Bowie refusal - true-to-you.net

Bowie refusal -true-to-you.net
6 February 2013

Bowie refusal

David Bowie has ordered EMI UK not to run the proposed artwork for Morrissey's April 8th issue of the re-mastered The Last of the Famous International Playboys single and CD. The sleeve featured a previously unseen private photograph of Bowie and Morrissey taken by Linder Sterling in New York in 1992. Although Bowie has no legal rights to the photograph, most of his back catalogue is presently licensed to EMI.
 
LOTFIP.jpg
 
What a pity. Two great artists into a sort of family feud show. I really don't know the reasons, but why didn'tmorrissey at least call the man to tell him that the Outside tour was not interesting for him anymore? Yes, it's probably some jobsworth at EMI or the Bowie organization, as someone mentioned before!
 
The same position?

Morrissey's music at 53 vs. Bowie's at 53...Morrissey wins hands down. Bowie's career is hinged on what basically amounted to an early 70s gimmick that shocked mom and dad, with a little genuine greatness peppered in...but not much. Whereas on the whole, Morrissey's career and continuity of integrity have been much more consistent. So I feel that no, they are not in comparable situations. Bowie is very lucky, or should feel lucky, to have a pupil in Morrissey.



Well la di da.

Hey Skykarker, you're an absolute dear and I love you but honestly, do you really believe what you say about Bowie? Not liking an artist is all well and dandy but saying that his career was based on shocking Mum and Dad is just weird.
 
As far as the famous walk out on Bowie, I say hats off to Morrissey. "Nobody puts baby in the corner"
 
The same position?

Morrissey's music at 53 vs. Bowie's at 53...Morrissey wins hands down. Bowie's career is hinged on what basically amounted to an early 70s gimmick that shocked mom and dad, with a little genuine greatness peppered in...but not much. Whereas on the whole, Morrissey's career and continuity of integrity have been much more consistent. So I feel that no, they are not in comparable situations. Bowie is very lucky, or should feel lucky, to have a pupil in Morrissey
Why doesn't he chuck out his shit musicians? the last album was the worst musically i have ever heard of a morrissey album.
He seems to be so knowledgable about how shit other bands/singers are doing, why isn't he focusing on his own band?
I think he should get different musicians, but of course when everyone says anything like that to morrissey it is "there slagging me off, meanies". he does it though.
 
Hey Skykarker, you're an absolute dear and I love you but honestly, do you really believe what you say about Bowie? Not liking an artist is all well and dandy but saying that his career was based on shocking Mum and Dad is just weird.

OK, well, then you disagree with me. Shh...listen, do you hear that noise? It's the sound of the world still turning.
 
OK, well, then you disagree with me. Shh...listen, do you hear that noise? It's the sound of the world still turning.

That point isn't that people disagree with your opinion. You can like or dislike Bowie and I don't really care. Personally, I like Morrissey much more than I like Bowie.

The problem is when you claim that Bowie was only successful because of a gimmick. Certainly it helped him, but he was both commercially and critically successful before and after his glam rock phase. Space Oddity, one of his most enduring and well-known songs, was recorded during his hippie psychedelic folk rock phase. It just seems silly to pretend like he's a gimmick artist. He also wasn't really a has been in 1991 either.
 
The problem is when you claim that Bowie was only successful because of a gimmick....he was both commercially and critically successful before and after

his glam rock phase.

Space Oddity, one of his most enduring and well-known songs, was recorded during

his hippie psychedelic folk rock phase.

It just seems silly to pretend like he's a gimmick artist.

Does it?
 
Morrissey's gone through a number of phases but none of them strike me as gimmicky, Skylarker makes an excellent point. Some might say his stage presentations have gone through phases with Boz in drag or dressing up or not dressing up the band, but at the end of the day when a Morrissey song plays on the radio it's essentially in one consistent voice, whereas Bowie songs are not. I could be wrong in this assessment.
 
I remember reading about the Moz/Bowie tour and Morrissey saying he didn`t like the way Bowie wanted to end his set.If I`m not mistaken I also remember hearing that Morrissey became ill with depression at that time and that was one of the reasons he left the tour.I don`t know if this is true or not.It`s just something I recall.Hey maybe this was Morrissey`s way of trying to make amends.(using the picture)
 
I remember reading about the Morrissey / Bowie tour and Morrissey saying he didn't like the way Bowie wanted to end his set. If I'm not mistaken I also remember hearing that Morrissey became ill with depression at that time and that was one of the reasons he left the tour. I don't know if this is true or not. It's just something I recall.
Hey maybe this was Morrissey's way of trying to make amends (using the picture).

Yeah, it seems HIS way of trying to make amends, but perhaps it is not the right way to do so.

I don't know what actually happened during 1995 tour.
One part of me saying that Morrissey was right that he didn't have to accept Bowie's request because he felt it wasn't right to swallow his artistic pride.
On the other hand, if he was artistically lenient and able to accept his request, everything would had been easier for both of them.

The biggest problem is, although he could put the past behind, he kept slagging off Bowie.
 
The same position?

Morrissey's music at 53 vs. Bowie's at 53...Morrissey wins hands down. Bowie's career is hinged on what basically amounted to an early 70s gimmick that shocked mom and dad, with a little genuine greatness peppered in...but not much. Whereas on the whole, Morrissey's career and continuity of integrity have been much more consistent. So I feel that no, they are not in comparable situations. Bowie is very lucky, or should feel lucky, to have a pupil in Morrissey.

The difference between Morrissey and Bowie is that Bowie knew when it was time to give the gimmick up and evolve...

One issue I noticed is that you seem to be trying to correlate gimmickry with music style changes. Ziggy Stardust, without a doubt, was a gimmick...but Bowie's forays into rock, glam rock, pop, folk, jazz, swing, and electronic weren't. Which is something Morrissey could learn from instead of rehashing the same album for over a decade. Bowie was critically and commercially successful before and after Ziggy Stardust...if anything, he was more successful with the 'Let's Dance' album than any of his 70s output. It's called staying relevant and evolving with the times and the music...you can't make music that all sounds the same indefinitely...or then you would be Morrissey.

Bowie was and is successful because he's always had strong material to back him up...Morrissey doesn't. Which is why one has a new album coming out while the other doesn't. So much for his consistence and integrity, huh?

I think Morrissey fans tend to give him a sense of importance in the music business that he doesn't actually have and never really has had. He's never really been a "successful artist". The most total units he's shipped in his entire career is approx 400,000 for 'Quarry'! That is it! It is really a pathetic amount...which is why all Morrissey ever manages to get is a high charting position for the first week of sales, because he already exhausts nearly his entire fanbase (what is left of it) in that 7 day period. Covering his songs, doing duets, being his opening act, having his former guitarists and producers produce his albums, taking on an opening act that did a duet with Bowie on one of her albums - Morrissey wishes he could be a Bowie pupil! It is almost embarrassing, really...however, not quite as embarrassing as Morrissey's gimmick of flowers in the pocket, hearing aids, ugly glasses, Oscar Wilde books, 'woe is me, nobody loves me' attitude, I don't have sex-I do have sex-I'm back to not having sex-nonsense, bitching in the press for attention about anything and everything. I could say more, but you get the general idea...
 
I think Morrissey fans tend to give him a sense of importance in the music business that he doesn't actually have and never really has had. He's never really been a "successful artist".



hahahahaa that really is quite funny.
bowie fans have always had a kind of pompous delusion about them, he's a kind of "emperors new clothes " figure really isnt he?? he hasnt got a decent lyric to save his life which is why he gave up and dissapeared up his own backside 15 years ago.
 
I think Morrissey fans tend to give him a sense of importance in the music business that he doesn't actually have and never really has had. He's never really been a "successful artist". The most total units he's shipped in his entire career is approx 400,000 for 'Quarry'! That is it! It is really a pathetic amount....

Not that it really matters that much, and just on a point of fact, Morrissey has had 5 gold albums in the US (for sales of between 500,000 and a million).
 
Last edited:
Not that it really matters that much, and just on a point of fact, Morrissey has had 5 gold albums in the US (for sales of between 500,000 and a million).

Wrong - Morrissey has only had one gold album in the US, and that was Viva Hate. Nothing else got close.
 
This really shouldn't take devolve into a Morrissey versus Bowie petty tribal fight. Like I said, I personally prefer Morrissey to Bowie by a long stretch. I also don't think his new material is bad and I don't know why this has to turn into yet another excuse to assail it.

That being said I also recognize Bowie's impact, influence, as well as commercial and critical success. I don't feel the need to delude myself into thinking it doesn't exist just because he happens to be having a feud with my favorite artist. Obviously you can't judge an artist by their commercial viability, otherwise we'd all be convinced that Justin Bieber was the greatest artist of all time. And there are many artist whose commercial success pales in comparison to their artistic and cultural influence. The Velvet Underground, Patti Smith, Joy Division come to mind and I think Morrissey and the Smiths firmly rest within that category. I mean the Smiths pretty much invented the genre of indie and along with a handful of other bands defined modern alternative music. It doesn't matter that didn't sell a bazillion albums or Morrissey isn't dong stadium tours. He's had far more impact that most people who do and even if he doesn't that wouldn't effect the quality of his artistic output.

Bowie, however, has never had any problems selling albums. Morrissey wasn't doing him some act of charity by appearing on stage with him the 1990s. People are delusion if they think Bowie is just a gimmicky artist.
 

Yes. It is from his 1969 album of the same name.

Check out the original video for it--http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D67kmFzSh_o
Bowie doesn't look so glammy does he?

You can argue whether or not Bowie's constant reinvention was crass opportunism and taking advantage of trends or creative genius and artistic innovation, but Bowie's career does not rest on any single facet of Bowie.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom