Nick Kent talks Morrissey and The Smiths in DN interview - Fredrik Strage / Morrissey 61 Facebook group

An anonymous person sends the link:


Excerpt:

Post by Fredrik Strage:

Jag intervjuade just rockjournalisten Nick Kent för DN. Han är aktuell med sin första roman "The Unstable Boys". Jag frågade också om hans relation till Morrissey och han gav mig väldigt utförliga svar. Eftersom jag bara fick med ett par korta citat i den färdiga texten tänkte jag bjussa er Moz-fans på resten. (Det här är inte korrat eller redigerat, bara utskriven intervju.)

Another big "what if" in rock history is what would have happened if you had agreed to publish the stuff that Morrissey sent you when you were a section editor at the NME? Maybe he would have become a rock journalist instead?
I never turned him down. I just didn't get back to him. He wasn't very good. But the main thing is that Morrissey was 14 years old. He was obsessed with the New York Dolls and I had spent enough time around the New York Dolls to know first hand that people who hang around the New York Dolls don't live very long. There's only one guy in the band still alive. Five are dead. Probably more than any other rock group of their era. So I just thought he'd better grow out of it. Also he was 14, what was I going to say? Leave school? Go to New York? I think he always resented me for that. Haha. We had a strange relationship. I remember interviewing him as a member of The Smiths, I couldn't remember him as Steven Morrissey, this kid that used to write to me. He wrote to a lot of people. But very quickly he wanted to know about the New York Dolls. And I knew about them. Johnny Thunders was the same age as me. We dressed the same and we had connections shall we say. So I knew the real story which he didn't. He just knew the story that he had read in the music papers. So I told him the real story of the New York Dolls and I remember him looking at me as if I was Saint Peter talking about Jesus Christ. This kind of worshipful look on his face. He wanted to touch the hem of my garment or something. I said to him "listen, man, the New York Dolls were a fine group, far be it from me to knock them but The Smiths are way better, you Morrissey are way more talented than anyone in the New York Dolls, that's just my opinion". And that impressed him. Haha.

I love The Smiths. I've been listening to them again. It's strange because their music came along at a really bad time in my life. Getting towards the end of my bad drug period. I was suffering from a really bad chemical depression. I was jaded and lacking stamina and everything was shit. Too many synthesizers. The whole music scene was all synthesizers at that point and I didn't like it. Then The Smiths came along and it was just wonderful. It was like hearing The Byrds again for the first time. I fell in love with music again. And meeting them was very nice. Johnny Marr gave me an amplifier, I was still a musician at that time, very nice of him. And a huge talent. I've played guitar with Keith Richards, I know how good a musician he is, like one-to-one, I know how good he is on stage but I also know how good he is when playing in a room and he's very good. He's much better in a room than he is on stage. And also Jimmy Page. Another guitar great. I've been in the same room and watched him play. He's great. But Johnny Marr was the best. When he was in The Smiths it was like... God, the beauty.... I'd purposedly go to soundchecks, before a gig, and Morrissey wouldn't sing it was just Joyce, Rourke and Marr getting the sound right. And they were rehearsing the songs for "The Queen Is Dead" which they were yet to record. They had just written them. And the music coming off that stage... everything that Marr played was just beautiful. It was like something out of a Greek myth. This golden music was coming out of his amplifier. Everything that he played was just... and they worked every day. The Smiths worked hard. The Smiths were the opposite of The Sex Pistols and The New York Dolls. They developed. They rehearsed. They wanted to be great. Every f***ing day, man. Morrissey and Marr would get together and say: "OK, today we're gonna write our version of '8 Miles High'. We're not gonna copy it but we're gonna do something as monumental as that." And they wrote "How Soon Is Now". Then Marr said: "OK, today we're gonna do our 'Gimme Shelter'." And they wrote "Bigmouth Strikes Again". They'd pick a song that was a classic. "OK, we're gonna do our 'You've Lost That Loving Feeling'." And they wrote "I Know It's Over". You understand? That's the level they were working on. Everyone else were thinking like: "OK, we want to sound a bit like Leonard Cohen, a bit like U2, and a bit like Depeche Mode, and the singer wants to sound a bit like Jeff Buckley. We'll put these ingredients together and we'll write our own songs." And that's pretty much what Coldplay does. And hundreds of thousands of people like that approach. That's a mainstream approach to rock music and has been for the last 30 years. But I don't like that because when I hear groups like that I just hear their influences. There's no personality. It's like the difference between Prince, who takes loads of influences but brought his own personality, versus Lenny Kravitz who takes Stevie Wonder, Jimi Hendrix, a little bit of John Lennon, and a lot of other influences but doesn't really add anything of his own to it.

