The Times: Comedian Paul Black on his most memorable Scottish gig (October 2, 2024)

Paul Black: I need to say sorry to anyone who ever gave me a job​

The comedian on avoiding doing anything hard at all costs, his Smiths obsession and stealing his earliest memory from his sister​

What has been your most memorable Scottish gig?
We’re gonna have to separate the artist from the art here: it has to be when I saw Morrissey for the first time. I had been obsessed with the Smiths throughout my teens and had made it my whole identity, so it felt like a big deal. I went to see Johnny Marr when I was 18 too and that was maybe even better because I didn’t have to live in shame of being there.

Paul Black: I need to say sorry to anyone who ever gave me a job

The comedian on avoiding doing anything hard at all costs, his Smiths obsession and stealing his earliest memory from his sister

www.thetimes.com

 

[Dorothy]

Do you realize you are preaching this on a site where when people express criticism of Morrissey, they are attacked and downvoted for simply having the steel, the resolve, the backbone and balls to say what they think?

That's so funny. One requires zero steel or resolve to say anything on a site where no one knows who you are and nearly everyone is using an alias. The worst thing that can happen is you get a little red downvote or some criticism towards a made up persona.

 

[Redacted]

That's so funny. One requires zero steel or resolve to say anything on a site where no one knows who you are and nearly everyone is using an alias. The worst thing that can happen is you get a little red downvote or some criticism towards a made up persona.

As usual, the point goes right over your head.

 

[Dorothy]

As usual, the point goes right over your head.

Great response, that took balls!

 

[Redacted]

Great response, that took balls!

Yours isn't and didn't, again, you always manage to miss the mark, so just move on

 

[Dorothy]

Yours isn't and didn't, again, you always manage to miss the mark, so just move on

You made a point in the rest of your post but the opening lines are
crap.

 

[hand in glove]

I am not a huge fan of wishing people dead, but what you are saying is Morrissey can wish people dead, but no one else can?

Come on, Redacted. That is not what I’m saying in this instance, and you know it.

 

[Anonymous]

If this was thatcher-solo.com then yes.
That quote was a direct stab at Thatcher because he despised her so much. I’m sure he felt sorry for those hurt or killed. He had a platform and he used it. Different era. Different circumstances. You cannot go online in 2024 when people are afraid of being shot to death or blown to bits just from going out to the shops and basically say it’s a shame that a Morrissey concert hasn’t been bombed. Paraphrase or not.

Nice pretzel logic there!

 

[Les Tameside]

Another spineless jellyfish floats to the surface. Instead of starting off with 'We’re gonna have to separate the artist from the art here' he should have started with 'You have to realise I'm a chickenshit c$nt who lies awake all night sweating over how I look and if people like me.' And then he can clatter on like a possessed ventriloquist dummy.

I despair sometimes over some people. I'm sure Moz does too. Where is the steel, the resolve, the backbone and balls to say what you think? So many people are so worried about what everyone thinks. Don't they get tired of it? Of the sheer fakery and futility of projecting a false image, or trying to escape scathe-free from every interaction with the press or in general?

If every artist willingly ripped out their spines like Paul Black does then all we'd have to listen to is Bucks Fizz, Black Lace, and Mr.Blobby. Is that the world these cretins want?

View attachment 112634

Am I the only Bucks Fizz fan here? Cheryl signed my album, in 1990. I still treasure it.

 

[Les Tameside]

I have to say, in my eyes, the notion of separating art from artist is a cowardly cop out. The same life experience determines both—they’re indistinguishable.

 

[Redacted]

Come on, Redacted. That is not what I’m saying in this instance, and you know it.

Someone paraphrased a Morrissey quote, and you said it was terrifying and that person should be banned. When it was brought to your attention that is was a paraphrase of a Morrissey quote, you didn't think it was terrifying anymore and started backpedaling with excuses, so yes, that is exactly what I think you are saying.
He also said he would kill the president of the United States if he could. He's mocked death, said the massacre of children was nothing, I could go on, but you get it. When will people understand these are the comments of an unhinged person?
There are always one set of rules for Morrissey and another set for everyone else.
What is so hard about saying he does and says some terrible things and may be earning all the criticism he gets?

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Be brave and speak your mind, unless you’re saying something that could be interpreted as vaguely anti-racist, inclusive, pro women or plainly against what Morrissey says or thinks or feels (or, rather, what you have perceived him to say, think or feel). Then you’re not brave, then you’re a brainless c*** sheep who should shut up.

 

[Roman Holiday]

Yes, Morrissey could have been less emotional which may have allowed him space to be more articulate as to who he was specifically talking about in the context of the subject being discussed and his strong feelings and beliefs about animal suffering.

