Q Magazine - the REAL "Best of..." - The Smiths by Simon Goddard

Maybe in the next world.

 

[Peterb]

Why don't Jews get herpes?

Oh oh, here comes some anti semitism.

 

[billy scissors]

Oh oh, here comes some anti semitism.

I thought you might jump in somehow.So come on Pete,why don't Jews get herpes?

 

[VivaLove]

I thought you might jump in somehow.So come on Pete,why don't Jews get herpes?

Lemme guess. Because not even herpes would... ?
But I still hope the punchline to come is not that plain.

 

[Death Disco]

Why don't Jews get herpes?

Same reason Africans don't get AI... oh, hang on, that doesn't work.
As you were.

 

[leedoggpimp]

1. there is a light that
2. i know it's over
3. bigmouth strikes again
4. this charming man
5. what difference does it make
6. girl afraid
7. the headmaster ritual
8. asleep
9. girlfriend in a coma
10. last night i dreamt

 

[Qvist]

I disagree, but I certainly understand your point of view. I think there are plenty who agree with you. But may I ask you-- when you say "Everyday Is Like Sunday" is a polar opposite of "Handsome Devil", well when-- I mean, what-- exactly do you mean? Surely not quality. If vitality is the measure, are you saying "Everyday" is like a Sunday nap?

It's just such a striking opposition to make. I don't know if I've ever heard it before.

Perhaps it was a bit hasty. I was referring mainly to those rough edges. Edils is instantly likeable, by nerly anyone, for reasons that are clear to you at the first listening. Even the lyrics are quaintly apocalyptic. Absolutely no rough edges. Hd on The other hand is abrasive. Cockily assertive like hand in glove, but musically even more aggressive. And the music is complex, with that jumpy bass and johnny's guitar paying covering the whole gamut within 2 and a alf minutes: driving, cajoling, filling out texture, lilting melody. Then of course there's the lyrics, which are perhaps the most insistently homoerotic in all of morrisseys catalogue, and takes some time and effort to warm to for those of us who are not wired in that direction. One could have chosen two diferent songs for the same point, but you see what I mean? Thing is, anyone would prefer edils on first listen, but 20 years down the road, i find hd is as fresh and impressive as ever, while edils has long since shot its bolt. It's a nice song, but i honestly feel no need to hear it even once more before i die, and wold never put it on a compilation disk.


I love a soundcheck, instrumental-only version of "There Is A Light", but it didn't quite crack my "secondary" Top Ten.

Never heard of such a one. That sounds interesting!

(again, sorry for the miserable ortography etc. Will try to fix when next posting from a proper computer)

 

[Anonymous]

Here's my personal favorites list:
1. Bigmouth Strikes Again (this is my favorite song of all time)
2. Girlfriend In A Coma
3. This Charming Man
4. The Queen Is Dead
5. Jeane
6. I Won't Share You
7. How Soon Is Now?
8. Rubber Ring
9. The Headmaster Ritual
10. Unloveable

 

[Worm]

Perhaps it was a bit hasty. I was referring mainly to those rough edges. Edils is instantly likeable, by nerly anyone, for reasons that are clear to you at the first listening. Even the lyrics are quaintly apocalyptic. Absolutely no rough edges. Hd on The other hand is abrasive. Cockily assertive like hand in glove, but musically even more aggressive. And the music is complex, with that jumpy bass and johnny's guitar paying covering the whole gamut within 2 and a alf minutes: driving, cajoling, filling out texture, lilting melody. Then of course there's the lyrics, which are perhaps the most insistently homoerotic in all of morrisseys catalogue, and takes some time and effort to warm to for those of us who are not wired in that direction. One could have chosen two diferent songs for the same point, but you see what I mean? Thing is, anyone would prefer edils on first listen, but 20 years down the road, i find hd is as fresh and impressive as ever, while edils has long since shot its bolt. It's a nice song, but i honestly feel no need to hear it even once more before i die, and wold never put it on a compilation disk.

I actually know what you mean here, because it's true that the early Smiths songs were better constructed as live pieces. They have a lot of muscle and energy behind them, which is why the early songs have usually had a lot more appeal to fans who prefer punk or hard rock (that's what I've found, anyway). The songs stand up really well when they're played "naked". Once they began producing the songs themselves, they became more complicated, almost orchestral pieces. Unlike you I think that was an improvement, mostly, but then again maybe I agree with you more than I think, because "Rank" is probably my most-played Smiths album.

It's interesting to imagine what a song like "Reel Around The Fountain" would have sounded like if they'd recorded it in 1986. Lush and orchestral, probably, whereas part of the reason the song is so haunting-- at least in the pared-down radio session version-- is that Johnny's guitar sounds so stark and exposed. Compare it to "I Know It's Over". On the record, the backing music (though brilliant) was softened up by the production, while the live version is much more like "Reel Around The Fountain", with Johnny's guitar soaring and slicing through the vocals without the Hated Salford Ensemble. I guess I prefer the later stuff because it sounds fantastic on vinyl and played live; the band of "Rank" is still very much the band rocking out on the "Handsome Devil" live track on their very first 45.

 

[johnnymunro]

6 out of 10 would be on my list so IMO he has good taste (for what it´s worth)

 

[Qvist]

I actually know what you mean here, because it's true that the early Smiths songs were better constructed as live pieces. They have a lot of muscle and energy behind them, which is why the early songs have usually had a lot more appeal to fans who prefer punk or hard rock (that's what I've found, anyway). The songs stand up really well when they're played "naked". Once they began producing the songs themselves, they became more complicated, almost orchestral pieces. Unlike you I think that was an improvement, mostly, but then again maybe I agree with you more than I think, because "Rank" is probably my most-played Smiths album.

It's interesting to imagine what a song like "Reel Around The Fountain" would have sounded like if they'd recorded it in 1986. Lush and orchestral, probably, whereas part of the reason the song is so haunting-- at least in the pared-down radio session version-- is that Johnny's guitar sounds so stark and exposed. Compare it to "I Know It's Over". On the record, the backing music (though brilliant) was softened up by the production, while the live version is much more like "Reel Around The Fountain", with Johnny's guitar soaring and slicing through the vocals without the Hated Salford Ensemble. I guess I prefer the later stuff because it sounds fantastic on vinyl and played live; the band of "Rank" is still very much the band rocking out on the "Handsome Devil" live track on their very first 45.

Well, i hate to seem querulous in the face of understanding, but i don't really see it. To me, their early work seem generally more complex musically speaking than their later. The production values are lower and the instrumentation simpler, but the basic structure of the songs are more complex. Take a song lie back to the old house, the harmonic structure of that. There is nothing like that on strngeways, everything there is much more straightforward. No amount of using strings and horns and fluffy production values alter that. Or william. Or you've got everything now - the nearly jazz-like swirling drive of that. Or the strangeness that is the harmonies of that joke isn't funny anymore, a melodic construction that surprises you at every turn. All of that is missing in their late work. They moved in the direction of more simplicity, not less, as far as i can see.

Also, morrissey got more self-conscious and less powerful in some respects. Where, in the later or solo work, is the raw desperation of a line like "vivid and in your prime/you'll leave me behind!"? Oh, he's said it again in many forms but then it seemed as if he was repeating himself. At that point it didn't, even though he had said it before at that point too.

Alo, I don't generally like punk and hard rock. I am much more inclined towards the soft and beautiful. And still....

 

[Worm]

Well, i hate to seem querulous in the face of understanding, but i don't really see it. To me, their early work seem generally more complex musically speaking than their later.

I don't really have the musical vocabulary to debate with any accuracy whether or not "This Charming Man" is more or less complex than "Death Of A Disco Dancer". Certainly, from what I've read in the interviews given by Marr, after they began to produce their own songs the music started to become heavily layered, often with dozens of guitars playing at once (his explanation of "The Headmaster Ritual" is amazing), and of course they started to use synths. Maybe it's true that "Handsome Devil", in some counterintuitive way, is more complex despite sounding simpler on the surface. I dunno. I guess it's a matter of taste, and your taste is mistaken.

I'm kidding.

Oh, he's said it again in many forms but then it seemed as if he was repeating himself. At that point it didn't, even though he had said it before at that point too.

Erm, aren't you being a tad bit unfair here? Of course the first records are going to sound fresher. I thought Morrissey and Marr did plenty to avoid sounding repetitive; in any case, "You will leave me behind" was echoed in "Miserable Lie" and a few other places, so he was repeating himself even then.

Also, while you can say that Morrissey became more self-conscious, it's also true that his lyrics acquired a lot more credibility and authenticity once he stopped stealing from Shelagh Delaney and "Saturday Night and Sunday Morning". I mean, maybe on a cruel day you can argue that he disappeared down the rabbit hole of "fame, money and lawsuits", as time went on, but at least it wasn't a vision of life borrowed from kitchen sink dramas he saw on TV. Don't get me wrong, I love that influence on the early Smiths. I'm just pointing out that Morrissey's 1983-1984 lyrics seem to have been his most artificial.

As a final point, maybe the desperation you cite in "These Things Take Time" is absent in his solo work, but then again the quiet, almost reverent joy in a song like "Dear God, Please Help Me" was utterly beyond the reach of the early Morrissey. He did evolve.

 

[Anonymous]

I've never cared for DEATH OF A DISCO DANCER, but I've always liked SHAKESPEAR'S SISTER.

On the other hand, my least favourite Go-Betweens album is 16 LOVERS LANE (no, I'm not so perverse as to say SEND ME A LULLABY is my most favourite - though it is #3), and that is evidently everyone else's favourite, so what do I know?

Tim

 

[Worm]

I've never cared for DEATH OF A DISCO DANCER, but I've always liked SHAKESPEAR'S SISTER.

On the other hand, my least favourite Go-Betweens album is 16 LOVERS LANE (no, I'm not so perverse as to say SEND ME A LULLABY is my most favourite - though it is #3), and that is evidently everyone else's favourite, so what do I know?

Tim

Don't be ridiculous. "Tallulah" is their masterpiece.

 

[Brigitte]

Yep. It fluctuates. For instance, Rusholme Ruffians took a good 20 years to advance from largely ignored to one of my favorite tracks. That being said, any top 10 of mine would contain largely the same songs as before - this charming man, there is a light, hand in glove, i know it's over, how soon is now, please please please etc.

Exactly the same favourites as mine!

 

[Gentler Words]

My top 10 contains 25 songs. Too many good ones. And I love them all!

1. Last Night I Dreamt That Somebody Loved Me
2. There Is A Light That Never Goes Out
3. Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want
4. Asleep
5. Ask
6. Rusholme Ruffians
7. What Difference Does It Make
8. William, It Was Really Nothing
9. Girlfriend In A Coma
10. Still Ill
11. Cemetry Gates
12. This Charming Man
13. I Won't Share You
14. Unhappy Birthday
15. Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now
16. Bigmouth Strikes Again
17. I Started Something I Couldn't Finish
18. Panic
19. I Want The One I Can't Have
20. The Queen Is Dead
21. Handsome Devil
22. A Rush And A Push And The Land Is Ours
23. The Boy With The Thorn In His Side
24. I Know It's Over
25. Death Of A Disco Dancer

 

[Anonymous]

Death of a Disco Dancer at No.1? Death of a Disco Dancer? Is this a joke?

Well, it's someones personal choice, so they can pick what the f*** they like you dickweed.

 

[Qvist]

I don't really have the musical vocabulary to debate with any accuracy whether or not "This Charming Man" is more or less complex than "Death Of A Disco Dancer". Certainly, from what I've read in the interviews given by Marr, after they began to produce their own songs the music started to become heavily layered, often with dozens of guitars playing at once (his explanation of "The Headmaster Ritual" is amazing), and of course they started to use synths. Maybe it's true that "Handsome Devil", in some counterintuitive way, is more complex despite sounding simpler on the surface. I dunno. I guess it's a matter of taste, and your taste is mistaken.

I'm kidding.

Hehe. I don't really have the vocabulary either. For that matter, I don't know if you actually can measure complexity in music in any objective way. It's just how it seems to me. Handsome Devil does not sound simpler on the surface, to me (although it is not a great example of complexity). But I'm looking at complexity in the melodies and, so to speak, the basic structure of the songs. Adding layers of guitars and synths is to me something different, that goes more to the density of the sound. I don't understand how anyone can experience Death of a Disco Dancer as a complex piece of music - it's just the same four chords over and over and over again? There's different kinds of jingle-jangle added underway, but that's just production stuffing. It is what I experience as a very simple and straightforward piece of music - not just by the relative standards of the Smiths, but by any standard. To me, and I realise this must be fairly subjective, say the acoustic version of Back to the Old house is a much, much, much more complex piece of music, with its intricate guitar and surprising chords and ambivalence of moods.

Not that I would equate complexity with merit, necessarily. Indeed, some of my favorite music long, droning, repetetive jobs. But I think the compexity of nearly all of their early work is a big factor in keeping it interesting. Also it seems obvious to me, so much so that I have never thought to question it prior to this discussion, that their development was in the direction of simpler and more accessible music, where production values increasingly replaced the internal dynamism that drove the earlier songs. A song like You've got everything now, you can listen to it focussing primarily on the bass, or on the guitar, or on the vocals - and it's like three different songs, all of them great. I don't find that on Strangeways.

Erm, aren't you being a tad bit unfair here? Of course the first records are going to sound fresher. I thought Morrissey and Marr did plenty to avoid sounding repetitive; in any case, "You will leave me behind" was echoed in "Miserable Lie" and a few other places, so he was repeating himself even then.

Yes, that's what I attempted to say - he was already repeating himself, but it still sounded fresh. But maybe a bit unfair yes, you have an obvious point.

Also, while you can say that Morrissey became more self-conscious, it's also true that his lyrics acquired a lot more credibility and authenticity once he stopped stealing from Shelagh Delaney and "Saturday Night and Sunday Morning". I mean, maybe on a cruel day you can argue that he disappeared down the rabbit hole of "fame, money and lawsuits", as time went on, but at least it wasn't a vision of life borrowed from kitchen sink dramas he saw on TV. Don't get me wrong, I love that influence on the early Smiths. I'm just pointing out that Morrissey's 1983-1984 lyrics seem to have been his most artificial.

