Morrissey and Child Molestation
a.vega
I've listened to "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle" several times since I
bought the cd about 5 or 6 years ago. And I really think it is talking
about child molestation:
"I once had a child, it saved my life but I never even asked his name.
I just looked into his wonderous eyes and said 'never never never again'
and all too soon I did return, just like a moth to a flame."
"And your mother she just never knew . . . although your only three . .
." etc.
I'm not saying that Morrissey is talking about something he did or even
would want to do. Maybe it was something that was done to him or maybe
something that happened to a friend of his. But I really think that
this is what the song is about. Are there other theories?
Carl V.
southpaw thrill
But you see, the rest of the lyrics don't suggest child molestation. In
the rest of it he's protective of a child brought into a scary world, "My
life down I shall lie/If the bogey man should try/to play tricks on your
sacred mind." I always figured the "never never never again" was a promise
that resulted from the regret of bringing a child into a world where there's
"blood on the cleaver tonight."
But whatever.
thrill
[1;33m
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"If you pander to the public, art can never exist." - Morrissey
[1m [4m [0;1;7m [5mFRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS EAT MEAT [0m
[1;33m http://www.csusm.edu/public/thrill/
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * [40;0;37m
Roddy Ashworth
"a.vega" <a.v...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>I've listened to "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle" several times since I
>bought the cd about 5 or 6 years ago. And I really think it is talking
>about child molestation:
>"I once had a child, it saved my life but I never even asked his name.
>I just looked into his wonderous eyes and said 'never never never again'
>and all too soon I did return, just like a moth to a flame."
>"And your mother she just never knew . . . although your only three . .
>." etc.
>I'm not saying that Morrissey is talking about something he did or even
>would want to do. Maybe it was something that was done to him or maybe
>something that happened to a friend of his. But I really think that
>this is what the song is about. Are there other theories?
This is very interesting.
I recall that when the first Smiths LP came out, there was a theory
that the entire album was about child abuse, from the opening lines
..
"It's time the tale were told
Of how you took a child
And you made him old"
... to the final song about the Moors Murderer Myra Hindley, who was
involved with the killing of several children near Manchester in the
1960s. This is a compelling theory, although I don't endorse it.
Finding the evidence is engaging, though. You can go through almost
every song on the disk and find a dark, hidden secret in it that
doesn't want to be let out or a premature coming of age motif. This is
not necessarily contained in the explicit lyric, although often it
clearly is. I doubt that even thrill will deny that Suffer Little
Children is somehow connected to abused kids - Morrissey, after all,
uses their voices to pillory Hindley.
As I say, I don't really support this theory but merely report it as a
speculation of the times. I seem to recall that there was a good deal
of correspondence about it in either the NME or one of the other
British music papers at the time of release.
Roddy
--------------------------------------------------
What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish ?
EMAIL: ro...@pentheus.demon.co.uk - IRC: roddy-uk
--------------------------------------------------
Heidi
I thought "The Hand That Rocks The Cradle" was about a man who fathered
a child, but was excommunicated with the mother and child (maybe a one
night stand?) "but whom i never even gave a name," and he didn't want
to go through losing another child that way "I just looked into his
wonderous eyes and said "never never never again". He is therefore
singing about how much he regrets what happened to his other child and
reasureing the new baby that he will not abandon it (him/her) "I'm here
and here I'll stay".
My opinion,
Heidi
Heidi
tiam...@peganet.com (skip frederiksen) wrote:
>In article <4v3psi$j...@orb.direct.ca>, shae...@direct.ca says...
>kinda sounds like molestation, a little bit... but mostly I thought the same thing... Cool.
>Someone out there on my wavelength! =)
>
>Skip Frederiksen
I agree that there are some parts of the song that sound like child molestation, but when I listen to the song my original impressio=
n stays with me...although it *is* kind of a creepy song.
Anyway, it's cool that you got the same impression, I thought more people would disagree! :)
Heidi
>
Johnny Marr
Roddy Ashworth wrote:
> This is very interesting.
>
> I recall that when the first Smiths LP came out, there was a theory
> that the entire album was about child abuse, from the opening lines
> ..
Probably the greatest strength of a lot of Smiths work is that you can
read so much into so little: hence the songs have different messages to
different people and everyone appreciates the song for different reasons:
bear in mind the How Soon Is Now thread a while back: despite its lack of
homosexual connotations, a lot of people read into it a "coming out of
the closet" storyline...
--
Johnny Marr - wadh...@sable.ox.ac.uk
Webpage at- http://www.wadham.ox.ac.uk/~jstacey
I left the North again, I travelled South again
Wallace J.McLean
Johnny Marr (wadh...@sable.ox.ac.uk) writes:
> Probably the greatest strength of a lot of Smiths work is that you can
> read so much into so little: hence the songs have different messages to
If you can read so much into so little...