It's fine to be emotional and say something outrageous in the moment. But unless you want a popular misunderstanding of your comments to persist, all it takes is a paragraph or two on your blog to explain. You and I have both done it already on this thread; Morrissey is a great writer, and him clarifying would give the original statement even more force. He could turn the tables on the sanctimonious people criticizing him and make them examine their own prejudice instead. Why do you suppose he just let a statement that makes him look racist sit there like a festering turd?

‘legitimate’? He very well may not like Morrissey. And that’s fine. But what are his dislikes based on?

His disclaimer was unnecessary. He wasn’t asked his feelings on how Morrissey is portrayed in the media.

Was the disclaimer unnecessary? He could want to say it without being asked about it. It's just reflexive: "let it be known I don't like his views." I would possibly say something similar if I was talking about going to a Billy Bragg concert. I don't get high on Marxist apologetics or "she/he/we/they" and Bragg is well-known for that. His music (like Morrissey's) often reflects his worldview. I assume Paul Black didn't feel the need to get specific because "Morrissey is a racist wanker" seems like a popular enough sentiment in the UK that his comment about separating the artist was just shorthand for that.

Well, one can still be moved by the song without having to separate their idea of who Morrissey is now, with who they thought Morrissey was then at the time of singing those words.

A fan can either think .. he doesn’t care about the subject anymore or has changed his mind and that is why he’s silent on it, or a fan can think … he still feels strongly about the subject and has reasons for remaining silent on it. (or has he been silenced to speak publicly about politics? or is he just again refusing to do what’s expected of him? ) Anyway, the fan has a right to either view, but, I believe one of these views is really an unfortunate and perverse way to impede oneself from really enjoying the music. I mean, why invent these obstacles?

I agree, it does "impede oneself from really enjoying the music." But my love of Morrissey's music has always been entangled to some extent with my admiration for/fascination with him as a person. It's more difficult for me to just robotically flip a switch on Morrissey like I'm able to do with someone like Billy Bragg. Morrissey isn't obligated to live up to my or anyone else's expectations, but the expectations are there because of the previous greatness.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

It's fine to be emotional and say something outrageous in the moment.

Yes. But my point was if he stood back and
looked at what he was saying, then most likely we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Which can possibly be one of the reasons for him not defending or explaining his comment, in spite of the damage to a public image.

But unless you want a popular misunderstanding of your comments to persist, all it takes is a paragraph or two on your blog to explain. You and I have both done it already on this thread; Morrissey is a great writer, and him clarifying would give the original statement even more force. He could turn the tables on the sanctimonious people criticizing him and force them to examine their own prejudice instead. Why do you suppose he just let a statement that makes him look racist sit there like a festering turd?

Maybe it has happened, in some parallel world where Morrissey isn’t the Morrissey we have in this world. Or not.

Was the disclaimer unnecessary? He could want to say it without being asked about it. It's just reflexive: "let it be known I don't like his views." I would possibly say something similar if I was talking about going to a Billy Bragg concert. I don't get high on Marxist apologetics or "she/he/we/they" and Bragg is well-known for that. His music (like Morrissey's) often reflects his worldview. I assume Paul Black didn't feel the need to get specific because "Morrissey is a racist wanker" seems like a popular enough sentiment in the UK that his comment about separating the artist was just shorthand for that.

It seems more of a copycat response really. The safest route for these kind of people to take.

I agree, it does "impede oneself from really enjoying the music." But my love of Morrissey's music has always been entangled to some extent with my admiration for/fascination with him as a person. It's more difficult for me to just robotically flip a switch on Morrissey like I'm able to do with someone like Billy Bragg. Morrissey isn't obligated to live up to my or anyone else's expectations, but the expectations are there because of the previous greatness.

yeah, greatness is subjective. And so it can also be said.. presently for others there is still greatness from him simply by being his unique and problematic self, it goes on. This crazy diamond still shines on! Lol.

 

[Redacted]

It's not dangerous or edgy to say you like Morrissey, an elderly asshole with a giant chip on his shoulder, some people just genuinely don't like him.
Chloe Sevigny goes to his shows and gave an interview in 2020 in which she spoke of him quite glowingly and she still works all the time, she was just in that Ryan Murphy Netflix project Monsters.

Quite being so dramatic

 

[Roman Holiday]

yeah, greatness is subjective. And so it can also be said.. presently for others there is still greatness from him simply by being his unique and problematic self, it goes on. This crazy diamond still shines on! Lol.

Yes, I think the difference is that in the past his "unique and problematic self" had a righteous &/or enigmatic bite to it. Problematic itself ≠ great; a crazy diamond is not just a mere crazy person.

If everything he does can be justified by "well, that's just Morrissey being his usual inexplicable self" then we are essentially in something like MAGA cult territory: "that's just Trump being Trump," no matter crazy or incoherent Trump gets, when it's pretty clear to almost anyone that Trump has lost a lot off his fastball since 2016.

 

[Roman Holiday]

Chloe Sevigny goes to his shows and gave an interview in 2020 in which she spoke of him quite glowingly and she still works all the time, she was just in that Ryan Murphy Netflix project Monsters.

Good point, and if liking Morrissey is such career poison in the UK, then it doesn't explain why she was cast as the classic/legacy "It girl" in a Charli XCX video (3:37). Where were the gatekeepers and woke mob? Did someone lose the blacklist?

 

[BookishBoy]

Yes, I think the difference is that in the past his "unique and problematic self" had a righteous &/or enigmatic bite to it. Problematic itself ≠ great; a crazy diamond is not just a mere crazy person.

If everything he does can be justified by "well, that's just Morrissey being his usual inexplicable self" then we are essentially in something like MAGA cult territory: "that's just Trump being Trump," no matter crazy or incoherent Trump gets, when it's pretty clear to almost anyone that Trump has lost a lot off his fastball since 2016.

I love this phrase so much!

 

[Redacted]

Yup, this is totally killing her career. I think she went to Cruel World when he headlined too. How will you all feed your persecution complexes now?

How The Smiths changed Chloë Sevigny's life

How The Smiths changed Chloë Sevigny's life and the story of her following Morrissey when he was on tour in support of his album 'You Are The Quarry'.

faroutmagazine.co.uk

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

Yes, I think the difference is that in the past his "unique and problematic self" had a righteous &/or enigmatic bite to it.

Subjective.

Problematic itself ≠ great; a crazy diamond is not just a mere crazy person.

My crazy diamond reference was obviously a joke. I don’t believe M is that kind of crazy. But trouble does love him. Always great, as far as I’m concerned. He’ll be fine.

If everything he does can be justified by "well, that's just Morrissey being his usual inexplicable self" then we are essentially in something like MAGA cult territory: "that's just Trump being Trump," no matter crazy or incoherent Trump gets, when it's pretty clear to almost anyone that Trump has lost a lot off his fastball since 2016.

But it is Trump being Trump, I don’t know he played any sports, in regards to the ‘fastball’ comment. You mean he’s crazier? I don’t follow any politics at all.

I'm in the world where young and old
Are bought and sold, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Peace and War
Are bargained for, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Money talks
To Doves and Hawks, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Kith and Kin
Are Moving in, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Thought Control
Is taking toll, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Jokers Make -
Believe the Fake, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Lies are Flies
That fill the Skies, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Boom and Bust
Are both a must, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Law is Force
A Trojan Horse, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Good and Bad
Are iron-clad, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Pride in Race
Is losing Face, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Talk is cheap
And Isms creep, but I'm not of it

I'm in the world where Truth is what
If not a Plot, but I'm not of

 

[Roman Holiday]

Subjective.

Of course. But do you think he's in as good a position as he was fifteen or thirty years ago? I'm not talking about album sales or sold-out shows; I never cared about that. I care a lot about music quality, but we can put that aside. I just feel like he's really lost the upper hand with his adversaries, and you yourself have even noticed that he's gone relatively quiet on politics for unknown reasons. Not that I don't like recluses, either; I love the Garbo or Barrett kind of scene.

But he seems to be inhabiting a sad middle ground, where he won't bother to exercise his wit against his detractors. Bigmouth doesn't strike again, and that's a shame. His observations about the politico-cultural scene seem like boilerplate "heterodox podcast" stuff. Your mileage may vary. But do you think his interviews, now so few and far between, and many of them done with inner circle flunkies or sycophants, have the same bite and verve as they once did? I thought he was going to be like Quentin Crisp or Gore Vidal, and have that regal, bitchy impertinence until to the end. He doesn't have to live up to my expectation of being a good interview forever. But whatever has happened with him, it feels like I'm watching a great cat hobbled by an injury, and the gazelles are sporting and prancing around almost tauntingly.

But it is Trump being Trump, I don’t know he played any sports, in regards to the ‘fastball’ comment. You mean he’s crazier? I don’t follow any politics at all.

The fastball is figurative. Trump is still occasionally very funny. "You have never seen a body so beautiful," he recently said, remarking on his own physique. Current physique. And with Trump there's a >50% chance he's being serious, which adds to the hilarity. But overall he's off. He's eight years older and it really shows. He slurs and garbles words, and where he used to digress and come back to a thought, now he just digresses and rambles on.