Morrissey Central "YOU KNOW I COULDN’T LAST" (July 26, 2023)

YOU KNOW I COULDN'T LAST - MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY - MORRISSEY CENTRAL - YOU KNOW I COULDN'T LAST

MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY on MORRISSEY CENTRAL

www.morrisseycentral.com

“She had only so much ‘self’ to give. She was dropped by her label after selling 7 million albums for them. She became crazed, yes, but uninteresting, never. She had done nothing wrong. She had proud vulnerability … and there is a certain music industry hatred for singers who don’t ‘fit in’ (this I know only too well), and they are never praised until death - when, finally, they can’t answer back. The cruel playpen of fame gushes with praise for Sinead today … with the usual moronic labels of “icon” and “legend”. You praise her now ONLY because it is too late. You hadn’t the guts to support her when she was alive and she was looking for you. The press will label artists as pests because of what they withhold … and they would call Sinead sad, fat, shocking, insane … oh but not today! Music CEOs who had put on their most charming smile as they refused her for their roster are queuing-up to call her a “feminist icon”, and 15 minute celebrities and goblins from hell and record labels of artificially aroused diversity are squeezing onto Twitter to twitter their jibber-jabber … when it was YOU who talked Sinead into giving up … because she refused to be labelled, and she was degraded, as those few who move the world are always degraded. Why is ANYBODY surprised that Sinead O’Connor is dead? Who cared enough to save Judy Garland, Whitney Houston, Amy Winehouse, Marilyn Monroe, Billie Holiday? Where do you go when death can be the best outcome? Was this music madness worth Sinead’s life? No, it wasn’t. She was a challenge, and she couldn’t be boxed-up, and she had the courage to speak when everyone else stayed safely silent. She was harassed simply for being herself. Her eyes finally closed in search of a soul she could call her own. As always, the lamestreamers miss the ringing point, and with locked jaws they return to the insultingly stupid “icon” and “legend” when last week words far more cruel and dismissive would have done. Tomorrow the fawning fops flip back to their online shitposts and their cosy Cancer Culture and their moral superiority and their obituaries of parroted vomit … all of which will catch you lying on days like today … when Sinead doesn’t need your sterile slop.”

MORRISSEY
26 July, 2023.

---

Related thread:

• R.I.P. Sinead O'Connor

---

Media items:

• Consequence: "Morrissey Rips Sinead O’Connor Tributes: “You Hadn’t the Guts to Support Her When She Was Alive”" - July 26, 2023
• Daily Mail: "Morrissey SLAMS celebrity tributes to Sinead O'Connor following her death aged 56: 'You hadn't the guts to support her when she was alive'" - July 27, 2023
• The Independent: "I can’t believe I agree with Morrissey, but he’s right on Sinéad O’Connor" - July 27, 2023
• The Guardian: "‘You hadn’t the guts to support her’: Morrissey decries music industry after Sinéad O’Connor’s death" - July 27, 2023
• The Independent: "‘You praise her now only because it’s too late’: Morrissey lashes out at tributes to Sinead O’Connor" - July 27, 2023
• Ultimate Classic Rock: "MORRISSEY RIPS ‘INSULTINGLY STUPID’ SINEAD O’CONNOR COVERAGE" - July 26, 2023

 

[Crisstti]

Why are you dodging the question?

It’s not a relevant question imo. Moz was talking about people (essentially the press, really) who vilified her and mocked her and are now full of praise.

 

[goinghome]

LA magazine respectfully paraphrases exchanges
https://lamag.com/music/from-one-mi...er-morrissey-comes-to-sinead-oconnors-defense

 

[louisfriend]

It’s not a relevant question imo. Moz was talking about people (essentially the press, really) who vilified her and mocked her and are now full of praise.

And can you name those people? Are there instances of specific journalists who spearheaded her vilification who are now whistling a different tune post-mortem? Or is Morrissey, as usual, lashing out at a “they” that doesn’t exist outside of his imagination?

He doesn’t have the capacity to analyse the situation with any depth, just an overemotional rant that is indeed more about him than the woman in question.

