Johnny Marr announces new double album

marred

Member
And Jo Whiley's played it as well on her show!
They'll play anything Johnny Marr puts out. He's not one of those pesky trouble makers and says all the right things.

I just wish he'd get someone else to write his nonsense lyrics and vocalise his melodies that go nowhere because when he is left to his own devices his guitar sings better than anyone else.
 

Mike Rourke

Well-Known Member
Exactly - Johnny is intelligent and well-read, so how (or rather why) does he comes up with such nonsense?

As usual with Johnny, I get the impression that he wants to avoid 'rocking the boat' with lyrics that are too personal (or likely to be scrutinised for Smiths/Moz mentions) - which is fair enough, he doesn't want controversy. But God, he needs some better ideas for topics - 'Spirit, Soul and Hash' is the perfect description for this cosmic stoner crap.
Cosmic stoner crap? Brilliantly expressed!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Between the lyrics and the video, I honestly thought this might be a spoof (not that any of his other solo stuff has been much better).

The video... it's like something that might crop up in a comedy movie. I can just picture Will Ferrell or Ben Stiller in this video, in Johnny's place. Who are the absolute sycophants who tell this guy he looks cool? All those sideways glances - maybe the director was mouthing at him offstage "They're gonna love it, Johnny!". I think about how cool this guy looked and sounded in 1983 and I could weep.
Something more dignified like this?
 
Not so. Only a small percentage of "the wider public" have actually bought his records - the large majority has not.

As testified to by the sales figures of his records, it's therefore the views of the "handful of posters on this site" who are completely unimpressed by his records, that truly represent "the wider public".

Therefore BMG's liking it has got nothing to do with the views of the wider public. They'll like it if it makes a profit. As noted above, the fact that it does make a profit says nothing about its inherent aesthetic worth.

In other words, your constant response to criticism of Marr's records is a defensive "well, the record company likes it" or "other people like it". So what? That says nothing about the aesthetic worth of his records.

But I accept that the kind of people who lap Marr's songs up aren't going to be capable of employing their critical faculties to assess it, since they evidently don't have any.
Sounds to me like you are actually trying to claim that if anyone likes Marr's solo stuff that they are in fact wrong to do so and too stupid to know any better?

Implying that a persons taste and opinions are wrong is just f***ing stupid beyond belief.

This kind of total bullshitery is one of the main reasons I rarely even bother with this site any longer.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sounds to me like you are actually trying to claim that if anyone likes Marr's solo stuff that they are in fact wrong to do so and too stupid to know any better?

Implying that a persons taste and opinions are wrong is just f***ing stupid beyond belief.

Well, you're conflating two issues there - taste and opinion.

As to suggesting that a person's taste can be 'wrong', it's you who is drawing that inference from what you're reading, and mistakenly thinking it's therefore implied in what you read: it's not. Taste can't be 'wrong' any more than intelligence can be 'wrong'. Taste, however, is a characteristic and therefore it's an indicator. Somebody who has a taste for Marr's songs isn't wrong - they're just lacking in an ability to distinguish good lyrics and melodies from bad, or else they just don't care that the lyrics are shit and the melodies are uninspired. Which is fair enough.

As to the notion that opinions can't be wrong, well that's your opinion and it's wrong. If someone expresses the opinion that all actors are homosexual, for example, well that person's opinion is wrong. To think that opinions can't be wrong is... well, I'll be more polite than you were... it's not very bright.

No, sod it, I'll call a spade a spade - it's f***ing stupid.
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit .888

Guest
o_O

someone who 'likes' :handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: super sucky music is either Jr :handpointright::baby:
or the Ms:handpointright::girl:
or one of the several fake🦜log ins they employ(n)

:hammer:
 
Well, you're conflating two issues there - taste and opinion.

As to suggesting that a person's taste can be 'wrong', it's you who is drawing that inference from what you're reading, and mistakenly thinking it's therefore implied in what you read: it's not. Taste can't be 'wrong' any more than intelligence can be 'wrong'. Taste, however, is a characteristic and therefore it's an indicator. Somebody who has a taste for Marr's songs isn't wrong - they're just lacking in an ability to distinguish good lyrics and melodies from bad, or else they just don't care that the lyrics are shit and the melodies are uninspired. Which is fair enough.

As to the notion that opinions can't be wrong, well that's your opinion and it's wrong. If someone expresses the opinion that all actors are homosexual, for example, well that person's opinion is wrong. To think that opinions can't be wrong is... well, I'll be more polite than you were... it's not very bright.

No, sod it, I'll call a spade a spade - it's f***ing stupid.
Why are you claiming if someone likes something you clearly do not, then they must lack intelligence? Why do you assume your opinion on Marr's work is the correct one, not just for you but to include everyone else?

In addition, I fail to see the point in plucking a random example out of thin air, regarding opinions based on all actors being gay?
I never claimed ALL opinions must be correct. Maybe it's you who is drawing that inference from what you're reading, and mistakenly thinking it's therefore implied in what you read: it's not
The context of the opinion mentioned in my post was clearly referring to the content of the thread.
Was that not obvious?

Listen, I get it, maybe you get off on thinking you have some sort of influence over others regarding what they should like and why. Thankfully, we all have our own individual opinions, likes and taste and do not deserve be belittled for them
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I never claimed ALL opinions must be correct. Maybe it's you who is drawing that inference from what you're reading, and mistakenly thinking it's therefore implied in what you read: it's not

Nope. What you said was:

"Implying that a persons... opinions are wrong is just f***ing stupid beyond belief".

It was therefore entirely natural to draw the inference that you think a person's opinions can never be wrong - or else why would it be stupid to imply that they can be wrong?

On the other hand, if as you now claim, you accept that a person's opinions can be wrong, then it's not clear why you think that implying they can be wrong is, as you say, "f***ing stupid beyond belief".

So yes, I was drawing an inference from what you said, and yes, it was implied by what you said.

As to failing to see the point as to why I plucked a random example out of thin air, it was to demonstrate that your implication that opinions can never be wrong, was in fact wrong in itself. Clearly, all actors are not gay, therefore anybody holding that opinion would be wrong in their opinion. I thought the purpose of the example was fairly obvious.
 

Verso

Well-Known Member
Well, you're conflating two issues there - taste and opinion.

As to suggesting that a person's taste can be 'wrong', it's you who is drawing that inference from what you're reading, and mistakenly thinking it's therefore implied in what you read: it's not. Taste can't be 'wrong' any more than intelligence can be 'wrong'. Taste, however, is a characteristic and therefore it's an indicator. Somebody who has a taste for Marr's songs isn't wrong - they're just lacking in an ability to distinguish good lyrics and melodies from bad, or else they just don't care that the lyrics are shit and the melodies are uninspired. Which is fair enough.

As to the notion that opinions can't be wrong, well that's your opinion and it's wrong. If someone expresses the opinion that all actors are homosexual, for example, well that person's opinion is wrong. To think that opinions can't be wrong is... well, I'll be more polite than you were... it's not very bright.

No, sod it, I'll call a spade a spade - it's f***ing stupid.
This has to be that same pedantic moron who argued for like 10 pages about whether or not an instrumental piece of music is a "song."
 
V

Vegan Cro Spirit .888

Guest
Could it be as simple as some people just like something you do not?
Being patronised or insulted for doing so is uncalled for

are you implying im wrong about :handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: music sucking?:bowing:
5 minutes after posting that opinions cant be wrong?
:handpointright::guardsman::handpointleft: caterwauling sucking is a fact, which according to
your lemma makes it twice as right.(y)

ignore BGV chiming in, he lacks scientific knowledge:hammer:
 
Nope. What you said was:

"Implying that a persons... opinions are wrong is just f***ing stupid beyond belief".

It was therefore entirely natural to draw the inference that you think a person's opinions can never be wrong - or else why would it be stupid to imply that they can be wrong?

On the other hand, if as you now claim, you accept that a person's opinions can be wrong, then it's not clear why you think that implying they can be wrong is, as you say, "f***ing stupid beyond belief".

So yes, I was drawing an inference from what you said, and yes, it was implied by what you said.

As to failing to see the point as to why I plucked a random example out of thin air, it was to demonstrate that your implication that opinions can never be wrong, was in fact wrong in itself. Clearly, all actors are not gay, therefore anybody holding that opinion would be wrong in their opinion. I thought the purpose of the example was fairly obvious.
No there is a difference, you are drawing an inference of what you THINK I said, not what I ACTUALLY said in the given context. That's your problem.
Given that fact most of what you say makes no sense.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
No there is a difference, you are drawing an inference of what you THINK I said, not what I ACTUALLY said in the given context. That's your problem.
Given that fact most of what you say makes no sense.

Wrong again. What you actually said is not disputable - it's there in black and white and I quoted it.

The problem for you is that what you actually said doesn't mean what you thought it meant (as I demonstrated above), and you think that people should draw an inference based on what you really meant to say, rather than what you actually said. The context is irrelevant.

"Implying that a persons... opinions are wrong is f***ing stupid beyond belief" is what you said. That's a complete statement, which necessarily implies that opinions can't be wrong, because otherwise why would it be "f***ing stupid beyond belief" to imply that they can be?

Of course, your statement made no actual sense, since clearly opinions can be wrong, so there's no reason to assert that it's "f***ing stupid beyond belief" to imply that someone's opinions can be wrong.

The context - a discussion of Johnny Marr's songs - doesn't make your claim any more logical or sensible: taking into account the context, your claim is still illogical nonsense - to still be rabbiting on about how context can make it right is f***ing stupid beyond belief.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hey Shaun Keaveny’s played Johnny’s song three days in a row during his last week! The interview on Monday was very sweet. That’s an incredible amount of exposure. It’s a great song! ❤️
 

Carlisle baz

Cock of the north
o_O

well, you do seem to be on the same wavelength as fredo the robocopdoh:
needless to say not a good thing, much like going nazi hunting with hitler:lbf:


:hammer:
For the record........

Just who exactly is your
“Wider public “

Henry the Hog?
Delilah the duck?

Or the bearded lady from the carnival... AKA Grandmaww or...

Great great grandpappy who thinks he drives about in hitlers car still...

Your one 4ked up cookie
 
Tags
johnny marr
Top Bottom