"California Son" review by Laura Snapes (1 star, obvs) - The Guardian

Despite not being sent a copy to review, the Guardian has - of course! - reviewed the album anyway.

Morrissey: California Son review – clumsy covers with a troll-like spirit (1 of 5 stars) - The Guardian

In the words of Laura Snapes: "it is impossible to hear a number of the covers on California Son in anything but a chilling light."

And they're rather proud of this 1-star review, also mentioning it in their report of the Liverpool posters incident:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...erpools-merseyrail-transport-network#comments

---

Related item:

• Guardian has been refused copy of "California Son" for review - May 17, 2019

 

[gordyboy9]

They had to buy their own copy

they got it off fwd s link the cheap bastards.

 

[Rush 2 Danger]

I'm not in the UK, I've never read the Guardian, I have no idea of their politics. However, the editor who let Laura Snape's review of this album passed him/her should be ashamed of him/herself, as they are clearly not doing their job.

I am an avid Morrissey fan, I don't care for his politics one way or the other, they are none of my business. The author and editor have lost sight of the purpose of an album review, that being an abject critic on the quality of the material on the album and nothing more.

California Son, from a non-Morrissey fan point of view, should probably be scoring between 2-3 stars. Morrissey fans will likely rate it higher (it's a 3.5 for me). I don't praise everything Moz releases (a quick search will reveal my opinions on LIHS), but this album, albeit a covers album, is very good in parts but also has some duff moments. It may be many things, but a 1 star it is not.

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

Congrats to Moz on the release and even more good news for England... Theresa May resigns. Brexit!

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

Expect no less from a miserable "progressive" cretin

 

[womble]

I would not be at all surprised if the editorial approach to this one was, "who's going to write the 1-star review of California Son?"

 

[Bluebirds]

A clickbait review...seriously what's the f***ing point in that? I understand for some people (me included) it is difficult to divorce the artist and the art (or in this case the singer and the songs) but to dismiss this album as the ramblings of a right-wing nutjob is just pathetic.

I always recall Barbara Ellen reviewing a pointless Morrissey compilation (World of Morrissey?) in the mid 90s and doing a similar hatchet job. But even she suggested 3 or 4 out of 10 for the songs. But gave it zero cos of Morrissey's nationalist inclinations.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not in the UK, I've never read the Guardian, I have no idea of their politics. However, the editor who let Laura Snape's review of this album passed him/her should be ashamed of him/herself, as they are clearly not doing their job.

I am an avid Morrissey fan, I don't care for his politics one way or the other, they are none of my business. The author and editor have lost sight of the purpose of an album review, that being an abject critic on the quality of the material on the album and nothing more.

California Son, from a non-Morrissey fan point of view, should probably be scoring between 2-3 stars. Morrissey fans will likely rate it higher (it's a 3.5 for me). I don't praise everything Moz releases (a quick search will reveal my opinions on LIHS), but this album, albeit a covers album, is very good in parts but also has some duff moments. It may be many things, but a 1 star it is not.

It’s not an album review it’s an essay about morrisseys political opinions

 

[Anonymous]

Imagine marking down a review you don't like. You soft f***ers.

It may be that some just do not agree with the review.
Fair enough.
Twat.

 

[Mr. Jackpots]

Imagine marking down a review you don't like. You soft f***ers.

Oh but you're the very definition of thick-skinned, right?

 

[ninetimesfined]

What a surprise. Not. The guardian proving they’re ringleader of the tormentors. If this was 1984-2004 and there was no political context they’d totally be moist for this. It’s kind of pathetic really.

 

[Mr. Jackpots]

Expect no less from a miserable "progressive" cretin
View attachment 49851

LOL. She looks like one of those broads who thinks not shaving her legs is really sticking it to the man.

Yawn.

 

[ACTON]

She sounds like one of those braindead twits who go around waiting to be outraged. People who happily switch off their intelligence and swamp their pickled brains with emotion. Come Armageddon come Armageddon come.

She has a face for radio.

 

[ACTON]

I'd like to think that they'd got the album from the download section here - where it's been available for 'review' since Monday
Regards,
FWD.

I'd say the f***ers are too cheap to pay for Spotify premium and listened to the album on shuffle play, constantly interrupted by adverts. That might explain her line about not being able to listen to it without it under a chilling light.

 

[ACTON]

What a surprise. Not. The guardian proving they’re ringleader of the tormentors. If this was 1984-2004 and there was no political context they’d totally be moist for this. It’s kind of pathetic really.

Never mind. Things can only improve. We are just stood here waiting for the next great wound.

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

It arrived

 

[Mayfly]

But does it really matter?
There was no chance on earth that the album was going to get a proper review, let alone a positive review.
And readers of the Guardian share an ideological point of view. Given their high moral grounds, it is not permitted to like anything coming from Morrissey, who holds strongly opposing views to theirs, and evil views too.
Fact is, they are preaching to a congregation that is already converted (to the camp of Morrissey bashers). Hence, there's no need to write much about the album.
That's how it is and I won't lose any sleep over it.

 

[Anonymous]

In the words of Laura Snapes: "it is impossible to hear a number of the covers on California Son in anything but a chilling light."

And they're rather proud of this 1-star review, also mentioning it in their report of the Liverpool posters incident:

---

Related item:

• Guardian has been refused copy of "California Son" for review - May 17, 2019

"In Honour Of The Staff At The Guardian"
(I joke.)

These fools at The Guardian are stupid and irrelevant. This is the issue and the answer. When picking-up the so-called gutter-press that The Guardian has now become, one appreciates that it is now a guardian of actually nothing. At all. Not even of itself. Sadly now a laughing stock (before this article.)

Anyway, back to poor Phil Ochs who was mentioned by The Truth (above.) Phil Ochs is actually much more important that fools pretending to work at The Guardian. Ochs moved to New York in 1961-2 and wrote a large number of songs. One only has to listen to Ochs' wonderful song about Richard Nixon, that Mr Ochs sang to an arrangement of his entitled "Here's to the State of Missippi."

Mr Ochs wrote the song about Missippi after the KKK (and others) beat and then murdered many folks just because they were black, voters rights and white-black segregation, amongst other things. A rather insightful and powerful message one imagines might just stand the test of time. Not according to The Guardian. Anyway, this interesting song is entitled "Here's to the State of Richard Nixon" if you want to laugh along.

Hazard
x

 

[Eric Hartman]

Laura Snapes has a face like an old shoe.

 

[The Sound Of Mucus]

There are still people who genuinely enjoy what he's doing. One good review immediately negates all the bad ones.

 

[Eldritch]

This is a disappointingly lazy and perfunctory review from a critic who has elsewhere shown that she can write. But abusing her for how she looks is vile too, so get a grip.