-Zoey

I have to admit that it is funny to have journalists interested in this site. If we get some tourists who come by thinking this is a freak show, then that's fine with me. They should bring lots of peanuts and their polaroid cameras.

Also, it looks like it pays to have people blast you for your lack of knowledge. This buck tooth person gets 15 minutes of fame. The rest of us get a rented room on Whalley Range (which in my mind, will never top the lyrical depth and importance of "some girls are bigger than others")

Hmm. I'm not sure I understand someone who doesn't find "Hairdresser On Fire" to be a really cute and fun pop song. There's no accounting for taste. Oh well. Must every song be a great piece of poetry? I don't think so. But certainly "Trouble Loves Me" on the album this guy hates is up there with anything the Smiths ever did.

As for his comments about us, well, as someone else pointed out, this guy clearly has this web site on his favorite places list. I don't apologize for being a Morrissey trainspotter. When you're an insomniac with too much time, these web sites are great. I notice the same goes on for all types of artists, but you only get mocked when it's pop music artists you love. That apparently is less legitimate. For example, the New Yorker went on about how Stanley Kubrick watched the Simpsons and Roseanne regularly, and a full description of his house. Do I care? Not anymore than the New Yorker probably cares that Morrissey watches Friends or what photographs decorate his walls.

Oh, and regarding the Net. Of course Morrissey fans have turned to the Net. Duh. The record industry and music media only support crap, so it's only natural. I so hope Morrissey releases an album on the Net. He doesn't need the industry or the music press. You guys are losing your power.

That said, it really was a great couple of nights - we must have been at different concerts!

And to the journalist.... I quit reading your acticle after you said Maladjusted is bad. Just erase the title track and pretend "Roy's Keen" is a b-side and you have a 5 star album.

Here's another thing to think about which will probably lead to a certain amount of bile (and perhaps some sympathy) being hurled at me. Looked at objectively, there is a fair amount to be mocked in old Moz. In fact, you could say pretty much the same thing about any iconoclastic artist or public figure. It is pretty difficult to be eyecatching without potentially being the subject of ridicule - and who wants a run of the mill icon, anyway? The old generalisation about the English being cynical and hard bitten and Americans being fresh and optimistic is, to my mind, pretty much what sits at the heart of the difference of attitude. From the UK perspective, anything other the self deprecating and apologetic has to be a sham or a con. From the US perspective, it just might worth the benefit of the doubt.

The other thing about the english reviews of Moz - and something that I've not really picked up in the US reviews - is that the UK press has a big problem with the sexuality issue. We Brits like our categories very much indeed. In particular, we want anybody who doesn't fall wholly within the category of "straight" to conform with a very easy to recognise category. For example, we are perfectly happy with George Michael as long as he is camp, because we understand that. But confront us with any identity which is more complex or subtle than pure pantomime, and we get very confused indeed.

I think the difference between America and England is that England is more trendy. So when it's fashionable to move on from Moz, almost everyone does. At least that's how it appears to me, a person who has never been to England. In a small country like that it's easy for musical trends to quickly sweep the nation and just as quickly pass, and how many of those people were in it for real reasons? From reading British music magazines I often get the (possibly false) impression that there's not much diversity in taste. Like Suede being called the greatest thing since sliced bread based on one or two singles. Americans, very generally, are less inclined to buy into that kind of hype, and when Suede came to American TV and played one of their early singles on the Tonight Show, I recall, it left many of us scratching our heads thinking, "What the heck was so special about that? Not a bad song, but certainly nothing to phone the neighbors about...." Outside of the Christina Aguilera types who get the industry push and appeal to kids or morons, you generally have to pay your dues and slowly build up fans over years and albums and tours, which builds very loyal fans who are into the substance of it and thus less likely to turn their backs on you. I've always been a person who follows entire careers of my favorite bands. I buy all their albums, even when they're considered "washed up," because I have a deep appreciation for them and am always interested in what they'll do next. And I often find that the least popular periods in artists' careers are very interesting, sometimes the most interesting. Although this kind of following bands over many albums is on the decline in America these days, it still seems more prevalent than in England.

I may be totally ignorant about England, and I'm aware of that. I'm not patriotic at all, but I do think America, very generally and with many exceptions, is the best place for musical artists to be judged by audiences on merit and substance.

A star...
And then - suddenly gone
Down to a few lines
In the back page
Of a faded annual
Oh, but I remembered you
I remembered you...

Er...no.

"world tour, media whore, please the press in Belgium, SADLY this was your life"

For the jackasses who call them selves fans, but have to "suffer" through Morrissey's artistic work, they should think about not bothering visiting a website such as this. It's amazing the comments from "fans" isn't it. Really need to get a life I suppose.

Mike, it would be fine to read some negativity if it were really fair and in touch with reality. It could be that Morrissey is judged by tougher standards because people expect more. For example, the mentally disabled members of Oasis would kill to have lyrics as good as Morrissey's worst song, but good lyrics just aren't expected from Oasis so they're excused for it.

When you've written songs as perfect as "Everyday Is Like Sunday," it's a different story. When Martin Scorsese judged the Cannes film festival in 1998 he said he was looking for a film that would "change his life." How many pop songs on the radio these days have the power to change anyone's life? (I don't mean for the worse!) Morrissey has large handfuls of songs that can and have changed people's lives. This is the proof that he's great, IMO.

It may all be subjective, but IMO "Maladjusted" and the accompanying b-sides have more good-to-great songs than many bands release over several years and several albums. It makes me wonder if some in the press are really listening. I get bummed if there's one subpar track on a Morrissey album, but with other artists I feel relieved if there are even two or three songs on the album as good as, say,"Wide to Recieve," and I sure don't expect to find anything as wonderful as "Trouble Loves Me." And among others' b-sides, I feel lucky if I find one decent track out of five.

It's OK if the press doesn't like him as much as I do. But is Morrissey judged by the same as other acts are? I don't see how anyone could say so, considering all the throwaway albums that get built up and then quickly forgotten. Back when I used to read music magazines I kept tabs on certain critics so I'd know how much to respect their opinions. It was amazing some of the crap they loved - and I mean REAL CRAP; Spice Girls kind of crap- and yet they found so much to nitpick with various Morrissey albums. If one song has one bad couplet, they'll say the whole album is a failure. Well...people are still buying Smiths albums. People are still buying Viva Hate, Bona Drag, etc. (And I agree that Bona Drag and especially Kill Uncle were flawed albums, even though I love Bona and accept Kill Uncle.)

If "Maladjusted" were the first album by Morrissey that the world had ever heard, do you think it would've impressed people more? With each album I wash away what I was hoping for and try to digest it for what it is, first judging it as a single album, and then later putting it in the context of the other stuff. Each Morrissey album is uniquely Morrissey and yet distinct. The writer here appears stuck on the Smiths, which is fine. But I'm glad there are albums like Southpaw Grammar. There'd be no point for him to continue if it were the same over and over. Did the album fail them or did they fail the album? I don't know, and of course when you change you shed some fans and gain some othersm. All I do know Morrissey is still making distinctive, lovely songs for those who want to be open to them, and he doesn't get his due for this in the press.

I'm not talking about Mr. Journo, I'm talking about some of you people. It's tiresome to wade through that garbage and so give it a rest.

Anna aka Pissed off Spice!

* no offense to anyone who likes ABBA, I like them too!

Maybe I didn't finish school, but at least I can spell.