Morrissey-solo
Archive
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
posted by
davidt
on Thursday December 20 2001, @11:00AM
Pat Reid writes:
Hi there, I thought maybe I should belatedly respond to some of the speculation on the site about my forthcoming book. 1. The launch of the book has now been delayed until the middle of 2002. Sorry... 2. Although the book is concerned with issues of sexuality, it also contains an extensive examination of Morrissey's work within the context of late-20th century pop culture. There's also a certain amount of stuff concerning my personal relationship - as a fan - with Morrissey and his work. 3. The book is NOT a dirt-dredging biography. I'm more interested in the themes and issues which have erupted around Morrissey throughout his career. I would definitely describe it as a real fan's book, and I really hope you guys like it. 4. When the book appears, I'll be doing readings/discussions in Bristol, Liverpool and London in the UK, and hopefully in New York, Los Angeles and Toronto in North America. 5. If anyone has any queries, or would like to send me relevant material, please email me at [email protected] Have a fab Christmas! Pat Reid Bath, England 19 December 2001
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|||||||||
|
| |||||||||
Thanks... (Score:0)
Dear Pat (Score:1)
So, sure, you will will be laid into by the man's defenders on this site. But so what. Ignore it. You've nothing you need to justify. You certainly don't need to self censor.
Just get the book on the bookshelves. I'm looking forward to it.
(User #256 Info)
Pat? (Score:1)
Is Pat a guy or gal? When I first heard the name, I imagined a middle-aged woman for some reason. Am I wrong?
Don't keep us in suspenders..give us a little excerpt from the book PLZZ!!
(User #4056 Info)
discussion (Score:2, Insightful)
And it is interesting. whenever he is spotted with a man, the assumption that it is a boyfriend and when he's with a female, she must be a fag hag. He never really says what these people mean to him. Yet, he even wrote the song "I can have both" which is blatant, but yet, people tend to gloss over it. Like it doesn't exist.
So, when i see a book parading around what Moz has done for the gay movement, it's just sort of silly. I think people WISH he had done something for them. You don't see him at rallies and he makes no political statement out of what he wants and treats it more like a personal matter. You've adopted him as "one of our own" when in truth, he hasn't really done a whole lot to make it look like a natural process. He dodges the question. Or he says something and nobody believes him. the only words most people would believe is if he said he was gay. anything else gets buried and ignored. What people have placed upon him is unnatural, because it's not born out of his personal wants or behaviours, yet they hold him up as a person who broke the barriers. If that was true, then what he wants as an individual would have been a focal point. Not what everyone wants him to be. so, in the end, you are back to square one. "Are you or aren't you?" and nothing revelatory has been achieved. matter of fact, it does absolutely nothing more than reinforce stereotypes.
(User #36 Info)
Re:discussion (Score:2, Insightful)
Journalists have an insatiable hunger for a scoop. The first one to hear the words "I¡¯m gay" from Morrissey will have scored a real coup. Of course Morrissey knows this (as does every celebrity) and he withholds such a statement. This purposeful ambiguity on Morrissey¡¯s part has many uses; many more than a simple "outing." He can appeal to a wider audience than a pop star who takes up a gay cause explicitly, since even at this late date, some are alienated by any clear mention of "the love that dare not speak its name." He can also escape the fate of appearing forever as a static, one-dimensional character. Does anyone take The Village People seriously? Their role is to embody cartoonish stereotypes, and they are interchangeable parts of a vast, cynical machine. Who they are as people doesn¡¯t really matter. For an intelligent singer-songwriter with a great degree of control over his image, this sort of role can be constraining and tiresome in the extreme. David Bowie certainly never made the simple statement, "I¡¯m gay." Who he is as a person and a performer has been much more complex than that, even in his conservative dotage! A year or so after Bowie¡¯s first "bisexual" announcement, another rock star by the name of Jobriath emerged. He was as "out of the closet" as he could possibly be, and he got a lot of publicity for a while. His career was a miserable failure for a number of reasons (lack of record company support, an egomaniacal manager, and yes, audience hostility) but he remains a cult figure, the first -- and just about the last -- openly gay American rock star. Morrissey has made a number of allusions to this nearly forgotten figure, most notably by waving a copy of Jobriath¡¯s second album at the camera in the video for "Pregnant for the Last Time" and by placing a copy of Jobriath¡¯s first album in the hands of Gary Day and Alain Whyte in the photo he took for the cover of "My Love Life." Could these references be hints not only to search out Jobriath¡¯s music, but also to reflect upon the circumstances of his career?
Morrissey¡¯s own solution to the nagging problem of having to choose an identity for public consumption is surely one of his greatest strokes of genius: "I¡¯m celibate." Case closed, darling. As for my own reaction to this statement, I¡¯ll quote the great one himself, "Oh, I can smile about it now, but at the time it was terrible."
(User #4040 Info)
Parent
Re:discussion (Score:2, Insightful)
And second of all, there are people in this world who are incredibly uncomfortable discussing their love life. they don't have to be gay, or even be in relationships that people would make snide comments about. just because you, or maybe lots of other people don't mind broadcasting to everyone that they are with someone they love doesn't exactly mean the rest of the world follows suit. it's a very private area for some people, and there are many married celebrities who change the subject when asked about their spouses just because they don't want their loved ones being public fodder. maybe moz is the same way. he feels people already pick him apart enough that he probably wants an area he can retreat to at the end of the day that is off limits. he obviously doesn't fall in love very easily, so it's obviously a very deep emotional challenge on its own dealing with a budding relationship without having the entire world watching and taking notes. it's usually only jerry springer trailer trash and gold diggers who like having their personal relationships displayed for public view.
so, that leaves the rest of it. Jobriath et al. I find Richard Pryor funny. Am I black? I've taken Kendo. Am I Japanese?
And even if those pics were indicative of something, it doesn't mean there is some Darth Vader figure running around saying, "Give into the GAY side! Decorate your house in fuschia and your journey will be complete" It could be an indulgence, hence the "I can have both" song. What does that mean? I hope you realize that most people are not flat and two dimensional. He's had plenty of females on the covers of his albums as well. There is one in particular in my Peepholism book of a very busty woman in bed used as the cover to a single. Is that to be ignored? Or, are you too busy strictly looking for the covers with Jobriath on them to reinforce some idea that you have?
As I reiterate, my first post of what people are looking for as opposed to exactly what is in front of them. There is a broad spectrum. And the thing is that, most of these journalists start out like "i'm looking for the truth" and then evidence is ignored, because the middleground is not seen as a viable option. Especially with men. With women, if they are lesbians, there is this overriding idea that they will date men on occasion and nobody seems to question the back and forth they can easily pass through. And nobody gets grossed out at the idea that they've been with other women, and matter of fact, to many men, it is seen as a turn on.
But with men, it's different. It's either you are a Boy George or you are a womanizer. And once they've dated another man, they are obviously seen as damaged goods that have accepted the role of "gay man" and that's it for them. i'm more convinced than anything that because the stigma is so much greater for men than it is for women that many bi- men who might want to date a woman on occasion won't do it because they feel safer in the gay scene.
(User #36 Info)
Parent
Re:discussion (Score:2, Funny)
Does this satisfy the previous request for concision?
(User #4040 Info)
Parent