posted by davidt on Monday November 14 2005, @10:00AM
L'Estrange writes:
In this weeks City Life Johnny Marr is on the cover - photographed by the legendary Mick Rock - who has an exhibition on at Urbis in manchester (Get ' two for one' admission by presenting City life before the end of November). There's a small back slapping interview with a number of Smiths references-

MR - Those people(stones/Bowie) were pop art to me because they were so fabulous to look at. But you knew that when you and Morrissey were in the Smiths didn't you?

JM- oh yeah, it was really important how we looked. but i've always been drawn to music that worked on one level whether in style or just being slightly knowing. Contrivance is very unattractive but 'Knowing' can be great. Things have been a little organic and earnest in recent years but i think things are swinging back our way.

he then talks about the Healers but later in the interview:

Jm- Do you think that the pioneers like iggy and ziggy were more intense (than the killers, white stripes & yeah, yeah ,Yeahs)?

MR- i think bands now are more business like, more concerned with the mechanics of promotion. You know without David Bowie there's no way that Lou and iggy would have cottoned on to their image so well. David pioneered that stuff with ziggy stardust. But the smiths really added another layer of sophistication to image. After all not many bands escaped the '80s intact.

JM- the 80's were a weird time though. you have a snap shot of a decade like the 60's in your head and you think of a girl in a mini skirt walking down carnaby street or something. with the 80's you there's only bad images like Duran Duran on their yacht. but there was a lot of great stuff in the 80's like The gun club and Birthday party. and there was a whole inderground pop layer with bands like New Order. You know it's not ofetn i say the 80's were great because it still just doesn't feel quite right in my head to do so.

MR- How do you think the Smiths weathered it then?

JM- its Quite simple...... we spilt up before we got crap. After all when it comes down to it you have to fall back on your body of work.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • sex beat.......go!
    Anonymous -- Monday November 14 2005, @10:19AM (#185430)
  • Yeah, the lead singer of Gun Club has a very sexy voice I must say. What Marr says is true -- the 80's actually have left us enduringly incredible music, you just have to delve much further, wading through the banal to actually find the gems. It still bewilders me when I talk with people who aren't familiar with The Smiths. Even if you aren't obsessed, as we all are, not recognizing and appreciating their importance in terms pop history totally reveals one's lack of musical awareness. As far as his comments regarding image: 'tis true, Bowie is the artist who orchestrated the many elements of his predeccesors into a singular package that trailblazed the importance of image/metamorphis for rock stars. He brought a certain "plasticity" meets theatricality to pop and it hasn't been the same since. Whereas Bowie championed the extreme image, The SMiths mastered the art of subtlety and suggestion.
    DavidBeauy <[email protected]> -- Monday November 14 2005, @11:06AM (#185438)
    (User #6009 Info | http://beaurock.net/)
    "When thirteen years old Who dyed his hair gold ? Oh, I know very well, I don't need to be told"
  • Try that instead its more interesting
    Anonymous -- Monday November 14 2005, @02:21PM (#185482)
  • Maybe he meant before he went crap...because it's impossible for Morrissey to go crap...

    I reference The Healers disc from a couple years ago...

    Johnny Marr went crap solo...had he stayed with Morrissey, he would have become a legend...

    Seriously, Johnny, did you really say, "I didn't form a band to cover Cilla Black songs!" ?

    What made you think for one second that that's all Morrissey wanted to do from then on? It was one freaking flimsy little song that took a day or two to record and mix... That's why you broke up The Smiths? The only way any fan or music critic could defend Marr for dumping The Smiths would be if Marr would then have gone on to be something good/great/better. Well, we all know that didn't happen...Marr.

    Kind of like John Lennon breaking up The Beatles because of Yoko. Make no mistake about it, had anti-depressants been available in 1967 and if there had been no Yoko, The Beatles would have been around for a lot longer. Unquestioningly so.
    (I just finished a biography on Lennon...boy, I wasn't aware of how incredibly insecure and scared and lost he was with himself. I guess that's what happens when your mother abandons you at age 5 and you then turn to narcotics to cope with the fact you've become a living god.) [To continue the sidebar, is John Lennon, post-Beatles, perhaps the most over-rated musician in history? Pretty bad stuff... Oh, and don't forget to throw "Imagine" at the top of the trash heap. What do people see in John Lennon's solo work? Awful...]
    dewdrop -- Monday November 14 2005, @03:08PM (#185495)
    (User #2326 Info)
  • each other and make up simply because they just do, if ya no what i mean in the noel gallagher sense.
    Anonymous -- Monday November 14 2005, @06:23PM (#185522)
  • I'm sorry, don't mean to be rude or snooty, but this post is a bit misplaced: what does Marr and the Healers have to do with Moz, ever since they split up? They both have different mindsets and destinies; shouldn't this post be in Marr's website for those who want to learn more about Marr?
    Mrs. Woolf -- Tuesday November 15 2005, @01:30PM (#185588)
    (User #14157 Info)
  • who is mick rock?
    Anonymous -- Tuesday November 15 2005, @05:45PM (#185624)


[ home | terms of service ]