 

[Vesper Nocturne]

And can you name those people? Are there instances of specific journalists who spearheaded her vilification who are now whistling a different tune post-mortem? Or is Morrissey, as usual, lashing out at a “they” that doesn’t exist outside of his imagination?

He doesn’t have the capacity to analyse the situation with any depth, just an overemotional rant that is indeed more about him than the woman in question.

The media was relishing having an opportunity to dramatize her sad plight and to splash it across all possible channels and outlets that they could, while sensationalizing every heartbreaking aspect and development that didn’t need to be sensationalized any more.

They profited by using her lowest and most vulnerable moments to try and make a media spectacle out of her misery and her acute human suffering, to the absolute best of all their ability, both in photo and in print.

What is actually wrong with you? No one needs to provide a list of journalist names for you.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

And can you name those people? Are there instances of specific journalists who spearheaded her vilification who are now whistling a different tune post-mortem? Or is Morrissey, as usual, lashing out at a “they” that doesn’t exist outside of his imagination?

He doesn’t have the capacity to analyse the situation with any depth, just an overemotional rant that is indeed more about him than the woman in question.

 

[louisfriend]

Yes, you posted this days ago with a similar smugness and once again you’re missing the point. Is the same writer penning both pieces? The same editor? What “they” did to Sinead is objectively brutal, but we’re talking about a difference of thirty years and completely different personnel. Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view? Sure?

This @A scanty bit of thing is why the names of the journalists would be particularly useful in determining the level of hypocrisy Morrissey thinks he’s railing against. What is actually wrong with you that you find this point so difficult to comprehend?

 

[Vesper Nocturne]

Yes, you posted this days ago with a similar smugness and once again you’re missing the point. Is the same writer penning both pieces? The same editor? What “they” did to Sinead is objectively brutal, but we’re talking about a difference of thirty years and completely different personnel. Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view? Sure?

This @A scanty bit of thing is why the names of the journalists would be particularly useful in determining the level of hypocrisy Morrissey thinks he’s railing against. What is actually wrong with you that you find this point so difficult to comprehend?

I’m not the one finding any point difficult to comprehend. You’re the one who sounds absolutely clueless

Journalists aren’t the ones who decide what gets published For a start

 

[louisfriend]

I’m not the one finding any point difficult to comprehend. You’re the one who sounds absolutely clueless

Journalists aren’t the ones who decide what gets published For a start

I very clearly made reference to editors in my post. Do you need a minute?

We all understand the point Morrissey thinks he’s making, but his angle is completely two-dimensional. You’re obviously happy to meet him there.

 

[Vesper Nocturne]

I very clearly made reference to editors in my post. Do you need a minute?

We all understand the point Morrissey thinks he’s making, but his angle is completely two-dimensional. You’re obviously happy to meet him there.

Yes, you posted this days ago with a similar smugness and once again you’re missing the point. Is the same writer penning both pieces? The same editor? What “they” did to Sinead is objectively brutal, but we’re talking about a difference of thirty years and completely different personnel. Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view? Sure?

This @A scanty bit of thing is why the names of the journalists would be particularly useful in determining the level of hypocrisy Morrissey thinks he’s railing against. What is actually wrong with you that you find this point so difficult to comprehend?

No, i don’t need a minute.

You made reference to all sorts of things. Including stupidly and explicitly stating over and over again that you “want names of specific journalists”.

You’ve already said that in more than just the last post above that i quoted here. In fact, you’ve said it in more than one post even just on this one single page.

You clearly have an issue with Morrissey, but the issue here is you, trying to stir negativity and wishing you could tar and feather someone for penning a true and accurate criticism on their own personal website, highlighting something very real that happened to someone they personally know.

Get help.

 

[Redacted]

It’s not a relevant question imo. Moz was talking about people (essentially the press, really) who vilified her and mocked her and are now full of praise.

The goal posts keep changing here, I don't think that it nullifies the point that he did nothing to help her publicly. He could have defended her, as far as I know, he didn't. I don't think he can claim the high road here. I don't remember him doing anything for Amy Winehouse either. Terry Hall worked with both these women.

 

[gashonthenail]

T

The goal posts keep changing here, I don't think that it nullifies the point that he did nothing to help her publicly. He could have defended her, as far as I know, he didn't. I don't think he can claim the high road here. I don't remember him doing anything for Amy Winehouse either. Terry Hall worked with both these women.

The issue is not who publicly helped or defended or worked with Sinéad O'Connor - the issue is who showed hatred and contempt for her in public and now shower her with praise, again in public. We don't know whether Morrissey and Sinéad ever communicated in private. They certainly shared a conversation over a nice cup of tea at some point. I do have to say though - every word Morrissey has ever written, everything the man has ever said, validates the existence of an artist like Sinéad O'Connor - being an individual, being yourself, being fierce and independent and outspoken. Some things just don't need to be said.

 

[Les Tameside]

Yes, you posted this days ago with a similar smugness and once again you’re missing the point. Is the same writer penning both pieces? The same editor? What “they” did to Sinead is objectively brutal, but we’re talking about a difference of thirty years and completely different personnel. Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view? Sure?

This @A scanty bit of thing is why the names of the journalists would be particularly useful in determining the level of hypocrisy Morrissey thinks he’s railing against. What is actually wrong with you that you find this point so difficult to comprehend?

“Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view?”

Yes.

 

[gashonthenail]

“Should every piece written in The Sun come bundled with a supplementary text that apologises for a formerly held view?”

Yes.

Love it. Although The Sun would need to come with an encyclopedia sized compendium apologising for all the lies and vitriol they have spewed out over the past few decades, and the phones they have hacked, and the litter bins they have rifled through.

 

[Les Tameside]

Love it. Although The Sun would need to come with an encyclopedia sized compendium apologising for all the lies and vitriol they have spewed out over the past few decades, and the phones they have hacked, and the litter bins they have rifled through.

Yes, you wouldn’t actually eat your chips out of it—because you know precisely where it’s been.

 

[Musician]

Why is the Pete Burns anecdote comment removed?

 

[Famous when dead]

Why is the Pete Burns anecdote comment removed?

Deleted by the poster.
Same information posted in a thread here:
Thread 'Pete burns talks Sinead O'Conner and Morrissey (2009)' https://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/pete-burns-talks-sinead-oconner-and-morrissey-2009.151312/
FWD.

 

[Redacted]

Deleted by the poster.
Same information posted in a thread here:
Thread 'Pete burns talks Sinead O'Conner and Morrissey (2009)' https://www.morrissey-solo.com/threads/pete-burns-talks-sinead-oconner-and-morrissey-2009.151312/
FWD.

Yes, I deleted it. It was getting laugh reacts and I thought it was in poor taste to mock a dead person. FWD did not delete it.

 

[Jennifer Jupiter]

Yes, I deleted it. It was getting laugh reacts and I thought it was in poor taste to mock a dead person. FWD did not delete it.

That story about Morrissey’s cruel humor made your point very well though. Reminds me of another story that Brix Smith told in her book. The Fall and the Smiths were staying at the same hotel and there was a fire. Outside, a panicked Brix asked Morrissey if he’d seen her husband Mark and Moz replied “He’s upstairs burning.” She never spoke to him again.

 

[Crisstti]

Peter Burns kinda admits he actually was watching her, doesn't he?

 

[gashonthenail]

Peter Burns kinda admits he actually was watching her, doesn't he?

Yes, I'm not quite sure what that 'story' was being presented as evidence of? Firstly, any story told by Pete Burns has got to be taken with a salt mine quantity of salt. The story all sounds a bit hyperbolic and exaggerated to say the least. Secondly, we don't have a link to the radio interview so we only have a remembered summary of what was said and we can't hear how the story was actually told. But it sounds as if Pete Burns was the one laughing about the incident in the interview. Who knows, maybe Sinéad laughed about it too later? Maybe Moz later apologised to her for winding her up? And that's all dependent on if the story is actually true in any way, of course. If some third hand story told by Pete Burns is the only 'evidence' being presented to suggest that Moz is some sort of hypocrite, 'could do better' is the only response.