> different people and everyone appreciates the song for different reasons:
> bear in mind the How Soon Is Now thread a while back: despite its lack of
> homosexual connotations, a lot of people read into it a "coming out of
> the closet" storyline...
...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
whether you wish to concede it or not.
--
This message has been tested on live animals.
skip frederiksen
southpaw thrill
On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
> whether you wish to concede it or not.
Explain.
Graham Robertson
There is no word in the song that says (THIS IS A GAY SONG or THIS IS A
STRAIGHT SONG), basically it's ok to believe whatever you want about this
song, as long as you don't think this is what Mozz meant you to think.
--
For it so falls out that what we have we prize not the worth whiles we
enjoy it but being lacked and lost why then we wrack the value, then we
find the virtue that possession would not show us whiles it was ours.
Tatewaki Kuno
Wallace J.McLean
southpaw thrill (ball...@coyote.csusm.edu) writes:
> On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
>
>> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
>> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
>> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
>> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
>> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
>> whether you wish to concede it or not.
>
> Explain.
>
> thrill
LISTEN. Concentrate.
Kent C. Burt
I've decided to try and interpret "The Hand That Rocks The Cradle." I've
listened to this song quite often over the past few years - the lyric is
one of my absolute favourites of Morrissey's, and I've never once
seriously considered that it is from the point of view of a "child
molester."
Rather, the lyrics in this song paint a very breathtakingly gentle image.
There are ghoulish or gothic elements, but the speaker wishes to protect
the object of his affection from these, not subject him to them.
Now, I am not suggesting that this love object is not a teenager, because
it could very well be, but I don't see this relationship as being
neccessarily harmful to either party - I mean, it isn't at all according
to the lyrics, but one has to make a moral judgement, I guess, even if the
relationship is completely consensual. Relationships between young men in
their late teens and older men aren't that uncommon - ask Oscar Wilde -
and while they can be harmful - not everyone's intentions are good - that
is not always the case, and I don't see it as being the case in this song.
And if the love object in this song is a teenager, I think it is probably
someone who is 17 or 18, not someone who is 13 because the lyrics just do
not have a seedy edge to them. It's more nurturing/protecting than that.
Indeed, lines like "my life down I shall lie" and the inclusion of lyrics
from the standard "Sonny Boy" drive home the fact that the older man in
this relationship is very over-protective of the younger man. The "blood
on the cleaver tonight" is that of the phantoms trying to cause harm, not
of either of the lovers. One man is fighting, and the other is protected.
It's quite similar to "Hand In Glove" in that regard.
As for the later lines "I once had a child and it saved my life," they
could be referring to fathering a child, or they could refer to a past
relationship similar to this one. I suspect it is the latter.
Of course, the love object in this song might not be a teenager at all,
and could merely be someone who is child-like - untouched, innocent -
but the reference to a child and the "Sonny Boy" lyrics betray this
theory. And because there are no explicit references, the relationship
might not even be of a sexual nature, but again certain lines suggest that
it is ("together we lie").
So, I think the song is gentle and moving - devoid of any seedy
undertakings. But you can make of it what you will. I personally know
people who, while still in their teens, have had relationships with older
men and see it as being the best thing that could have happened. On the
other hand, I know people who are currently in such relationships and I
see these as being bad experiences - but that is because of the persons
involved, not because of the nature of the relationship itself. However,
everyone involved is over the age of consent and thus nothing illegal is
going on and you can't tell people how to live their lives, now can you?
So I can see both the good and the bad in these situations. This song
seems to explore the good.
Discuss and flame at will.
- Kent
--
And this time I'm gonna be wooed - and not pursued.
Johnny Marr
Wallace J.McLean wrote:
>
> Johnny Marr (wadh...@sable.ox.ac.uk) writes:
>
> > Probably the greatest strength of a lot of Smiths work is that you can
> > read so much into so little: hence the songs have different messages to
>
> If you can read so much into so little...
>
> > different people and everyone appreciates the song for different reasons:
> > bear in mind the How Soon Is Now thread a while back: despite its lack of
> > the closet" storyline...
>
> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
> whether you wish to concede it or not.
Where are there any clues to him being gay rather than merely being shy,
going to a club hoping to find the girl/boy of his dreams and not being
able to communicate with anyone? There is the line:
"How can you say
I go about things the wrong way?"
But this could equally be applied to him going to a club to find someone,
or summat... If you want to read something into that line, then that's my
point: there are so many interpretations of Smiths songs...
Wallace J.McLean
Johnny Marr (wadh...@sable.ox.ac.uk) writes:
> Where are there any clues to him being gay rather than merely being shy,
> going to a club hoping to find the girl/boy of his dreams and not being
> able to communicate with anyone? There is the line:
[snippo]
Let's survey the song.
