Morrissey 25:Live - can it relight my fire? Alex Needham - The Guardian

Morrissey 25: Live – can it relight my fire? - The Guardian
A new US concert film celebrates Morrissey's 25 years solo, but can it mend fences and bring back alienated fans – like me?

Alex Needham
theguardian.com, Tuesday 30 July 2013 11.38 EDT

Excerpt:

Filmed in March, at a gig at Hollywood high school by director James Russell, Morrissey 25: Live opens with backstage shots of Morrissey in moody black and white, and breathless testimonials from fans. For those of us who deplore his Little Englander tendencies, it's great to be reminded of Morrissey's massive Latino fan base, and that his constituency is still essentially indie kids, with bushy beards and pierced septums even as they approach middle age. But the fans also provide the most excruciating moments. I've been to dozens of Morrissey gigs, but never seen the mic passed around the front row so the fans can declare their devotion to the room at large. One even said "thank you for living," a sentence which elicited groans from the hacks watching the film. Surely even Morrissey doesn't need such an extreme form of ego massage.

But what of the object of the fans' obsession? His voice is on top form, and the performance has a showbiz veteran's confidence and craft. Lit well and filmed in a hectic style replete with unusual angles and flashy jump-cuts, Moz lashes the floor with the microphone cable like a disgruntled lion-tamer, wearing a shirt which appears to be covered in a giant Rorschach test. The band are considerably less stellar. Sadistically forced into tight t-shirts by their master (Boz Boorer looks particularly uncomfortable), they get their revenge by putting the aural equivalent of hobnailed boots on some of the Smiths' most quicksilver songs: plodding would be too kind a term for The Boy with the Thorn in His Side.

 

[Anonymous]

Morrissey gets attacked by the media for making his often brash, black and white statements; yet, this poor excuse for a writer is engaging in the most cliche descriptions of Morrissey's core audience. Yes, we all know that he has a strong Latino fan base, but that is primarily in the LA region and the southwestern states. In my travels, the only concert where I saw a huge Latino crowd was in Pomona; but otherwise, there is always a diverse group. The ages range from angst-ridden teens who have newly discovered Morrissey to life long Smiths fans who think twice about stage jumping for fear of breaking a hip. Gender is also equally represented. So, I am so tired of 'journalists' who rely on the stereotyped descriptions of Morrissey's fans. Obviously, even though this hack has been to "dozens of concerts", he knows nothing about the experience. Yes, the mic will be given to those who have made it to the first row; yes, most of the comments will be fawning, inaudible, and cringe-worthy; and yes, Morrissey does need his ego massaged, most artists do. Needham is missing the entire point: Morrissey, in spite of his cancellations and cantankerous public statements, still has a deep hold over his fans. There is an unyielding respect for the music of the past and a hope for new music of that caliber, and that is why people are often reduced to a hysterical mess when they see the man live. It is a truly emotional experience. Most of us have uniquely personal reasons for caring about Morrissey; even those who attack him on this site regularaly still can't let him go. What Needham needs to understand is that nobody gives a f*** about what "lights his fire".

lynnda

 

[Eric Hartman]

Dear Sundown Playboy,

ofcourse I do remember. You were a voice of reason on this website. And oh so clever! I loved your snappy comebacks and dark sense of humour. I was, I must confess, a bit smitten with you.

Nowadays I hardly come round here. Everything I had to say about his Mozjesty and his horrible, plodding band of Bleeding Ulcers has been said. Morrissey has, as I predicted he would, managed his carreer deeply and firmly into the ground. It's a shame to see how the mighty have fallen.

Anyway, how are you? I miss the good old days, don't you?

Kind regards,

Your friend Eric Hartman

PS: sorry it took so long for me to answer your e-mail. As I said, I hardly visit M-solo anymore.

 

[Chip]

the "Chinese are a sub-species", while a little harsh and/or hyperbolic and certainly untactfully put, is not racist. He's not talking about the Chinese race, he's talking about China and their deplorable record on animal cruelty. agree of disagree with his hardline stance, it's not racist.

The problem with all of Morrrissey's "racist" remarks is that yes they are all just borderline and can in isolation be explained away with the "It's just Moz" or "he didn't really mean it" or "he's hyperbolic," but when you start to put them all together in the context of everything he's said it starts to get very...uncomfortable.

And while I don't think Morrissey intended to make a racist statement, at least with the sub-species remark, it doesn't take much common sense to see that the average person who hears that remark is going to attribute from it a racist meaning.

 

[HandThatRocksTheCradle]

The problem with all of Morrrissey's "racist" remarks is that yes they are all just borderline and can in isolation be explained away with the "It's just Moz" or "he didn't really mean it" or "he's hyperbolic," but when you start to put them all together in the context of everything he's said it starts to get very...uncomfortable.

And while I don't think Morrissey intended to make a racist statement, at least with the sub-species remark, it doesn't take much common sense to see that the average person who hears that remark is going to attribute from it a racist meaning.

I guess the video of Chinese coat factory workers using pliers to skin German Shepherds alive shouldn't cause anyone to bat an eyelash. Maybe the testimonies of Chinese nurses of how they were instructed to inject rubbing alcohol into the soft spots of newborn babies in order to kill them should make us shrug our shoulders and say "It's a choice..." I'm not uncomfortable by his words. Some sh** needs to be said out loud. You can tell a lot about a people by how they treat the most vulnerable and helpless elements of their society.

 

[morrisseyisall]

Morrissey gets attacked by the media for making his often brash, black and white statements; yet, this poor excuse for a writer is engaging in the most cliche descriptions of Morrissey's core audience. Yes, we all know that he has a strong Latino fan base, but that is primarily in the LA region and the southwestern states. In my travels, the only concert where I saw a huge Latino crowd was in Pomona; but otherwise, there is always a diverse group. The ages range from angst-ridden teens who have newly discovered Morrissey to life long Smiths fans who think twice about stage jumping for fear of breaking a hip. Gender is also equally represented. So, I am so tired of 'journalists' who rely on the stereotyped descriptions of Morrissey's fans. Obviously, even though this hack has been to "dozens of concerts", he knows nothing about the experience. Yes, the mic will be given to those who have made it to the first row; yes, most of the comments will be fawning, inaudible, and cringe-worthy; and yes, Morrissey does need his ego massaged, most artists do. Needham is missing the entire point: Morrissey, in spite of his cancellations and cantankerous public statements, still has a deep hold over his fans. There is an unyielding respect for the music of the past and a hope for new music of that caliber, and that is why people are often reduced to a hysterical mess when they see the man live. It is a truly emotional experience. Most of us have uniquely personal reasons for caring about Morrissey; even those who attack him on this site regularaly still can't let him go. What Needham needs to understand is that nobody gives a f*** about what "lights his fire".

lynnda

Could not agree more Lynnda. I worship him. I am thankful for his every breath and there is nothing any one could say that would change this. Good on you Moz. Still pissing people off after all these years and getting under the skin of everyone (whether for good as in my case or bad as for 99% of the population) PRICELESS. (I have been to 17 gigs that he turned up at, 2 he didn't and 1 he quite rightly walked off after 1 song due to a moron throwing a bottle. Never blamed him for any of it.) The man is a pure genius and i love the bones of him. I also love the fact that this will annoy just about everyone who reads it. Toodle pip chaps x

 

[realitybites]

I guess the video of Chinese coat factory workers using pliers to skin German Shepherds alive shouldn't cause anyone to bat an eyelash. Maybe the testimonies of Chinese nurses of how they were instructed to inject rubbing alcohol into the soft spots of newborn babies in order to kill them should make us shrug our shoulders and say "It's a choice..." I'm not uncomfortable by his words. Some sh** needs to be said out loud. You can tell a lot about a people by how they treat the most vulnerable and helpless elements of their society.

I think his choice of the word, subspecies, was careless... as it backfired... made people focus of the messenger rather than the message. He could have critiqued the culture, the practices, and not the people.

Does he regret it? Or did he know he ran the risk of being branded a racist--yet again--in order to call attention to the horrific animal rights abuses taking place in China?

I cannot for the life of me understand why the dogs are not killed first. If it was for meat... well the Chinese have a strange belief that suffering causes the animal's flesh to be more tender. When in fact, it is just the opposite. When adrenaline is released into the muscle, it toughens it. Now, as far as the skins go... do they think the fur will be softer or of higher quality? This is the PROBLEM with foolish, unscientific, superstitious folklore and folkways.

Education is the solution. And pressure from corporations/governments that the Chinese make deals with.

 

[Cornflakes]

The problem with all of Morrrissey's "racist" remarks is that yes they are all just borderline and can in isolation be explained away with the "It's just Moz" or "he didn't really mean it" or "he's hyperbolic," but when you start to put them all together in the context of everything he's said it starts to get very...uncomfortable.

And while I don't think Morrissey intended to make a racist statement, at least with the sub-species remark, it doesn't take much common sense to see that the average person who hears that remark is going to attribute from it a racist meaning.

I'm not sure I get the distinction here. Isn't saying something racist and saying something that will be understood by the average person as racist pretty much the same thing?

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Still pissing people off after all these years and getting under the skin of everyone (whether for good as in my case or bad as for 99% of the population) PRICELESS.

Not much of a business model though, is it? You can get away with it when things are on the up, but when things start to go wrong you might find you have burnt your bridges.

By the way, I'm pretty sure I read that a very highly thought of Chinese evolutionary scientist considered the Chinese a sub-species, and it was taught in Chinese schools for some time, as, of course, a good thing.

 

[Anonymous]

Education is the solution.

Thank you, Miss Ohio!

And now, on to the swimsuit portion of our competition!!!

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

I'm not sure I get the distinction here. Isn't saying something racist and saying something that will be understood by the average person as racist pretty much the same thing?

In English law there is a term "The man on the Clapham Omnibus" which denotes an hypothetical average person. In certain cases what might the man on the Clapham omnibus think was a reasonable thought or deed? (It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the gist.) The thing is that Mr. Average is still prone to being utterly wrong, depending on the circumstances.

As we are talking about race let me give you an example.

What if I knew a coloured person who was a member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? Would describing them in that fashion make me a racist? They have a membership card which says they are one. Let's go further. Would someone who claimed I was being racist for even saying that in fact be acting in a niggardly fashion towards me?

The above paragraph does not contain a single racially offensive word, but it walks a tightrope of other peoples' stupidity. It is potentially incendiary despite it being entirely innocent. It is technically correct, the best kind of correct there is. The NAACP don't consider "coloured" to be a racially loaded word, merely archaic, and only a fool would take offence at the word niggardly. Yet they do in the United States, and quite often. Bizarrely that word has even cost people their jobs, hounded out by imbeciles who don't know its meaning. "A Confederacy of Dunces."

Morrissey has long toyed with such technicalities. Bengali In Platforms could easily have read "Life is hard enough when you were born here." instead of "Life is hard enough when you belong here." The former carries no racial baggage at all. Similarly playing with quotation marks for "England for the English." in The National Front Disco was clearly courting controversy. It's hard to see ironic quotes when you play a track and he knew it.

Morrissey is a public figure of long standing. If he doesn't know of the media's unwavering ability to misreport and wilfully misinterpret quotes by now he should. What he seems to like to do is play with peoples' perceptions, which depending on the people you play with can be very dangerous. It seems to me it isn't so much that he has done it, rather than he has done it too many times.

For an allegedly intelligent man who deals in words for a living he is often remarkably cavalier with them, when he should probably err on the side of caution. If he did he wouldn't get burnt so often. He could get his message across in far more erudite ways, assuming he knows how to do so.

 

[realitybites]

Thank you, Miss Ohio!

And now, on to the swimsuit portion of our competition!!!

Oh, my favorite round. I just love representing my home state in a bikini and high heels.

 

[Cornflakes]

In English law there is a term "The man on the Clapham Omnibus" which denotes an hypothetical average person. In certain cases what might the man on the Clapham omnibus think was a reasonable thought or deed? (It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the gist.) The thing is that Mr. Average is still prone to being utterly wrong, depending on the circumstances.

No, that's wrong. The thing about the man on the Clapham omnibus is that he is always right. It's a legal test for reasonableness, so that's how it works. If he thinks "the Chinese are a sub-species" is racist, then it is, and the judge will determine that it is. It's how we tell whether it is racist or not. IOW the notion that Morrissey might have decided to say something he imagined people would understand as racist and yet the thing he said was in fact actually not racist is totally incoherent.

What if I knew a coloured person...

Then you would be living in some period before the Internet was invented, so I don't think the question merits much thought. I stopped reading here.

 

[Reelaround]

I guess the video of Chinese coat factory workers using pliers to skin German Shepherds alive shouldn't cause anyone to bat an eyelash. Maybe the testimonies of Chinese nurses of how they were instructed to inject rubbing alcohol into the soft spots of newborn babies in order to kill them should make us shrug our shoulders and say "It's a choice..." I'm not uncomfortable by his words. Some sh** needs to be said out loud. You can tell a lot about a people by how they treat the most vulnerable and helpless elements of their society.

Spot on.

 

[realitybites]

Not much of a business model though, is it? You can get away with it when things are on the up, but when things start to go wrong you might find you have burnt your bridges.

By the way, I'm pretty sure I read that a very highly thought of Chinese evolutionary scientist considered the Chinese a sub-species, and it was taught in Chinese schools for some time, as, of course, a good thing.

Peking Man?

 

[Anonymous]

The only problem with the 'Chinese are a sub-species' comment, was that Morrissey had plenty of opportunities after that whole storm in a teacup broke to clarify his statement, to make it clear that he was only attacking those Chinese who skin animals alive, rather than everyone in the world who happened to be Chinese....and unless I missed it, he never DID clarify that statement. So all we have left is a very broad-brushed tarring of everyone from a particular nation, which in it's very inclusivity smacks of the language of racism, which cannot separate individuals from entire racial groups.

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

No, that's wrong. The thing about the man on the Clapham omnibus is that he is always right. It's a legal test for reasonableness, so that's how it works. If he thinks "the Chinese are a sub-species" is racist, then it is, and the judge will determine that it is. It's how we tell whether it is racist or not. IOW the notion that Morrissey might have decided to say something he imagined people would understand as racist and yet the thing he said was in fact actually not racist is totally incoherent.

The man on the Clapham omnibus is a legal hypothesis, nothing more.*

Then you would be living in some period before the Internet was invented, so I don't think the question merits much thought. I stopped reading here.

Oh dear. You make my point for me so perfectly, and yet you are too monumentally dim to even know it.

 

[Johnny Barleycorn]

Peking Man?

Rings a bell. I'll check it out in the morning.

 

[Cornflakes]

Oh dear. You make my point for me so perfectly, and yet you are too monumentally dim to even know it.

Yes, that must be it.

 

[realitybites]

The only problem with the 'Chinese are a sub-species' comment, was that Morrissey had plenty of opportunities after that whole storm in a teacup broke to clarify his statement, to make it clear that he was only attacking those Chinese who skin animals alive, rather than everyone in the world who happened to be Chinese....and unless I missed it, he never DID clarify that statement. So all we have left is a very broad-brushed tarring of everyone from a particular nation, which in it's very inclusivity smacks of the language of racism, which cannot separate individuals from entire racial groups.

Excellent point.

 

[Chip]

In English law there is a term "The man on the Clapham Omnibus" which denotes an hypothetical average person. In certain cases what might the man on the Clapham omnibus think was a reasonable thought or deed? (It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's the gist.) The thing is that Mr. Average is still prone to being utterly wrong, depending on the circumstances.

As we are talking about race let me give you an example.

What if I knew a coloured person who was a member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? Would describing them in that fashion make me a racist? They have a membership card which says they are one. Let's go further. Would someone who claimed I was being racist for even saying that in fact be acting in a niggardly fashion towards me?

The above paragraph does not contain a single racially offensive word, but it walks a tightrope of other peoples' stupidity. It is potentially incendiary despite it being entirely innocent. It is technically correct, the best kind of correct there is. The NAACP don't consider "coloured" to be a racially loaded word, merely archaic, and only a fool would take offence at the word niggardly. Yet they do in the United States, and quite often. Bizarrely that word has even cost people their jobs, hounded out by imbeciles who don't know its meaning. "A Confederacy of Dunces."

Morrissey has long toyed with such technicalities. Bengali In Platforms could easily have read "Life is hard enough when you were born here." instead of "Life is hard enough when you belong here." The former carries no racial baggage at all. Similarly playing with quotation marks for "England for the English." in The National Front Disco was clearly courting controversy. It's hard to see ironic quotes when you play a track and he knew it.

Morrissey is a public figure of long standing. If he doesn't know of the media's unwavering ability to misreport and wilfully misinterpret quotes by now he should. What he seems to like to do is play with peoples' perceptions, which depending on the people you play with can be very dangerous. It seems to me it isn't so much that he has done it, rather than he has done it too many times.

For an allegedly intelligent man who deals in words for a living he is often remarkably cavalier with them, when he should probably err on the side of caution. If he did he wouldn't get burnt so often. He could get his message across in far more erudite ways, assuming he knows how to do so.

Ignoring some of the strangeness of your example and getting to your main point--Morrissey's clumsy choice of words. I've sometimes suspected (and I may be alone in this) that Morrissey knows what he's doing. It reminds me a lot of what Morrissey does with his sexuality giving contradictory messages, playing with imagery, loaded word choices, etc. Is he gay or is he not? Is he asexual? Is he just toying with us? Etc. I've always found this part of his image as ambiguous as it may be to be carefully crafted by Morrissey.

I almost suspected the same thing about the race issue. He toys with skin heads, makes some crass comments on immigration, and has some rather ambiguous things to say on the National Front and some slightly less ambiguous things to say about UKIP. But then he goes and writes lyrics like "In America where the President is never black, female, or gay," includes some random anti racism stuff in his shows opening stuff (at least on the last tour), and states that the only person fight to be president of the United States is a black lesbian woman. It leads one to wonder--where does Morrissey really stand? The difference being that while Morrissey's sexual ambiguity makes him a super hip indie rock icon this is just at best very embarrassing and at worse deeply problematic.

Though my second hypothesis is that Morrissey is just kind of ignorant and racially insensitive and a few dumb things plopped out of his mouth from time to time and he's since tried to cover his tracks, but being kind of ignorant and racially insensitive doesn't realize when he's making more dumb comments.