Classic Pop: Sparks on Morrissey - "it's saddening, very disheartening"

In a new interview in Classic Pop, the Sparks are asked about Morrissey.
"We love so much of what he's done, to see his stance against humanity seems so contradictory. From his music we thought inclusion would be part of his views. When it comes to us versus them,
Morrissey seems to be on the side of them. It's very disheartening."


Scan posted by Famous when dead:



Related items:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Comments

NealCassidy

Well-Known Member
‘The’ sparks . Is this how you sell a new album these days.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
They're going by what they've read & they hedge their bets by saying it might not be true.

The Anon who started the thread showing how pull-quotes can make something more damning than it is - which is pretty much what always happens to Morrissey.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
They're going by what they've read & they hedge their bets by saying it might not be true.

The Anon who started the thread showing how pull-quotes can make something more damning than it is - which is pretty much what always happens to Morrissey.
Unfortunately we know that the Sparks' suspicions are spot on. They haven't even mentioned Steve's unequivocal backing of a far-right political group, or his declaration that he prefers his own race. Things are even worse than the Sparks seem to have realised.
 
V

Vegan. Cro. Spirit. 888

Guest
🤒
O NO NOT THESE DUMB CUCKS AGAIN:mad:
with their stupid one line songs
theres a hippo in the pool
theres a car in the garage
theres a book on the shelf
theres cucks and there these cucking cucks:rolleyes:
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
Unfortunately we know that the Sparks' suspicions are spot on. They haven't even mentioned Steve's unequivocal backing of a far-right political group, or his declaration that he prefers his own race. Things are even worse than the Sparks seem to have realised.
More things out of context.
 

Amy

from the Ice Age to the dole age
theres a hippo in the pool
theres a car in the garage
theres a book on the shelf
theres cucks and there these cucking cucks:rolleyes:
Best summary of Sparks I've seen, but they're bloody funny.
 
I feel like this is the predominant debate on here, but what and where exactly is the “us vs. them” stance that is being referenced here? Also, Morrissey has ALWAYS been against humanity. He has said from the beginning of his career he doesn’t like people in general, and prefers animals to people. So, when did his genius as a lyricists get confused with a responsibility to human injustices? He’s pretty upfront that he’s a voice for animal rights, but is now talked about as if he used to be a voice for human rights too, which isn’t true. Maybe this connection is being made because he, like many young working class British citizens who came of age outside London in the 60s and 70s, was disenfranchised, felt he had no future in England, and that the powers that be had sold him out. This sentiment was very common and still is today by most people who are disenfranchised. But that reality doesn’t equate him to a politician or human rights activist, which is a person motivated by human rights not animal rights. He doesn’t even like people! I read that article on the “Chinese people are a subspecies” remark, and that came in response to him being asked about his thoughts on the treatment of animals at wet markets in China. He doesn’t like people who abuse animals, so if you ask him about animal abuse it seems pretty obvious he’s going to voice his abhorrent disgust. This is not a new position from Morrissey. He has been completely consistent on his position concerning animal rights and the British people’s disenfranchisement for almost 40 years. Why do so many people look to him as if he used to have the answers for the many human rights issues the world faces? It’s so weird to me. His strength is his ability to write and synthesize an emotion or experience into lyrics. It’s very shady for other artists to put him down publicly insinuating racial bigotry. What the hell people? I know a ton of anons are going to start trolling- but I had to share my pov. Curious what other think.

EDIT: drafted this before article was posted. Will read article later. Sentiment is the same. Curious what others think- and why the hate and the misapplied duties to moz exist now.
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
I feel like this is the predominant debate on here, but what and where exactly is the “us vs. them” stance that is being referenced here? Also, Morrissey has ALWAYS been against humanity. He has said from the beginning of his career he doesn’t like people in general, and prefers animals to people. So, when did his genius as a lyricists get confused with a responsibility to human injustices? He’s pretty upfront that he’s a voice for animal rights, but is now talked about as if he used to be a voice for human rights too, which isn’t true. Maybe this connection is being made because he, like many young working class British citizens who came of age outside London in the 60s and 70s, was disenfranchised, felt he had no future in England, and that the powers that be had sold him out. This sentiment was very common and still is today by most people who are disenfranchised. But that reality doesn’t equate him to a politician or human rights activist, which is a person motivated by human rights not animal rights. He doesn’t even like people! I read that article on the “Chinese people are a subspecies” remark, and that came in response to him being asked about his thoughts on the treatment of animals at wet markets in China. He doesn’t like people who abuse animals, so if you ask him about animal abuse it seems pretty obvious he’s going to voice his abhorrent disgust. This is not a new position from Morrissey. He has been completely consistent on his position concerning animal rights and the British people’s disenfranchisement for almost 40 years. Why do so many people look to him as if he used to have the answers for the many human rights issues the world faces? It’s so weird to me. His strength is his ability to write and synthesize an emotion or experience into lyrics. It’s very shady for other artists to put him down publicly insinuating racial bigotry. What the hell people? I know a ton of anons are going to start trolling- but I had to share my pov. Curious what other think.

EDIT: drafted this before article was posted. Will read article later. Sentiment is the same. Curious what others think- and why the hate and the misapplied duties to moz exist now.
Yes, you are right. It's this very misogynistic, uncaring view of people in general that is no longer in fashion. It was funny and curious when he was younger in the 1980s, but in an old man of today it comes across as mean-spirited, ugly, immature. He may be unchanged, but that's not always a good thing.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
Yes, you are right. It's this very misogynistic, uncaring view of people in general that is no longer in fashion. It was funny and curious when he was younger in the 1980s, but in an old man of today it comes across as mean-spirited, ugly, immature. He may be unchanged, but that's not always a good thing.
You really need to look at the scandals happening on twitter - every day some new celebrity gets done for being a sexist/racist/transphobe & the canceller becomes the cancelled.

He actually has more compassion than most of them in his narky way.

If you want someone who plays well on social media or in the media in general - then it's not him.

But if you want someone who will be vindicated in the end because he didn't join in with fashion - it will be him.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
I feel like this is the predominant debate on here, but what and where exactly is the “us vs. them” stance that is being referenced here? Also, Morrissey has ALWAYS been against humanity. He has said from the beginning of his career he doesn’t like people in general, and prefers animals to people. So, when did his genius as a lyricists get confused with a responsibility to human injustices? He’s pretty upfront that he’s a voice for animal rights, but is now talked about as if he used to be a voice for human rights too, which isn’t true. Maybe this connection is being made because he, like many young working class British citizens who came of age outside London in the 60s and 70s, was disenfranchised, felt he had no future in England, and that the powers that be had sold him out. This sentiment was very common and still is today by most people who are disenfranchised. But that reality doesn’t equate him to a politician or human rights activist, which is a person motivated by human rights not animal rights. He doesn’t even like people! I read that article on the “Chinese people are a subspecies” remark, and that came in response to him being asked about his thoughts on the treatment of animals at wet markets in China. He doesn’t like people who abuse animals, so if you ask him about animal abuse it seems pretty obvious he’s going to voice his abhorrent disgust. This is not a new position from Morrissey. He has been completely consistent on his position concerning animal rights and the British people’s disenfranchisement for almost 40 years. Why do so many people look to him as if he used to have the answers for the many human rights issues the world faces? It’s so weird to me. His strength is his ability to write and synthesize an emotion or experience into lyrics. It’s very shady for other artists to put him down publicly insinuating racial bigotry. What the hell people? I know a ton of anons are going to start trolling- but I had to share my pov. Curious what other think.

EDIT: drafted this before article was posted. Will read article later. Sentiment is the same. Curious what others think- and why the hate and the misapplied duties to moz exist now.
It's because they won't meet him at a party - if he had a network with clout, they'd have to weigh up if it was worth sticking the boot in.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You really need to look at the scandals happening on twitter - every day some new celebrity gets done for being a sexist/racist/transphobe & the canceller becomes the cancelled.

He actually has more compassion than most of them in his narky way.

If you want someone who plays well on social media or in the media in general - then it's not him.

But if you want someone who will be vindicated in the end because he didn't join in with fashion - it will be him.
There's no vindication for being on the wrong side of history.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom