Morrissey, at his peak or past his prime?

It will never cease to bewilder the shit out of me how anyone can deem Viva Hate as sub-par or mediocre in any sense of the word(s)

it's practically the fifth Smiths album and superior to SHWC, imo.

If Rourke, Joyce and Gannon had been onboard for it like they were the two later singles, it would have been hailed as such
 
It will never cease to bewilder the shit out of me how anyone can deem Viva Hate as sub-par or mediocre in any sense of the word(s)

it's practically the fifth Smiths album and superior to SHWC, imo.

If Rourke, Joyce and Gannon had been onboard for it like they were the two later singles, it would have been hailed as such


While I don't think Viva Hate is better than Strangeways, I do think it was severely underrated on release. Despite good reviews and chart placings it was deemed by many to be lesser than The Smiths. (In many ways the same thing can be said about Strangeways, in that everybody I knew said it wasn't as good as The Queen Is Dead.)

Anyway, this was the small point I was trying to make about Morrissey albums often only being appreciated in retrospect.
 
While I don't think Viva Hate is better than Strangeways, I do think it was severely underrated on release. Despite good reviews and chart placings it was deemed by many to be lesser than The Smiths. (In many ways the same thing can be said about Strangeways, in that everybody I knew said it wasn't as good as The Queen Is Dead.)

This is also my recollection of how I, and most other Smiths fans I knew of, received both "Strangeways" and "Viva Hate". Neither album was considered great for a few years after its release, but over time they both got their share of plaudits.

However, I'm not sure it proves the hypothesis that all of Morrissey's work is only fully appreciated in retrospect. "Strangeways" and "Viva Hate" were both difficult albums to judge because the music represented a slight departure from formula. There wasn't a big, Radiohead-worthy transformation, but the extensive use of strings and other little tricks and tweaks in the studio were new for Morrissey. Fans and critics can't be blamed for taking more time to appreciate what those albums had to offer. "Viva Hate" in particular was much more intricately-arranged and adventurous (again, I'm speaking in relative terms) than the first three Smiths LPs. You have to listen to the whole album quite a few times to explore its depths properly. The songs demand multiple listenings.

That was less true of his subsequent albums. Whether it was the nuanced songs of "Vauxhall and I" or the straightahead rock of "Southpaw Grammar", they just weren't as layered and sophisticated in comparison to "Strangeways" and "Viva Hate", and therefore easier to judge. As you said above, "Your Arsenal" and "Vauxhall and I" were judged accurately right after their release and the lukewarm reactions to his post-1994 were certainly accurate in their own way, too-- it's been a mixed bag for 17 years.

I think the change can be explained by the fact that he altered the way his songs were written and composed. Following the arrival of Boz Boorer as musical director, and the triumphant "Kill Uncle" tour, he moved back toward arrangements centered around a band, as in the earlier days of The Smiths. Producers remained important, and certainly Mick Ronson, Steve Lillywhite, and Jerry Finn added a lot in the studio. But the source of the songs was clearer: his guitarist/co-writer whipped up a backing track, Morrissey added his words, and the producer polished it. More like his first work with Marr, in other words. My sense of the recording of "Strangeways", "Viva Hate", and "Kill Uncle" is that there was more of an emphasis on composing layered tracks in the studio. The music was shaped more by the producer than the band. After his got his band in place, that dynamic was reversed. Unsurprisingly, it was "Southpaw Grammar", which came almost entirely out of his band's jam sessions, and bears the faintest fingerprints of any producer he's ever worked with, that really broke his momentum in the mid-90s and ushered in the era of mixed critical and fan reactions to his albums.
 
Last edited:
While I don't think Viva Hate is better than Strangeways, I do think it was severely underrated on release. Despite good reviews and chart placings it was deemed by many to be lesser than The Smiths. (In many ways the same thing can be said about Strangeways, in that everybody I knew said it wasn't as good as The Queen Is Dead.)
Anyway, this was the small point I was trying to make about Morrissey albums often only being appreciated in retrospect.

To be honest, I think both the critical and the fan consensus would still say that Strangeway was worse than TQID, and that Viva Hate is worse than Strangeways. But that just shows how amazing TQID is. Viva Hate is a brilliant album (in my humble) - about 6.3 zillion times better than Who Ate Me Curry or Ringleaders - it's just that it's very slightly worse than the absolute genius of the Smiths.
 
A lot of posters seem to be of the opinion that the early solo days (up to Vauxhall and I) or his days with the Smiths were his best years and we are now witnessing his decline,
Discuss.

Like anyone else who has sung for their supper for a living from a young age, he's obviously not the same man he was at 22 and his outlook on life, approach to writing and mindset have the wonderful vantage point of much hindsight and maturity. You can't expect him to spit the same vitriol, nor be as energetically petulant these days, but I think his writing is still good and his voice is also as good as ever. At just post-50 myself, I am of course, slightly biased toward old crooners, but I believe he's every bit as valid and now has the added benefit of being a 'National Treasure' too. One of the very (very) few artists to traverse the cess-pit that is the modern music "business" and emerge with credibility entirely intact. How many more so called 'artists' can boast the same merits?
 
Great first post -- let me respond with a huge "THIS."

Like anyone else who has sung for their supper for a living from a young age, he's obviously not the same man he was at 22 and his outlook on life, approach to writing and mindset have the wonderful vantage point of much hindsight and maturity. You can't expect him to spit the same vitriol, nor be as energetically petulant these days, but I think his writing is still good and his voice is also as good as ever. At just post-50 myself, I am of course, slightly biased toward old crooners, but I believe he's every bit as valid and now has the added benefit of being a 'National Treasure' too. One of the very (very) few artists to traverse the cess-pit that is the modern music "business" and emerge with credibility entirely intact. How many more so called 'artists' can boast the same merits?
 
I think he's clearly past his prime, but I genuinely believe that he has a lot left in him. He's like Bob Dylan. He's never going to write lyrics that jump up and smack me in the face ever again, but he doesn't need to. He does something else now, something that he couldn't do when he was younger.
 
His voice is also as good as ever

Looks like we'll have to respectfully disagree. I just watched his recent live performance of You Have Killed Me and he really did sound much, much better during the 2006 world tour. If it wasn't one of my favorite songs post Quarry, I probably wouldn't have even noticed.
 
Last edited:
I think he's clearly past his prime, but I genuinely believe that he has a lot left in him. He's like Bob Dylan. He's never going to write lyrics that jump up and smack me in the face ever again, but he doesn't need to. He does something else now, something that he couldn't do when he was younger.

Dylan pays homage to his inspirations - namely 12-bar blues, delta music and early (30's-40's) vocal groups for his own enjoyment. He makes no apology for what he does and doesn't ask for support. Come along for the ride or don't. He's yet to bitch about his genius going unrecognized or send an angry e-mail about the fact that Beyond Here Lies Nothing didn't burn up the Top 40.

Morrissey doesn't 'do something else now, something he couldn't do when he was younger' because like a low-rent Northern asylum's resident PETA Pan he's sycophantically kissed (and subsequently disappeared up) his own arse sufficiently enough to stunt his emotional maturation and growth, remaining the eternal, aging, balding art student rather than the far more meaty (ho ho!) prospect of a middle-aged Morrissey coming to terms with his mortality, aging and loneliness - which might actually make for some interesting songs and albums.

Morrissey circles in an endless vortex of self-delusion of his own relevance in the current musical landscape. In the live arena he mixes tepid, weak new songs with weak, tepid versions of old songs while blasting all-comers for failing to recognise his potential for greatness - which has long since faded. There's no greater testament to his unapologetic trumpet-blowing ego-addled mindset than his recent listing of 'Years Of Refusal' as the album of which he is most proud - more so than any of the Smiths work, or his superior older solo work. It would be like hearing Miles Davis tell you 'You're Under Arrest' is far better than 'Kind Of Blue'. You don't know whether to smirk at him or weep for him.

His voice is not 'as good as ever'. That's such a ridiculous statement I can't be bothered to say any more on it than listen to a Smiths bootleg or a 2004-2006 era bootleg and compare it to anything you can find from the last two years.

What remains? His whinging, idiotic, sophomoric understanding of human rights and his pathetic chest-beating in favour of violent, illegal/terrorist activity funding PETA? This is a middle aged man who should know better. He may think his turgid, depressing attention-seeking attempts at controversy make him relevant but to anyone with common sense, they are one more reason to write him off as a sad, deeply delusional has-been.

Does he still have the potential for greatness? While surrounded by the current crop of mediocre, uninspiring workaday musicians, I'd say probably not. If 'Years Of Refusal' represents the kind of 'glories' he hopes to scale the lofty heights of in future, I'd say certainly not.

Morrissey needs to be challenged in order to produce great music. His band don't challenge him. His yes-men don't challenge him. The majority of his fans don't challenge him. And he's his own biggest fan.
 
Last edited:
life is a pigsty is a masterpiece. so is the world is full of crashing bores. actually, so is first of the gang to die. morrissey been occupying since 1959.
 
Like anyone else who has sung for their supper for a living from a young age, he's obviously not the same man he was at 22 and his outlook on life, approach to writing and mindset have the wonderful vantage point of much hindsight and maturity. You can't expect him to spit the same vitriol, nor be as energetically petulant these days, but I think his writing is still good and his voice is also as good as ever. At just post-50 myself, I am of course, slightly biased toward old crooners, but I believe he's every bit as valid and now has the added benefit of being a 'National Treasure' too. One of the very (very) few artists to traverse the cess-pit that is the modern music "business" and emerge with credibility entirely intact. How many more so called 'artists' can boast the same merits?
Are you Morrissey?


just kidding, but yeah, great first post, way better than mine, I think I said "I like soup."
 
Don't think I'll ever understand what the mass fascination is with 'First of the gang to die'
 
Don't think I'll ever understand what the mass fascination is with 'First of the gang to die'

Well, it's a great comeback song (probably would have done even better if 'Irish Blood, English Heart' hadn't been bafflingly picked as first single'), it has a great classic pop structure and a lot of memorable lines. Just a likeable song - probably even for non-Morrissey fans.
 
Back
Top Bottom