The Smiths were like The Velvet Underground. They had their own sound. And those are the rare groups. Those are the important groups that are going to last.

Is it true that Morrissey wrote the song "Reader Meet Author" about you?
I haven't heard the song so I don't really want to comment. There was a time when things were nasty between us. Now we just ignore eachother. I prefer it that way. I don't like his politics. I don't know too much about him. I haven't even listened to his last album. But I listened to "California Son" and I really enjoyed that. I thought he made some really good choices. Joni Mitchell. Laura Nyro. But as for the stuff that he writes now... no. I don't want to say anything negative about the guy but I'm not gonna say anything positive either. Loved him in The Smiths.



The original DN article:


full
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit 555

Guest
😐
OY Nick Kent
another old punk rock nutter we are not going to get rid of one (Le:frogface:)
just to add another:handpointdown:

kentnickbw.jpg
 

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
Thats a lot of rambling Ketamine but you have your view of Morrissey based on his musical output and what he says in the odd interview he gives, people like Nick Kent have their view based on actually interacting with Morrissey as did Tony Wilson.


No, sorry, but my views of Morrissey are not based only on his musical output & interviews, and that’s not the kind of knowing that I’m talking about in my post. Sorry you misunderstood.

Also, their working or business interactions as brief as they are do not bring them any closer to understanding why Morrissey says or does what he does.

And thank you for keeping your rambling short, but it’s not short enough, Surface.


;)
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
Thats a lot of rambling Ketamine but you have your view of Morrissey based on his musical output and what he says in the odd interview he gives, people like Nick Kent have their view based on actually interacting with Morrissey as did Tony Wilson.


That video boils down to they don't understand his social anxiety & they've got some deep need to explain his sexuality.

Was he the only gay Indie star in the 80s?
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit .777

Guest
:(

he may have been one of :handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: 45 min dude schnoggling victims:blushing:

very ridiculous punk rock troll🤒
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
That top! was he trying to pass himself off as Marianne in order to get into bed with Mick? Journalists will do anything it seems for the latest scoop!

I got his book for the Morrissey chapter.

I lost it inbetween flat moves or I could pick out all the horrendous things macho rock stars get to say/do without causing as much alarm as Morrissey does by existing.
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit 555

Guest
😐

lost in between 'flat moves':rolleyes:
all in Edinburgh?:(

very suspicious all these 'flat movements' while
the poor need food.:mad:
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit 555

Guest
very very very suspicious this nutter troll Nick Kent. 😐
1 praises the :handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: dumb suco :guitar:, is the nutter deaf????
2 no not deaf, LePew gave him a free amp FFS:mad:

this is highly suspicious. why would Le Pew just up and give him this amp for free???

scroll back to the schnggoing of dudes by LePew. he schnogged dudes who would wear house dresses indoors.doh:

schnogger no 1 identified.:yum:
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
I'll have to track down the original article - but I think my hunch that one reason why there isn't a lot of irl anecdotes about Morrissey being terrible (someone brought him a towel is hardly up there with biting the head off a dove) is because he was working in a horrifically homophobic industry where this is 'banter' that doesn't dent a career by a millimetre.

Morrissey's a f**king f***** - lolz.

Morrissey holds a Union Jack - *faints*.

20210305_002255.jpg


& the hate songs...

20210305_005603.jpg


20210305_005540.jpg


20210305_005521.jpg


20210305_005503.jpg


He's supposed to accept all this while getting a kicking for a joke about reggae for 36 YEARS.
 

Verso

Well-Known Member
I mean, if you’re fit enough to type your reply and post your opinion, that can be called ‘being fit’ I guess. But that’s not what I’m talking about.

I like Kent’s writing, but when it comes to such a complex and rare individual as Morrissey, I’m afraid if you’re not being touched by his art to the extreme that most of his fans are, then you won’t have access to valuable information that’s needed in order for you to come a little closer to an understanding of why Morrissey may do or say what he does. So, in the case of many journalists, hack ‘writers’ bloggers, Twitter users and general listeners of alternative music, their judgments and criticisms can never truly be balanced or fair.
Of course it’s more complex than that, and the one that’s criticizing Morrissey may have their own agenda or reasons for coming to the conclusions that they do, but it’s something that I believe should definitely be taken into consideration.
But that presupposes that there's only one 'correct' way to write about Morrissey and if the text is too critical, then it's somehow unfair or improperly researched. Would you ask that Fiona Dodwell's "writing" meet the same criteria?

People simply don’t know or care to acknowledge Morrissey’s refusal to give ordinary answers or to do what’s expected of him by the music industry, media or even his fans. He prefers to be contrary, difficult, and say something ridiculous even to the point of self-sabotage, as long as feels he is saying something new, something different.

And that's all fine, but being cryptic or idiosyncratic doesn't exempt someone from criticism nor does it excuse what many perceive as careless, disappointing and reactionary remarks. Anyone can shield themselves from critique with linguistic obfuscations and self-pity, but it doesn't make what they're saying or doing any more valid.
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit 555

Guest
But that presupposes that there's only one 'correct' way to write about Morrissey and if the text is too critical, then it's somehow unfair or improperly researched. Would you ask that Fiona Dodwell's "writing" meet the same criteria?



And that's all fine, but being cryptic or idiosyncratic doesn't exempt someone from criticism nor does it excuse what many perceive as careless, disappointing and reactionary remarks. Anyone can shield themselves from critique with linguistic obfuscations and self-pity, but it doesn't make what they're saying or doing any more valid.
:crazy:

WTF?? this is straight off FC psycho babblin.(n)
being cryptic or idionsycratic doesnt exempt someone from criticism not does it excuse:crazy:
what "MANY" ( the hate trolls :lbf: -) perceive as careless etc etc more stupidity etc etc....

Trolls will troll. Dont make
as if you troll Moz after doing nuclear research. FFS :lbf:
 

The.Truth.

about Ruth
No, sorry, but my views of Morrissey are not based only on his musical output & interviews, and that’s not the kind of knowing that I’m talking about in my post. Sorry you misunderstood.

Also, their working or business interactions as brief as they are do not bring them any closer to understanding why Morrissey says or does what he does.

And thank you for keeping your rambling short, but it’s not short enough, Surface.


;)
It's like someone outside Scientology having an opinion of David Miscavige. They just don't get it, man.
 

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
But that presupposes that there's only one 'correct' way to write about Morrissey

Well, from reading all the interviews
that I and I’m sure that you have, it seems obvious that there already is some kind of blueprint or instructions on what the ‘correct’ and only way to interview Morrissey is.



and if the text is too critical, then it's somehow unfair or improperly researched.

I’m not talking about being too critical. Be critical, but know your subject, has that ever been done? And is it possible with Morrissey? though I have enjoyed some interviewers in the past, it’s rare.


Would you ask that Fiona Dodwell's "writing" meet the same criteria?


I didn’t like Fiona’s ‘style’ when I’ve read earlier pieces by her, so I have no interest in reading her recent writings. I don’t think she would ask Morrissey interesting questions if given the opportunity.

Then again, what can be considered an interesting question to us, may not be one that Morrissey
would care to answer, or if he did give an answer, then the answer he gives may not be the one we want.

And that's all fine,

just fine? I believe it’s crucial to know that Morrissey will not do what’s expected of him. Especially, in giving the answers that he does in interviews.

but being cryptic or idiosyncratic doesn't exempt someone from criticism

I don’t think Morrissey feels that he’s exempt from criticism.

And of course there’ll always be someone jumping up to criticize something no matter how perfect it is, always finding fault in others, especially strangers. Sometimes just
to pay the bills or stroke the ego or both.

nor does it excuse what many perceive as careless, disappointing and reactionary remarks.

Does ‘many’ make it right? Many share this perception and give this opinion, so it must be the correct opinion to have.

Well, no one’s stopping anyone from doing that.




Anyone can shield themselves from critique with linguistic obfuscations and self-pity,

But, can they do it like Morrissey does? That of course is, if you believe that’s what he does.

but it doesn't make what they're saying or doing any more valid.

What do you mean by ‘valid’ ? Valid to Morrissey or ? And does it need to be valid?




