Morrissey, at his peak or past his prime?

[Worm]

Now I think I'm even more confused.

Are you saying that he's writing stuff like "All You Need Is Me" because it's all he's got left? He's simply exhausted his ability to write powerful, well-worded songs so now he's bombarding us with cockrock to show off his voice? His voice is excellent now, I agree, but I'm not sure I see the logic in saying that's why the quality of his lyrics has taken a nosedive. I don't think he ever wrote wordy lyrics just to distract from his singing voice, and I can't see how or why he'd do the reverse.

No, I'm saying that it can be meaningful and interesting to hear a wordsmith who made his name writing literate lyrics choose to express himself in short sharp shocks. I don't think he's exhausted at all. I think he's chosen to be more direct, not as precious in his choice of words, and intentionally more combative. It's a different style. You can hear that as decline, I suppose, but in my opinion you can also hear it as a conscious choice very much in keeping with his past. I also think (as I've said on here before a few times) that this is also his way of avoiding repetition. As I said, if you've made "Vauxhall and I" and "The Queen Is Dead", why would you need to make them again?

Case in point: Belle and Sebastian. Witty, intelligent, playful lyrics. Some fantastic musical arrangements. A clear, distinct aesthetic for the band. I don't think they've declined much at all over the course of their career, and if anything they're a model of consistency. And I don't care a bit about their newer stuff because I know what I'm getting-- it's always the same items on the menu. I believe Morrissey could have stuck to the formula he created in The Smiths for his entire career but chose not to, whether that meant shortening his lyrics or electing to encase his words in sloppy pub rock. The point is this: nothing he has done erases the past, it only complements his previous stuff.

I believe that when he retires, and his career's at full stop, everything he's done will make perfect sense. Measuring the distance between "Hand In Glove" and his final tune will prove fascinating and deeply enjoyable, and above all will reflect a changing artist, not a declining one. Don't you think it's interesting that a man who so carefully crafted his image and his songs, in the early part of his career, is now turning out choppy little jams with baggy lyrics? Doesn't that show a curious willingness not to play up and protect his own legend? What can that mean? Decline? Or...?

 

[Amy]

Hi Amy, Yes, I meant Kill Uncle.
Yeah, that was a great period around the Maladjusted period. Makes you think about what he may have produced with the 'break'.
I can't remeber Trouble Loves Me. I will check it out tonight.
Do you not like 'Something is Squeezing My Skull' or 'Carol'?
(Love your choice of late songs by the way).

Oh, Trouble Loves Me is a thing of beauty. Just listen to the words, wait for the drums to kick in at 1.48...wow. *stares into distance*. I think I'll just go the whole hog and say it's better than anything he ever did with the Smiths.

Ready with ready-wit, still running 'round
On the flesh rampage - at your age!
Go to Soho, oh
Go to waste in the wrong arms,
Still running round

Show me a barrel and watch me scrape it
Faced with the music, as always I'll face it
In the half-light
So English, frowning
Then at midnight, I
Can't get you out of my head

Hmm.."Carol" I like lyrically but not musically. "Skull" is a good, raucous little number, but a bit 'empty' if that makes sense?

 

[Amy]

No, I'm saying that it can be meaningful and interesting to hear a wordsmith who made his name writing literate lyrics choose to express himself in short sharp shocks. I don't think he's exhausted at all. I think he's chosen to be more direct, not as precious in his choice of words, and intentionally more combative. It's a different style. You can hear that as decline, I suppose, but in my opinion you can also hear it as a conscious choice very much in keeping with his past. I also think (as I've said on here before a few times) that this is also his way of avoiding repetition. As I said, if you've made "Vauxhall and I" and "The Queen Is Dead", why would you need to make them again?

Case in point: Belle and Sebastian. Witty, intelligent, playful lyrics. Some fantastic musical arrangements. A clear, distinct aesthetic for the band. I don't think they've declined much at all over the course of their career, and if anything they're a model of consistency. And I don't care a bit about their newer stuff because I know what I'm getting-- it's always the same items on the menu. I believe Morrissey could have stuck to the formula he created in The Smiths for his entire career but chose not to, whether that meant shortening his lyrics or electing to encase his words in sloppy pub rock. The point is this: nothing he has done erases the past, it only complements his previous stuff.

I believe that when he retires, and his career's at full stop, everything he's done will make perfect sense. Measuring the distance between "Hand In Glove" and his final tune will prove fascinating and deeply enjoyable, and above all will reflect a changing artist, not a declining one. Don't you think it's interesting that a man who so carefully crafted his image and his songs, in the early part of his career, is now turning out choppy little jams with baggy lyrics? Doesn't that show a curious willingness not to play up and protect his own legend? What can that mean? Decline? Or...?

Ah I see. That's fair enough, Worm. He probably has chosen to be more direct - I'm just not sure if I like that approach, personally. I don't find the 'choppy jams' interesting, they make me feel sad. I see them as a waste. Is it better than him serving up the same stuff all the time? Probably. But if I want to listen to the Ramones, I'll put on a Ramones record. I've never looked to Morrissey for that kind of thing and I don't think he's very good at it.

 

[Worm]

Ah I see. That's fair enough, Worm. He probably has chosen to be more direct - I'm just not sure if I like that approach, personally. I don't find the 'choppy jams' interesting, they make me feel sad. I see them as a waste. Is it better than him serving up the same stuff all the time? Probably. But if I want to listen to the Ramones, I'll put on a Ramones record. I've never looked to Morrissey for that kind of thing and I don't think he's very good at it.

I think he's spotty with those tunes. He's at his best with "Something Is Squeezing My Skull" but the songs in the newest batch are stone-cold horrendous.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

This conversation would be way more interesting if we were talking about Morrissey being at his sexual peak. Hey ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'll get me sweatshirt.

 

[Worm]

This conversation would be way more interesting if we were talking about Morrissey being at his sexual peak. Hey ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'll get me sweatshirt.

He is at his sexual peak. That's the whole point. That's the whole reason his songs are different. When you've got explosive kegs between your legs there's no need to plunder "A Taste of Honey" for the 83rd time.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

He is at his sexual peak. That's the whole point. That's the whole reason his songs are different. When you've got explosive kegs between your legs there's no need to plunder "A Taste of Honey" for the 83rd time.

Good point.

 

[mcrickson]

This conversation would be way more interesting if we were talking about Morrissey being at his sexual peak. Hey ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'll get me sweatshirt.

A man aged 52 at his sexual peak? Biologically unlikely.

 

[Worm]

A man aged 52 at his sexual peak? Biologically unlikely.

Making up for lost time.

 

[Worm]

Tell me Worm, have you heard the music/lyrics of Alex Turner of the Artic Monkeys? There may be a debt to our Moz there.

There's probably a debt there, but I haven't logged enough listening time to know what it might be. Whatever it is, they've concealed it well enough, because I don't think of The Arctic Monkeys as Smiths/Morrissey clones. To my ears, if you can hear the influence of Morrissey in a song, the song's usually rubbish. There's a reason some artists are called "inimitable". Better to take the influence and make sure it's well buried, as with Andre 3000 of OutKast.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

A man aged 52 at his sexual peak? Biologically unlikely.

Unless he's an elephant.

 

[Orson Swells]

Unless he's an elephant.

And some of us are.

 

[Worm]

Unless he's an elephant.

Oh? What have you heard...?

 

[bored]

Based on how deep into his career he released Life Is A Pigsty I would say that things are just fine. The fact that there may never be another record deal saddens me since there is so little worth listening to these days. It would also be very sad if we never get a proper release of Arthounds.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

Oh? What have you heard...?

Just that when he's touring he carries his clothes in a very long, firm trunk...

 

[Worm]

Just that when he's touring he carries his clothes in a very long, firm trunk...

Right, and that he's got a thing for nuts?

Okay. Stop.

 

[Maurice E]

I haven't read every response in this thread but there seems to be a general misconception that Morrissey is a songwriter. So, where once he wrote something as subtle, beautiful and poignant as I Know It's Over, he now writes the clumsy, tuneless bluster of All You Need is Me.
A quick point of clarification - MORRISSEY HAS NEVER WRITTEN A SONG IN HIS ENTIRE LIFE! He is not, and has never been, a solo act in any meaningful sense of the word. He went from having Johnny Marr write songs and play the guitars to Stephen Street, then to Mark Nevin, Alain Whyte etc. Post-Smiths he's presented himself as a solo act but he could hardly be less solo.
He is a lyricist. The reason I Know Its Over, Maudlin Street, Well I Wonder, Will Never Marry, I Won't Share You, Please Please Please etc are things of absolute beauty are because Stephen Street and Johnny Marr wrote absolutely beautiful pieces of music.
Unlike many others round here, I'm not a Jesse basher, but he never writes musical compositions which could be considered beautiful or understated.
Marr and Street could easily come along tomorrow and hand Morrissey another gorgeous twinkling gem of a composition, Morrissey adds a few lyrics, and we have another beautiful song on our hands.
If we're gonna discuss the alleged decline of Morrissey, it only really makes more sense to focus on the words which are his responsibility, and his alone.
Although Morrissey has some say in the way the music is presented, it's certainly not a strength of his. His musical judgement is somewhere between poor and dire hence his recent announcement that the plodding mediocrity of That's How People Grow Up is one of the songs he's most proud of, and ludicrous musical decisions in the past such as releasing Dagenham Dave (officially his worst ever single) but hiding the genius of Nobody Loves Up on its b-side, releasing a bog-standard album track (Glamourous Glue) as the lead-single to his compilation album of last year, putting out Roy's Keen as a single, only to realise 10 years later the song shouldn't have even been released at all.
Anyway, err, what was I saying. Oh yes! It's the lyrics that he's responsible for and I'd argue that from Quarry onwards there's been a real drop in quality. We still get great lyrics and great songs from time to time, and I'm really pleased he's still writing new stuff, but they're the exception rather than the rule these days.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

Right, and that he's got a thing for nuts?

Okay. Stop.

Can ya keep up with me? Geddit? Kenya?

Okay. Stopping.

 

[peptastic]

All I can say in regard to this topic is that Morrissey is someone who I would not write off artistically as dead and buried until he is, quite literally, dead and buried.

Well said.

If anything for me the question isn't whether he's past his prime but does he still speak to the old fan base whose music he touched? Lyrically he's still got it.
Vocally he still has it.
Understandably not everyone can relate to every creative time period or parternship in his career. I'll admit his later career [past 2004] doesn't affect me the same way.

Michael Stipe's response to his detractors back in '99 that he couldn't write the same songs as he did in his '20s.

 

[Amy]

I think he's spotty with those tunes. He's at his best with "Something Is Squeezing My Skull" but the songs in the newest batch are stone-cold horrendous.

Yup. "Something..." is quite strong. He sounds full of anger and vitality.