Moz mentioned in article about Jarvis

[lightupvirginmary]

I love Jarvis and Morrissey. Jarvis saw me through 14-17 and Morrissey picked up the mantle when i went to uni. Still very fond of them both. Both write about issues such as sex, loneliness, poverty with wit and intelligence.
Simple as that really.

 

[lilikoi]

Nobody has yet provided any proof that any of them has slagged the other's voice.

true - but nevertheless I would not trust morrissey's judgement anyway. is there anyone in this universe he doesn't find horrible besides kristeen young and the new york dolls????

whatever. I trust my own ears.

 

[nightandday]

true - but nevertheless I would not trust morrissey's judgement anyway. is there anyone in this universe he doesn't find horrible besides kristeen young and the new york dolls????

Yes.


Patti Smith
Nico
Jobriath
Sparks
Klaus Nomi
T Rex
David Bowie in the 70s
Timi Yuro
Billy Fury
Sandie Shaw
Diana Dors
Dionne Warwick
Magazine
Ludus
The Cramps
Ramones
Sex Pistols (up to a point)
Buzzcocks
The Slits
The Jam
Siouxsie and the Banshees
James
The Monochrome Set
Angelic Upstarts
Cockney Rejects
The Primitives
Echobelly
Suede - at the beginning
The Libertines
Damien Dempsey
Franz Ferdinand
...

whatever. I trust my own ears.

What else were you supposed to trust??!

I must have missed something. Did anyone set a rule that you have to ask Morrissey what to like? He has his taste, you have yours, I have mine and so on, what's the problem?

 

[Christine]

Nobody has yet provided any proof that any of them has slagged the other's voice.

no plus peoples opinions change. Morrissey may have slagged off Jarvis in the past and now he might admire the man and visa versa. The only evidence from recent times is the Sunday Times interview when the 'journalist' was talking about artists who wont just go away mentioning Moz and Jarvis agreed.

I dont think it's fair to compare their recent output. This is Jarvis's 1st album when he gets to morrissey's stage.. if he does, then we'll see

 

[nightandday]

no plus peoples opinions change. Morrissey may have slagged off Jarvis in the past and now he might admire the man and visa versa. The only evidence from recent times is the Sunday Times interview when the 'journalist' was talking about artists who wont just go away mentioning Moz and Jarvis agreed.

I dont think it's fair to compare their recent output. This is Jarvis's 1st album when he gets to morrissey's stage.. if he does, then we'll see

The journalists are always trying to get celebrities to slag each other off, because it makes for an interesting story. That's why they're asking "what do you think of ____ that ____ is doing now?" and often they'll add a few disparaging comments to fuel it. Moz is a dream for many of them because he will slag people off if he dislikes them. But, for instance, I remember an interview where the journalist asked Moz "What do you think of John Lydon on 'I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here' "? and it felt like he was expecting something nasty, but Moz said something like, He can do whatever he likes and I will always respect him, he has the right to with what's he done in the past.

 

[Christine]

The journalists are always trying to get celebrities to slag each other off, because it makes for an interesting story. That's why they're asking "what do you think of ____ that ____ is doing now?" and often they'll add a few disparaging comments to fuel it. Moz is a dream for many of them because he will slag people off if he dislikes them. But, for instance, I remember an interview where the journalist asked Moz "What do you think of John Lydon on 'I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here' "? and it felt like he was expecting something nasty, but Moz said something like, He can do whatever he likes and I will always respect him, he has the right to with what's he done in the past.

yep like I remember reading in a newpaper and on teletext that Moz had blamed Kate Moss for Pete's decline and when I actually read the interview, the reporter (morley maybe ) spends the entire time trying to get Moz to mouth off about different people and eventually he just says the Doherty remark and bang it's everywhere

 

[The Crime Of The Century!]

yep like I remember reading in a newpaper and on teletext that Moz had blamed Kate Moss for Pete's decline and when I actually read the interview, the reporter (morley maybe ) spends the entire time trying to get Moz to mouth off about different people and eventually he just says the Doherty remark and bang it's everywhere

Pete Doherty deserves to be slagged off. I hate that waste of space junkie scumbag. His drug use is what he's recognised for, not his (rather mediocre) music. And that anorexic cokehead slut that he's with is even worse. Why does she exist? Why do men like such a drab, dull-looking piece of gristle? And why was her child not taken from her by social services when it was discovered she had snorted half of columbia up her nose? So many questions, so little time!

 

[Tomorrow]

So, what you're basically saying is, whatever Morrissey says or does now can't be controversial, unless he kills somebody or burns someone's house down?

Let's not get into a discussion about Bono and Bob Geldof and their dedication to their causes, because that would take a much longer discussion (and there especially are lots of things to be said about Geldof and Live Aid...) But that's beside the point. You seem to have read something that nobody has written - that Morrissey is literally more 'worthy' of being written about. All I meant by 'newsworthy' was that he is one of the musicians who attract media attention. Bono and Geldof are definitely among those, too. It's not a question of who allegedly 'deserves' attention, which is a matter of personal opinion/taste, anyway. From the POV of the media, some people are more likely to attract attention and therefore help you sell more issues of your magazine. I'm sure that NME had a good reason to put Morrissey on so many covers in the 80s/early 90s - I don't think they did it because they were so in love with him, they did it because those issues would sell very well. The editors of Q Classic must have also had a reason why they called their special issue

"MORRISSEY

AND THE STORY OF MANCHESTER"

and why they put a big close-up pic of Morrissey, instead of, say, Bernard Sumner or Vini Reilly. You might like him or not or think that he does or does not 'deserve' attention, but he is a star. Not a big mainstream star, but definitely a big star nevertheless.

You didn't have to put any effort in proving that Morrissey transforms on stage - did anyone say it wasn't true? I 've known for ages that Johnny Marr said that, and I'm sure it's true. Morrissey has been described many times by many people who knew him as a shy and reserved person (though I'm not sure if he is still as shy and quiet as he used to be). But in his interviews, he is definitely not 'quiet and shy'. I can't think of many other pop stars who are as articulate, funny, outspoken, and often controversial and outrageous in their interviews. On the other hand, are many musicians who might be outgoing and fun with their mates, but who are incredibly boring in interviews.[/SIZE]

If people find Morrissey’s comments controversial then they are probably people who don’t get out much or have spent their entire lives wrapped up in cotton wool. Most, if not all of Morrissey’s views are somewhat comical, “bring me the head of Elton John” it’s comical genius I tell thee. He supports the Animal Liberation Front who use radical methods to place pressure on Government to make changes, so what? People who have read and listened to Morrissey before will know he is a person with rather radical views, sure if someone isn’t too familiar with Morrissey than they might be alarmed, but usually when someone says something controversial it ends up being splashed on the front pages of the newspapers so again most people are familiar with Morrissey’s outlook on life, therefore most of what he says doesn’t have the same shock factor it did in the early stages of his music career. He doesn’t carry the same weight.

Morrissey would have to say or release a song, which is a major talking point in the world of current affairs for it to cause controversy, now if he released a song slating immigration into the UK, he will probably find himself on the front of scummy tabloids and in the midst of flashing cameras. His views have by in large been heard before, he is part of P.E.T.A and they aren’t exactly a pragmatic organisation, they are considered to be highly radical both in their views and methods to get their message across.

I might have misinterpreted what you said, I am sorry, but to me you seem to be saying Morrissey is the only person in music with something interesting to say. This is somewhat true as Morrissey is generally more open about his opinions than most people, but he does become somewhat tedious with recycled questions he gets asked by sloppy journalists and he generally says the same old clichés over and over again of how nationwide diseases of animals makes him smile. Morrissey to me says what a lot of people think, he slated Bono and Geldoff on several occasions, but let’s faces it, who doesn’t dislike those two? They have become extremely unpopular with their raising awareness campaign, would you call Morrissey’s snide comments at them controversial? I don’t, because he wasn’t saying anything outrageous, Morrissey is controversial because a lot of people hang off his every word and I’ve heard more controversial conversations and opinions down my local pub than what Morrissey has said, there isn’t much that shocks me in life in these days, so I suppose it takes more than “I wish Joyce the very worst in life” to leave me in a state of shock and have me saying “now that’s controversial”. I don’t even consider Tony Blair’s cash for honours scandal controversial, because it has been going on since Governments were formed way back when Magna Carta was introduced. It’s what bought the Liberals down in 1922.

Morrissey was put on the front of their magazines, because he’s always been seen as an enigma, this mysterious person who was able to captivate his audience with his lyrical genius and his outspoken views. His comments about him being a Virgin and celibate were always bound to cause controversy and wide interest, because there was this stereotype that every pop star or rock star was having sex all day long and doing drugs of some sort, when Morrissey came out about such personal issues, it was always bound to raise eyebrows and sell copies.

I never said that Morrissey isn’t a star, he one of Manchester’s finest lyricists that is why he was probably on the front cover, The Smiths helped put Manchester well and truly on the map, to many people in Manchester, The Smiths were what The Beatles were to Liverpudlians. Morrissey is a great lyricist and a fantastic singer who has bags of energy, humour and wit. He is not as controversial as most people think, that’s my argument. I don’t find half the things he says abnormal. Morrissey summed it up himself “I've never intended to be controversial but it's very easy to be controversial in pop music because nobody ever is.”

I never once said I had to put effort into it, you questioned whether or not Morrissey was a quiet person in his private life when you already knew the answer because you read what Johnny Marr said, I therefore used James (the wrong James) to seal the point. Morrissey’s interviews are interesting, but to say controversial is a term that is over used, I’d call Rage Against The Machine stripping naked on live television in the name of anti censorship controversial, I’d call Michael Jackson hanging his baby over a balcony controversial, Morrissey is not controversial, because he has spent his career being controversial with his comments and as a result his views and interviews have become predictable and normal. Whether he is still a quiet person or not remains to be seen on another documentary, he seems a lot happier in life these days and he has said he has changed a lot and age has helped so who knows. I’m guessing he still has elements of his youth within him, but perhaps he is not as reclusive as he once was.

 

[nightandday]

1) when did I say that Morrissey was the only person in music whose opinions are worth hearing?!

2) people in your local pub say more controversial things than Morrissey? Of course they do, I'm sure that people in pubs will say more 'controversial' things than most public figures do. Especially because it means nothing and it will have no repurcussions on them. I know many people whose opinions are more controversial than Morrissey's. Some of my relatives, for instance, thought that 9/11 was either a Jewish/American conspiracy, or that the Americans got 'exactly what they deserved'; actually, they will say both, however paradoxical it is. I assume that this would be deemed controversial if said in public. Wonderful, eh?

3) I don't remember that Morrissey ever slagged Bono off or said he was a fake? He slagged off Live Aid and Geldof in 1985, when Live Aid was happening, and when it was treated like a sacred cow. How many people dared say anything against it back then?



P.S. Morrissey never said he was a virgin.

 

[Tomorrow]

I said you seemed to apply Morrissey’s opinions are only worth hearing, I never said you said this, so you might want to double check such things, because you made a mistake there. You’re second point proves me to be correct, how is Morrissey’s views controversial when your relatives have made comments of a large controversial foundation? Morrissey’s views are not deeply controversial, they might be somewhat more controversial than most people’s in public eye, but to me they aren’t deeply controversial anymore, because I have gotten used to such comments as have most people who know of Morrissey. I’m pretty sure Morrissey has slated Bono on several occasions, I heard and watched a video clip where Morrissey was talking about coming out as a virgin. I don’t mean to be rude, but you seem to think you know everything there is to know about Morrissey, perhaps you know more than most, but has it never occurred to you to find these things out for yourself instead of blatantly dismissing them? It becomes increasingly annoying for the person you are engaged in a conversation with. As far as speaking out against Geldoff and Live Aid, it was a controversial thing at the time, you’re forgetting Morrissey had been around for little over three years, therefore The Smiths were relatively new on the scene, and I’m talking about now, the present day.

 

[nightandday]

I said you seemed to apply Morrissey’s opinions are only worth hearing, I never said you said this, so you might want to double check such things, because you made a mistake there. You’re second point proves me to be correct, how is Morrissey’s views controversial when your relatives have made comments of a large controversial foundation? Morrissey’s views are not deeply controversial, they might be somewhat more controversial than most people’s in public eye, but to me they aren’t deeply controversial anymore, because I have gotten used to such comments as have most people who know of Morrissey. I’m pretty sure Morrissey has slated Bono on several occasions, I heard and watched a video clip where Morrissey was talking about coming out as a virgin. I don’t mean to be rude, but you seem to think you know everything there is to know about Morrissey, perhaps you know more than most, but has it never occurred to you to find these things out for yourself instead of blatantly dismissing them? It becomes increasingly annoying for the person you are engaged in a conversation with. As far as speaking out against Geldoff and Live Aid, it was a controversial thing at the time, you’re forgetting Morrissey had been around for little over three years, therefore The Smiths were relatively new on the scene, and I’m talking about now, the present day.

You have completely missed the point of my answer number 2. The rest I've already answered. And this is getting really tiresome.

And why are you writing everything in bold letters?!


P.S. until you manage to name your sources instead of 'I know I've seen a clip/I've read it somewhere', I'll believe I do know more about Morrissey than you do.

 

[Tomorrow]

I don't think I have missed your answer to your second point, yes Morrissey is in the public eye and cannot say everything which he believes in because it will have consequences, I know that, you don't have to tell me, I'm not stupid, I know how the world works. However to say that Morrissey is still controversial today is pushing it to the wire. He simply isn't, if you still find his comments controversial, then you need to read more and widen your focus on people in the public eye. If it is getting tiresome, please leave, it’s obvious that you have ran out of steam and points, allow me to have the last word and the discussion will be laid to rest because I could go on and on about this issue, I have lots more answers in my arsenal. Why not type in bold, is there any rules that say I am not allowed to do such? You’re just nitpicking because I smashed your argument to pieces, you should be more graceful in defeat. I don’t memorise everything I read and watch, I have other more constructive tasks to carry out, believe what you like, perhaps you do know more about Morrissey than me, I have never ever been deeply interested in Morrissey to the point where I am obsessed, I care for his music and his music only, I’m not interested in his personality or what his dress code is. You obviously are therefore you’re bound to know the less relevant information. You also failed to supply me evidence earlier, so what does that say about you, apart from hypocrite? You’re getting petty so call it day; you’ll only end up looking the village idiot, it’s best to admit defeat on this one.

 

[nightandday]

Sorry, I first have to laugh at your 'you should be more graceful in defeat' and 'you better admit defeat'. LOL

All right, now that I've finished laughing:

If, instead writing all that gibberish, you would stop for a moment to read this thread and think about it, you would understand that we (me and other people who have answered you) have already proved your 'points' wrong. But it's an old truth that it's the most difficult having a debate with a fool, because a fool doesn't realize when they've been proven wrong, just like you don't.

Your initial point was that Jarvis is more outspoken than Morrissey, then you started saying that he is more controversial than Morrissey - with absolutely nothing to prove it. We mentioned his support of animal rights groups who oppose animal testing (something that alienates a lot of people), his boycott of Canada (which enraged many fans), in addition to his criticism of British and American government. And your argument was... that opposing Michael Jackson is the most daring, outspoken thing anyone can ever do?! Do you really need to be explained how absurd that is?!?! If anything, "Jacko" is the easiest target one can pick. And that incident has only made Jarvis more popular and given him additional 'coolness' points in the eyes of NME and the indie crowd.

Then - since such a ridiculous claim couldn't possibly be defended - you conveniently forgot about Jarvis and started going on about Morrissey not being controversial anymore, because he stands by the same beliefs he did 20 years ago, so "it's not surprising"?! What kind of logic is that?! That he should change his views, or try to say ridiculous things he doesn't believe in, just so that people like you would be suprised??

You started mentioning Bono and Bob Geldof for no particular reason, then you accused Morrissey of allegedly slagging them off because it's cool to do so. Yes, Tomorrow, it's "cool" to slag off Bono and Geldof today... almost as cool as it is to slag off Michael Jackson. (yes, it was cool to slag him off 10 years ago, as well.) But you couldn't really name an occasion when Morrissey slagged off Bono... and Morrissey did slag off Bob Geldof and Live Aid, but it was in 1985, when it was not 'cool' at all. So, you "argument" backfired. And then you couldn't find anything better to say, than to go back to your old, tired "argument" that "but that was 20 years ago, has he done anything controversial lately"? That was not the thing that was being discussed. Read this paragraph again, a few times if you need, until you understand.

And, on top of everything, you threw in the most absurd of all your arguments: guys in your pub "say more controversial things than Morrissey"! Of course they do, every idiot in every pub will say a lot of rubbish that he/she has heard from someone else, and they won't give it much thought because they're not in public eye and don't bear any responsability for what they say - and most of it will be sheer idiocy, just like the rubbish that my silly prejudiced relatives say. The fact that something is "controversial" doesn't necessarily mean that it's an intelligent or valuable opinion, or that it takes a lot of courage to be said. Especially when you're saying it in a pub or in a market or in your home, and not on TV or in papers. And especially when the majority of those around you think the same, so you're not really a rebel or a revolutionary. According to your logic, some idiot who mouths off in a local pub or in a market that he/she hates Jews or 'niggers' or 'f*****s' would be deemed "controversial".

And don't twist my words. I never said that Morrissey doesn't say everything he thinks because it could have consequences. I think he does. When did he ever hold back? What do you think he isn't saying? Please try to make up something "more controversial" that he's "holding back"? I don't know what it could be... Maybe you expect him to say that all human beings should be killed and that animals should take over the world, or what? And what consequences could there be that weren't there already? He's already been brought in by the British police and the FBI, he's been vilified by the press... What else could happen, apart from someone killing him (which is a bit too extreme and therefore quite unlikely)?

In short, all your arguments have been proven rubbish, so how long are you going to keep it up like this?!

 

[sonof77]

Someone is fighting at the wrong weight, I wonder who.

 

[Amy]

What does it matter whether Morrissey fits into your pathetic "controversial" category? The man says what he means and means what he says, that's enough for me and for most of his fans. Yes he has made some 'controversial' statements because he has radical views on certain things. But why must he need to endlessly stir up controversy? He's not some Z-list idiot still trying desperately to get his face in the papers, he's f***ing Morrissey. I don't believe he says things randomly just to get a rise out of people, he's more intelligent than that. Sometimes claiming to be controversial is just an excuse to be a twat.

 

[Tomorrow]

Amy, I very much agree with that, he's not controversial at all, if people do find his views controversial then they need to get out in the open world and listen to more people's opinions, a person on here claims that he's practically the only celebrity to say such things and do such things and this isn't true. Morrissey’s “controversial views” come from the media press making a big deal about something trivial and the amount of people like nightandday who buy into it, it’s truly amusing. If Morrissey was to be found funding the animal liberation front, then I would call that controversial, but saying such a thing as “I sympathise with the movement” isn’t at all surprising or controversial because Morrissey has said such things in the past.

It’s oversensitive do Gooding people who find Morrissey’s views controversial, the funny thing is some of these people are his so called fans.

 

[The Crime Of The Century!]

Amy, I very much agree with that, he's not controversial at all, if people do find his views controversial then they need to get out in the open world and listen to more people's opinions, a person on here claims that he's practically the only celebrity to say such things and do such things and this isn't true. Morrissey’s “controversial views” come from the media press making a big deal about something trivial and the amount of people like nightandday who buy into it, it’s truly amusing. If Morrissey was to be found funding the animal liberation front, then I would call that controversial, but saying such a thing as “I sympathise with the movement” isn’t at all surprising or controversial because Morrissey has said such things in the past.

It’s oversensitive do Gooding people who find Morrissey’s views controversial, the funny thing is some of these people are his so called fans.

Okay, the dictionary defines controversial as being 'likely to cause debate or disagreement over a certain issue'. Morrissey does, and always has done this. He still provokes debate even today. He's very much a love/hate figure, more so than anyone else I can think of.

Therefore he is controversial.



---- END OF THREAD ----

 

[nightandday]

Okay, the dictionary defines controversial as being 'likely to cause debate or disagreement over a certain issue'. Morrissey does, and always has done this. He still provokes debate even today. He's very much a love/hate figure, more so than anyone else I can think of.

Therefore he is controversial.



---- END OF THREAD ----

P.S....Especially when you're the kind of person who doesn't say "I sympathize with the movement" but things like "One dead butcher isn't such a great loss"

(sorry for adding this after the official end of the thread)