Reading that anyone would think that Morrissey was singing along to a busker, do you not hear the rhythms when Johnny "strums", do you not hear the riffs, how original they all are? It's not just about chord progressions. Why does one have to have a lesser imput than the other? Likewise do people not hear how unique Morrissey's lyrics and melodies are? Add how Rourke's bass mixes with Johnny's guitar and the magic is complete.
Take one out and it's never the same. That's all you need to know.
With respect, you're still missing the point - but in fact, there's so much to reply to in this post, brief though it is.
Firstly, I was citing a relatively unusual (though not unique) working method for Morrissey and Marr - Marr strumming a chord progression while Morrissey sung along. In this instance, Marr was effectively busking, yes - he wasn't doing something that couldn't have been played by another guitarist. But that's a red herring, it's irrelevant really to the point I'm making.
Do I not near the rhythms, the riffs? Yes, I do.
How original they all are?
Well, a couple of points here. Original rhythms? No, Marr's are fairly standard. Original riffs? I'd be the last to deny that Marr is a hugely gifted guitarist with a unique tone/'voice', so yes, original in that respect. Riff-wise, again I think Porter's contribution is crucially underrated here. I believe it was his input (based on what I've read in interviews with, amongst others, Marr himself) that made many of the riffs sound so definitive, which would explain why Marr has never come up with anything close to rivalling them since the Smiths split. not saying he couldn't make great music without Porter, but I'd argue he never made anything as idiosyncratic - i.e. anything that could be fairly described as 'original' - as 'This Charming Man', 'How Soon Is Now' or 'William, It Was Really Nothing' on his own. Nothing on 'Strangeways..', 'Queen is Dead' or 'Meat Is Murder' could be described as musically 'original' to me, albeit much of was great stuff. Okay, I'll give you 'The Headmaster Ritual' but that's about the only exception I can think of.
In terms of what is rhythmically original about the The Smiths, it's far more about Morrissey's lyrical phrasing than it is about the music - there are now many instances of those who have worked with Morrissey highlighting how unusual and unique his sense of phrasing was - including Marr - and how it confounded their conventional notions of songwriting and their conventional expectations. For example, rhythmically, what is unique about 'There is a Light...' is not Marr's music, which is a standard ballad-strum type rhythm, but Morrissey's lyrical phrasing, with the likes of "I don't care, I don't care, I don't care". And again, compare that to Sumner's lyric to 'Out of My League' for an example of what, on the on hand, is original (Morrissey) and on the other hand, isn't (Sumner).
Yes, the harmonies that Marr superimposed were fantastically original in terms of being uniquely his style, but you can say that about many, many musicians' contributions to records - you could say it about Andy Rourke: but Rourke's don't, to my mind, make him a songwriter (nor, it seems, to his mind), and nor do Marr's.
You say it's not just about chord progressions. I'd argue that for Morrissey, it basically is. He has proven many times in his solo career that he can craft great vocal melodies/lyrics - i.e. great songs - out of music far more rudimentary than that given to him Marr - as recently as this year he's had given us 'Istanbul' for example.
And this brings me to why I really feel impelled to push this argument - this year, Marr has given us another album's worth of his own claims to songwriting ability; and frankly, 'Playland' is as risible as 'The Messenger'. Nor do I feel for one moment when I listen to Marr singing the songs of the Smiths that they are in any way 'his' songs: it sounds like he's singing someone else's songs (badly). And why? Cos he is.
So credit where credit's due, and credit for the songs should go to Morrissey. Credit for the magic that was The Smiths? That goes to Morrissey, Marr, Joyce and Rourke. And to John Porter. And to Stephen Street. And to the music. And to the songs. Morrissey's songs.
Cos as long as people are maintain that it was 50/50, we're always gonna be waiting for Marr to come up with brilliant songs in his own right, in the way that Morrissey has done. And it's increasingly obvious that that is never going to happen.