 

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
I'll have to track down the original article - but I think my hunch that one reason why there isn't a lot of irl anecdotes about Morrissey being terrible (someone brought him a towel is hardly up there with biting the head off a dove) is because he was working in a horrifically homophobic industry where this is 'banter' that doesn't dent a career by a millimetre.

Morrissey's a f**king f***** - lolz.

Morrissey holds a Union Jack - *faints*.

View attachment 69255

& the hate songs...

View attachment 69256

View attachment 69257

View attachment 69258

View attachment 69259

He's supposed to accept all this while getting a kicking for a joke about reggae for 36 YEARS.

Informative.


And the people here that criticize Morrissey on a daily basis ignore all the homophobic hate that is thrown at him. I guess they think he deserves it.
 

Verso

Well-Known Member
Well, from reading all the interviews
that I and I’m sure that you have, it seems obvious that there already is some kind of blueprint or instructions on what the ‘correct’ and only way to interview Morrissey is.
I don't think that's obvious, no. Most artists aren't interviewed by their biggest and most knowledgable fans and journalists aren't generally expected to know every minuscule detail of their subject's body of work. Morrissey is no different. Besides, any exchange can be illuminating, regardless of whether the person directing the conversation is an ignoramus or an acolyte.

And of course there’ll always be someone jumping up to criticize something no matter how perfect it is, always finding fault in others, especially strangers. Sometimes just to pay the bills or stroke the ego or both.
That's the name of the game. Art is created and art is criticized. The persona is created and the persona is criticized. There's no such thing as perfect and each perspective is, unfortunately, worth as much as the other.

Does ‘many’ make it right? Many share this perception and give this opinion, so it must be the correct opinion to have.
I'm not saying that "many" makes it right, but when one is provoking a particular response in a wide swath of people then it's fair to take into consideration why this might be happening. Surely you don't find it disagreeable when "many" people greatly enjoy Morrissey.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
Informative.


And the people here that criticize Morrissey on a daily basis ignore all the homophobic hate that is thrown at him. I guess they think he deserves it.

Yeah.

And the press themselves either don't notice it, think it's funny or think he should deal with it because he's 'acidic'.

Or - & this infuriates me - agree in passing that it's bad, but somehow not worth dwelling on, & not as bad as him.

No concept his sexuality was illegal (he was 34 when it was legalised in Ireland. 34!) & taboo in his lifetime & that being subjected to relentless jokes, questions, demands to accept a label/expectations, slurs, & speculation about why he's like that, might be an awful thing to endure in his workplace.

They can remember half a sentence he said to Q in 1992 but not poofy bastard or uppity f***** said about/in relation to him.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
very very very suspicious this nutter troll Nick Kent. 😐
1 praises the :handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: dumb suco :guitar:, is the nutter deaf????
2 no not deaf, LePew gave him a free amp FFS:mad:

this is highly suspicious. why would Le Pew just up and give him this amp for free???

scroll back to the schnggoing of dudes by LePew. he schnogged dudes who would wear house dresses indoors.doh:

schnogger no 1 identified.:yum:
What do you think of John Robb?
 

Surface

Vegan Cro’s parents regret the condom splitting
Yeah.

And the press themselves either don't notice it, think it's funny or think he should deal with it because he's 'acidic'.

Or - & this infuriates me - agree in passing that it's bad, but somehow not worth dwelling on, & not as bad as him.

No concept his sexuality was illegal (he was 34 when it was legalised in Ireland. 34!) & taboo in his lifetime & that being subjected to relentless jokes, questions, demands to accept a label/expectations, slurs, & speculation about why he's like that, might be an awful thing to endure in his workplace.

They can remember half a sentence he said to Q in 1992 but not poofy bastard or uppity f***** said about/in relation to him.

i don’t recall anyone on this site throwing homophobic hate at him?
 

Verso

Well-Known Member
You're honestly trying to argue that the people who criticize Morrissey should also have to take into account some scattered homophobic remarks that random people have made towards him over the years? How is that relevant at all? Do you hear yourself?
 

Gregor Samsa

I straighten up, and my position is one of hope.
i don’t recall anyone on this site throwing homophobic hate at him?
I don’t think @Nerak was referring to this site. Rather the press and/or other artists. She quoted a bunch earlier in this thread.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom