The Human Voice Is The Soul - Morrissey Central (Dec. 16th, 2018)

https://www.morrisseycentral.com/messagesfrommorrissey/the-human-voice-is-the-soul

The text:

I am lost to know how to express my thanks for this recent tour. Joyful is not a word that trips easily off my tongue, but joyful it was. There seemed to me to be an even deeper emotional response, and a more powerful projection everywhere of goodwill - more lungful and younger crowds than ever before. Something has happened. What is it?
Every night the crowds sang like an orchestra - every song an anthem, but this time infused with deeper meaning. Perhaps it is partly because of the press and their childish smear campaigns - which we all, not just I, must endure. Perhaps it's because only songs tell us who we really are, after all?
I wasn't attacked or punched at San Diego - the press depress. In fact, I had never felt so liberated in my life.
It is impossible to point to the best nights because they were all so incredible, but our two concerts in Chile and our concert in Peru reminded me of my privileged position to be on stage; it is life, yes, but with all the crap bits left out - for once. Tropicalia, San Diego, Sao Paulo and Mexico City were also particularly breath-taking.

I express my heartfelt thanks to all of you who came along.

backing into the future,
MORRISSEY
Santiago
16 December 2018.



… and I to the appointed place …

2018 was cruel to the Arts; more have quietly slipped away than you possibly realize: Charles Aznavour, Vic Damone, Nancy Wilson, Dorothy Malone, Bernardo Bertolucci, Aretha Franklin, Givenchy, Donnelly Rhodes (below)


…and where do they go?
 
it's because I know scanty thinks no such thing and is probably insulted at the mere suggestion that you might be her type :lbf:

c'mon scanty, prove me wrong. :lbf:
Scanty and I are fine, we’re cool, so try and sow some division if you like, those rookie moves aren’t gonna cut it.
 
*bhops patiently waits for scanty to restore his unwarranted self-complacency and compliment him on.... something*
Nah I’m actually wondering if you’ve got your own bathroom in your current set up. Lord I hope so!
 
Scanty and I are fine, we’re cool, so try and sow some division if you like, those rookie moves aren’t gonna cut it.
it aint happening dude. between you and her? nah, sorry man. someone had to tell you. she's laughing at you, bro.

now if i may Id just like to take a second to quote the legendary bobby fischer:

I love the moment when I break a mans ego.

ahhhh that's the stuff :cool:
 
it aint happening dude. between you and her? nah, sorry man. someone had to tell you. she's laughing at you, bro.

now if i may Id just like to take a second to quote the legendary bobby fischer:

I love the moment when I break a mans ego.

ahhhh that's the stuff :cool:
And the colour of your Formica table? Brown?
 
Scanty and I are fine, we’re cool, so try and sow some division if you like, those rookie moves aren’t gonna cut it.

I know, right? Like no one sees through the pedestrian baiting? The sad part is that even if one does take the bait, the follow through is so impotent that the situation is more confusing than it is effective. Very inept trolling from someone unaware they are a troll. It’s like one of those movies where the character figures out at the end that they were actually gay all along.

I don’t even bother responding or reading what they post half the time...I can’t be bothered with a bunch of aimless shots in the dark anyhow. Besides, there’s nothing I could say or do that life didn’t already beat me to.
 
As I say nothing comes back from that.

Nothing.
are you referring to that hilariously bad mark e smith post she wrote (which is what I was referring to)? I agree. nothing comes back from that. you'd think by now i'd be use to her wonky, terribly written, cringingly heartfelt posts but they're always unceasingly hilarious.
 
I know, right? Like no one sees through the pedestrian baiting? The sad part is that even if one does take the bait, the follow through is so impotent that the situation is more confusing than it is effective. Very inept trolling from someone unaware they are a troll. It’s like one of those movies where the character figures out at the end that they were actually gay all along.

I don’t even bother responding or reading what they post half the time...I can’t be bothered with a bunch of aimless shots in the dark anyhow. Besides, there’s nothing I could say or do that life didn’t already beat me to.

The last line in this post is the payoff because it’s so damn true :lbf:
 
except not really.
You tell yourself that Rifke as you scan about your salubrious surroundings while simultaneously wondering whether anyone is using the communal bathroom right now, all the while racking your brain for one decent idea to pop into your head so you can get writing that book that we all know will never get written. And who knows it might have even made you some money, money you could use to pay off your credit card debt and get those saggy brows lifted. And then maybe, just maybe there might be enough left over to take a little trip over to Europe, but only if you purchased one of those last minute tickets which are cheap, but means you have to stop at 20 places along the way. Ahhhh Rifke 2018, living the dream!
 
here, spineless, ima try to answer this because (aside from countthrees lovely post) you've thus far failed to receive a proper reply, one that doesn't become increasibly cringly and imbalanced-hormone-y the more one reads it....

I think it's possible that anyone who does something with love will say that there is soul in it. van gogh probably would've said paint on a canvas reveals the soul. Mozart probably would've said it was in his compositions. and all artists love what they do, otherwise they would cease to be artists. although for some artists, what they love is bringing into being their inner vision, while they may be at odds with the actual medium they use to do this. you may recall in olivia laings chapter on Edward hopper, how it talked about Edward hopper not actually enjoying the process of painting, calling it 'miserable business'. similarly, the piano prodigy glenn gould never was particularly fond of the piano, only finding it adequate enough as an instrument to bring about his vision: the real work, he insisted, took place when it reached the listeners brain, and so a piano--though he may not have always liked the way it sounded--was as good an instrument as any. even when they struggle with their medium, they still feel compelled to bring their vision into the world, to reveal, through their art, the soul of the world. no one would do such a thing without a feeling of love behind it--for art, for the world.

and most artists, when they speak of a soul, are usually, I find, referring to just that: the soul of the world--which is revealed to us through art. and that is where they differ from Morrissey and where Morrissey, I think, gets it wrong. most artists would, I think, consider themselves subservient to their vision; they would not consider themselves the end product of their vision. it's not their soul they're revealing for the worlds benefit. no artist would be so bombastic as to think that the world needs their soul.

now when Morrissey speaks of music revealing the human soul--specifically, one assumes, his soul-- that speaks to me more of a statement made in the moment, after a series of successful shows; it presents itself more as a fallacy of ego than anything else. I wonder, if morrissey didn't enjoy the medium of his art, if he didnt get instant gratification from it, would he still create it, the way Edward hopper tortured himself with "getting the whole miserable business down"? could the fact that he really enjoys what he does be deceiving him into believing that it's somehow a higher calling than anyone else's?
I agree for the most part, rifke, except when you come to Morrissey(only partially). A poster in an earlier page said an actor thinks acting is the highest form of art and a painter thinks painting is the highest form of art. Everyone thinks their own art form is more difficult or stronger or more pleasant. I don't believe it's the fact that he enjoys being a singer that sparks him to say that, nor do I interpret it as being limited to himself. It's not his doing it that makes him view singing as such high art. He felt that way before he became a singer about other singers. He is a singer because he thinks it's the highest art form, just like someone might become an actor because they believe acting is the highest art form etc.
 
You tell yourself that Rifke as you scan about your salubrious surroundings while simultaneously wondering whether anyone is using the communal bathroom right now, all the while racking your brain for one decent idea to pop into your head so you can get writing that book that we all know will never get written. And who knows it might have even made you some money, money you could use to pay off your credit card debt and get those saggy brows lifted. And then maybe, just maybe there might be enough left over to take a little trip over to Europe, but only if you purchased one of those last minute tickets which are cheap, but means you have to stop at 20 places along the way. Ahhhh Rifke 2018, living the dream!
whats it like having absolutely zero wit?

also my brows aren't saggy! my forehead is taut thank you very much! it's only my eyelids!
 
I agree for the most part, rifke, except when you come to Morrissey(only partially). A poster in an earlier page said an actor thinks acting is the highest form of art and a painter thinks painting is the highest form of art. Everyone thinks their own art form is more difficult or stronger or more pleasant. I don't believe it's the fact that he enjoys being a singer that sparks him to say that, nor do I interpret it as being limited to himself. It's not his doing it that makes him view singing as such high art. He felt that way before he became a singer about other singers. He is a singer because he thinks it's the highest art form, just like someone might become an actor because they believe acting is the highest art form etc.
well thanks for the response. I tend to disagree and I will get back to this to explain why I see it differently, but right now I have to go to work! (dammit :( )
 
well thanks for the response. I tend to disagree and I will get back to this to explain why I see it differently, but right now I have to go to work! (dammit :( )

Why are you even explaining this to me?????
 
here, spineless, ima try to answer this because (aside from countthrees lovely post) you've thus far failed to receive a proper reply, one that doesn't become increasibly cringly and imbalanced-hormone-y the more one reads it....

I think it's possible that anyone who does something with love will say that there is soul in it. van gogh probably would've said paint on a canvas reveals the soul. Mozart probably would've said it was in his compositions. and all artists love what they do, otherwise they would cease to be artists. although for some artists, what they love is bringing into being their inner vision, while they may be at odds with the actual medium they use to do this. you may recall in olivia laings chapter on Edward hopper, how it talked about Edward hopper not actually enjoying the process of painting, calling it 'miserable business'. similarly, the piano prodigy glenn gould never was particularly fond of the piano, only finding it adequate enough as an instrument to bring about his vision: the real work, he insisted, took place when it reached the listeners brain, and so a piano--though he may not have always liked the way it sounded--was as good an instrument as any. even when they struggle with their medium, they still feel compelled to bring their vision into the world, to reveal, through their art, the soul of the world. no one would do such a thing without a feeling of love behind it--for art, for the world.

and most artists, when they speak of a soul, are usually, I find, referring to just that: the soul of the world--which is revealed to us through art. and that is where they differ from Morrissey and where Morrissey, I think, gets it wrong. most artists would, I think, consider themselves subservient to their vision; they would not consider themselves the end product of their vision. it's not their soul they're revealing for the worlds benefit. no artist would be so bombastic as to think that the world needs their soul.

now when Morrissey speaks of music revealing the human soul--specifically, one assumes, his soul-- that speaks to me more of a statement made in the moment, after a series of successful shows; it presents itself more as a fallacy of ego than anything else. I wonder, if morrissey didn't enjoy the medium of his art, if he didnt get instant gratification from it, would he still create it, the way Edward hopper tortured himself with "getting the whole miserable business down"? could the fact that he really enjoys what he does be deceiving him into believing that it's somehow a higher calling than anyone else's?

:thumbsup:
 
I agree for the most part, rifke, except when you come to Morrissey(only partially). A poster in an earlier page said an actor thinks acting is the highest form of art and a painter thinks painting is the highest form of art. Everyone thinks their own art form is more difficult or stronger or more pleasant. I don't believe it's the fact that he enjoys being a singer that sparks him to say that, nor do I interpret it as being limited to himself. It's not his doing it that makes him view singing as such high art. He felt that way before he became a singer about other singers. He is a singer because he thinks it's the highest art form, just like someone might become an actor because they believe acting is the highest art form etc.

I'm the girl who posted the quote you mentioned. Its quite true. I shouldn't have quoted the person they hate the place but I have noticed their comments on here a few times now, so one more won't hurt
It just so happens being a pop star is what moz was good at He wrote and sang because that's what moved him and he felt he could do it. It was also what lots of other people were doing in Manchester at the time. It has nothing to do with it being the ultimate art form.
He now says it's the ultimate art form because that's what he does, he tried acting and sucked He can't be a novelist as he sucks at that too .
You have to think of it the context of everything else he says. His whole game is making himself seem the most important of all. It's very Trump like, he's a very insecure man these days. I think it's a shame as he should just ignore the BS, he used up be better than that
 
Yes, 9 shows if you count the UK ones as well.
Enough to wreck any 25 year plus career :crazy:

And please keep up the abuse and bullying, it shows the lowness of your character and exposes your agenda on here. :brows:

The point is, smelly balls, he never had to cancel before due to sales. You really are a huge cheese bellend.
The people pretending his career is the best yes been, are actually the ones killing his career
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom