff. Many, if not most, people into what you might call ‘indie’ music are simply not Smiths fans (although, of course, a fair percentage are).
The profile of Morrissey/Marr is huge in the world of the music media, but their appeal is much smaller in the real world. A reformed Morrissey/Marr would obviously attract a much larger audience than ‘solo’ Morrissey (or Marr Healers) but not on the scale of the Stone Roses.
Anyway, let's hope the unprecedented demand for the Stone Roses concerts causes Marr and Morrissey to reconsider their future, and do something together, preferably in a line-up that does not include Joyce Michael and Andy Berk.
PS Joe Frady, splendid post and, yes, I’m pretty certain Marr/Morrissey could call themselves the Smiths. A promoter actually said as much a few years ago i.e. that from their point of view, a ‘Smiths tour’ need only comprise Morrissey and Marr from the original line up. I don’t see Nirvana as being the key breakthrough act, though. They were an American rock group, albeit a slightly grungey one. Blur were the first British ‘indie’ band to sell a million, and that was back in 2004 (and didn’t Damon bang on about it!) closely followed by Oasis then Pulp.