As a final point, maybe the desperation you cite in "These Things Take Time" is absent in his solo work, but then again the quiet, almost reverent joy in a song like "Dear God, Please Help Me" was utterly beyond the reach of the early Morrissey. He did evolve.

Well, I guess that goes to show the relative banality of the merely personal. For my part, I don't think "Dear God" is a particularly good lyric. For one thing, it depends almost wholly for its effect on the listener taking an active interest in Morrissey as a person, which is already arguably a considerable artistic deficiency. I don't have a major gripe about his solo lyrics or anything, they are mostly great in their own way. But equally, I don't really see evolution in a positive sense. Perhaps they have become closer to the real person, but frankly, who cares? I'd rather have This night has opened my eyes from someone who has picked the entire subject matter out of his imagination or from a tv show than a strictly autobiographical Sorry does not help us, any day. I hope he has the sense to make his autobiography a witty and semi-fictious exercise in self-mythification rather than a dreary catalogue of gripes and hardships.

 

[Worm]

Also it seems obvious to me, so much so that I have never thought to question it prior to this discussion, that their development was in the direction of simpler and more accessible music, where production values increasingly replaced the internal dynamism that drove the earlier songs. A song like You've got everything now, you can listen to it focussing primarily on the bass, or on the guitar, or on the vocals - and it's like three different songs, all of them great. I don't find that on Strangeways.

Coincidentally, last night I watched an interview with Johnny Marr taped in 1987, in the middle of recording "Strangeways". He explains how he was moving the sound of The Smiths away from more commercial, melodic, simpler pop into more complex, "dissonant" (a word he repeated twice), challenging music. Clearly he felt "This Charming Man" was as easy as A-B-C and the stuff for "Strangeways" was much more sophisticated. So it seems Johnny and I disagree with you.

However, he struggled to define the difference, and I think it's for the reasons you've articulated. In some ways a song like "Handsome Devil" is more complex in the way it works than a track like "Stop Me If You Think You've Heard This One Before". The same is true in most art forms. Simplicity is tough and often misleadingly easy-looking. In books, Hemingway is always cited as writing bone-simple prose, for example, but his style is actually a very difficult one to pull off. The problem here stems from ambiguous terminology, I think. At least we agree we don't have exactly the right terms.

Yes, that's what I attempted to say - he was already repeating himself, but it still sounded fresh. But maybe a bit unfair yes, you have an obvious point.

I excel at making obvious points.

Well, I guess that goes to show the relative banality of the merely personal. For my part, I don't think "Dear God" is a particularly good lyric. For one thing, it depends almost wholly for its effect on the listener taking an active interest in Morrissey as a person, which is already arguably a considerable artistic deficiency. I don't have a major gripe about his solo lyrics or anything, they are mostly great in their own way. But equally, I don't really see evolution in a positive sense. Perhaps they have become closer to the real person, but frankly, who cares? I'd rather have This night has opened my eyes from someone who has picked the entire subject matter out of his imagination or from a tv show than a strictly autobiographical Sorry does not help us, any day. I hope he has the sense to make his autobiography a witty and semi-fictious exercise in self-mythification rather than a dreary catalogue of gripes and hardships.

Granted. I prefer "This Night" to "Dear God" as well. However, the one criterion Morrissey places above all others, in his love of music, is honesty. He always seems to ask, or imply the question, "Is this artist singing with naked, helpless, absolute honesty?" I think most of us apply that standard to music we like (even if we admit it's just the impression of honesty, or honesty in an indirect form-- e.g. a singer can put a kids' story like "Horton Hears A Who" to music and the honesty can come through in the emotions conveyed in the vocals). I certainly do with Morrissey. I don't really see one period of his work as more truthful than another. Borrowing heavily from Shelagh Delaney was true to the person he was in 1983, the man who had scraped through the last ten years of his life swimming in books. "Dear God" is true to the man he was a few years ago. It's difficult to say I prefer the non-autobiographical stuff because it's all autobiographical.

I used to think the way you did, but I've come to see all his work as occupying the same spectrum: always himself, always honest. Sure, I prefer a story about a baby dumped on a doorstep to yet another droning complaint about the perils of fame, but they both come across as honest expressions of deeply-felt emotion. That's what really counts.

 

[Andrewroon]

Goddard appears to be listing his personal favorites, and not an 'objective' list. He mentions numerous times throughout Mozzipedia, as well as in various interviews, that TQID is his pick for the 'best' Smiths song.

Also, Goddard has said on numerous occasions that he no longer listens to The Smiths, which I find interesting, but understand.