"...criminally vulgar..." Criminally is a clever word. Makes me think of
things like age of consent and sodomy laws. Very tangential, but not
unMorrisseylike to throw that one in. I'm probably imaginging things, but
I still offer it as Exhibit A.
"...how can you say I go about things the wrong way?" A reference to
someone else being judgmental about his life. Gee, I wonder why?
"...I am human and I need to be loved..." He feels compelled to restate
and reconfirm his humanity. Some humans, for reasons I can't fathom, seem
to think that other humans, for whatever cause, are somehow not human.
Some people feel that way about people of certain colours, creeds, or
beliefs. There are other grounds. You decide.
"...just like everybody else does." Everybody else. The rest of the world.
The nice, normal, straight people.
"There's a club if you'd like to go..." There are clubs everywhere. You
don't need to look very hard to find them. But if you move in certain
circles, and live in certain places, the sorts of clubs you might want to
frequent may need to be pointed out to you. You latch on to members of a
certain crowd, who steer you in the appropriate direction. This is a
subtle but telling line.
"You could meet somebody who really loves you..." Nice, ironic line. As if
you can find love in a bar...
"You stand on your own...want to die." Nothing overt there, but there's
nothing that terribly overt in a lot of Oscar Wilde either, and we all
know what he was on about.
> But this could equally be applied to him going to a club to find someone,
> or summat... If you want to read something into that line, then that's my
> point: there are so many interpretations of Smiths songs...
There are, but most of them are wrong.
There is nothing blatantly 'gay' in this song, that I concede. It's not
like he is singing "I want to get buggered / nineteen ways to next
December / by an Ozzie-rules rugby player / with a body by Bombardier /
and a pecker by Black and Decker." But he doesn't need to. Does this song
(and much of the Morrissey canon) make more sense if you bear in mind the
question "Is the persona lonely?" or "Is the persona lonely and gay?"
Guess which side of that question I come down on.
Graham Robertson
Wallace J.McLean (ag...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
> Johnny Marr (wadh...@sable.ox.ac.uk) writes:
>
>> Where are there any clues to him being gay rather than merely being shy,
>> going to a club hoping to find the girl/boy of his dreams and not being
>> able to communicate with anyone? There is the line:
>
> [snippo]
>
> Let's survey the song.
>
> (CUT)
> "...just like everybody else does." Everybody else. The rest of the world.
> The nice, normal, straight people.
>
>>> It is known that Morrissey is a reclusive person, and often fights
>>> with people. You are putting the words in his mouth. "...just like
>>> everybody else does." Could mean just what it says, maybe Mozz means to
>>> say that in the sense that "everyone else" has found sucess at what
>>> they're looking for, unlike he has.
>
> (CUT)
>
>> But this could equally be applied to him going to a club to find someone,
>> or summat... If you want to read something into that line, then that's my
>> point: there are so many interpretations of Smiths songs...
>
> There are, but most of them are wrong.
>
>>> Yes, there are many interpretations of smiths songs, but who are you
>>> to say what ones are "right" or "wrong" That's just the thing, and
>>> interpretation can't be right or wrong. The very word
>>> "interpretation" refers to reading something out of the song, I.E.
>>> making assumptions based upon where you think the word lead. There is
>>> rarely only one interpretation to a song. I think it's ok to interpret
>>> things as long as you don't assume that you're thinking exactly what Mozz
>>> was trying to say
>>> when he wrote the song. This makes you much like a journalist, and Mozz
>>> hates journalists (just listen to JOURNALISTS WHO LIE)
> There is nothing blatantly 'gay' in this song, that I concede. It's not
>
>>> I have to agree %100 with this guy, there is nothing blatantly gay in
>>> the song. Once a journalist clamied that Mozz was gay and he said
>>> something to the effect of "It's just wishful thinking."
>>> People should read the interviews from "THE CEMETRY GATES"
>>> (http://www.public.iastate.edu/~moz) before they argue, because when you
>>> argue you should at least know the facts!
>
> like he is singing "I want to get
buggered / nineteen ways to next
> December / by an Ozzie-rules rugby player / with a body by Bombardier /
> and a pecker by Black and Decker." But he doesn't need to. Does this song
> (and much of the Morrissey canon) make more sense if you bear in mind the
> question "Is the persona lonely?" or "Is the persona lonely and gay?"
> Guess which side of that question I come down on.
>
> --
> This message has been tested on live animals.
>>> I just have to say that this argument is rather frivolous, and people
>>> shouldn't try to change other peoples minds, because why should someone
>>> else think the same way as you just because you think you are right?
>>> Sooner or later, no matter how good you are, someone will think of you
>>> as a bug, and before you know it, you're gone, so what good is it eh?
>>> My two cents.
spitfire thrill
On 21 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> southpaw thrill (ball...@coyote.csusm.edu) writes:
> > On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> >
> >> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
> >> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
> >> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
> >> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
> >> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
> >> whether you wish to concede it or not.
> > Explain.
> LISTEN. Concentrate.
You can't make a point can you? Take a writing class and learn how to
support your claims with evidence.
Robert5107
Gay people are constantly being accused of being pedophiles by bigots.
The song is lovely and is not about anything so immoral, so please get
your heads out of your asses! You're reading crap into a beautiful song,
how dare you!
Kent C. Burt
spitfire thrill <ball...@coyote.csusm.edu> writes:
>On 21 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
>> southpaw thrill (ball...@coyote.csusm.edu) writes:
>> > On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
>> >
>> >> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
>> >> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
>> >> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
>> >> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
>> >> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
>> >> whether you wish to concede it or not.
>> > Explain.
>> LISTEN. Concentrate.
>You can't make a point can you? Take a writing class and learn how to
>support your claims with evidence.
You know, I bet that all of us queerfolk on the list don't need evidence
to support what Wallace is saying. If you can't see the gay subtext in
Smiths songs you are just deluding yourself. I mean, have you ever
listened to "This Charming Man?" Have you listened to the way the
characters speak to each other? Straight men don't talk to each other
that way, darling, I'm sorry. And even the *way* Morrissey says "la la la
la la this CHAAAAAAARRRRMMMIIINNGGG man!" with such a wistful air. Girl,
open your eyes.
There are countless other examples of this sort of thing. Take a song
like "These Things Take Time" - what sex do you assume the principles
involved are? What does "I'm spellbound **but a woman divides**" mean?
(emphasis mine)
What sex is the lover he never had in "I Know It's Over?"
What kind of "boys" are being spoken to in "The QUEEN is Dead?" Why are
they out "on a limb?" Could this be a reference to lineage and family
trees? And if they are alone/lonely on this limb of their proverbial tree
does that not mean that there is no spouse listed there? Perhaps the
family is ready to cut this limb from the tree...? This "on a limb" also
has the double-meaning of referring to people going against the grain -
against society. How are they doing that? Why does the protagonist want
to discuss "castration?" How has he been castrated? Why? (For the
record, I say that "limb" could refer to a family tree because earlier in
the song he mentions looking into his lineage and discovering he is a
descendent of "some old queen or other." So he has been thinking about
this sort of thing. The allusion is not as far-fetched as it may seem.)
What on earth do you think "What Difference Does It Make?" is about?!?!
How it can be viewed as anything other than a coming-out-session-gone-bad
is beyond me.
Lines like "shove me on the patio" are rather suggestive, don't you think?
No? How abaout "pin and mount me like a butterfly?" Nothing suggestive
there...?
Why is the character in "Pretty Girls Make Graves" "too delicate?" How
has "Nature played this trick on [him]?" Do you know that this line
quotes a homosexual character in the film _Victim_?
"I Don't Owe You Anything" certainly paints a striking picture of the kind
of code used to identify attraction when cruising ("A nod was the first
step"). It seems to me to concern a closet homosexual who acts on his
true feelings in a drunken state (bought on stolen wine) and then when it
comes down to, you know, really *acting* on them he hesitates. "But," the
speaker claims, "you owe me something" - you came to me.
There are so many other examples - "William It Was Really Nothing," "A
Rush And A Push And The Land Is Ours," "Vicar In A Tutu," etc.
Perhaps Wallace can follow up with more.
- Kent
--
Will I still be soiled when the dirt is off...?
spitfire thrill
On 23 Aug 1996, Kent C. Burt wrote:
> spitfire thrill <ball...@coyote.csusm.edu> writes:
> >On 21 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> >> southpaw thrill (ball...@coyote.csusm.edu) writes:
> >> > On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> >> >> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
> >> >> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
> >> >> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
> >> >> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
> >> >> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
> >> >> whether you wish to concede it or not.
> >> > Explain.
> >> LISTEN. Concentrate.
> >You can't make a point can you? Take a writing class and learn how to
> >support your claims with evidence.
>
> You know, I bet that all of us queerfolk on the list don't need evidence
> to support what Wallace is saying. If you can't see the gay subtext in
If you don't have evidence then your words are meaningless (as usual.)
> Smiths songs you are just deluding yourself. I mean, have you ever
I never said I didn't see any "gay" subtext in Smiths songs. Uh oh! Kent's
high horse has gotten out of the barn!
> listened to "This Charming Man?" Have you listened to the way the
If you remember, this discussion about "How Soon Is Now." If you are
trying to compare it to "This Charming Man" then you aren't doing a very
good job.
> characters speak to each other? Straight men don't talk to each other
> that way, darling, I'm sorry. And even the *way* Morrissey says "la la la
First of all, Morrissey doesn't label anyone "gay" or "straight." He
doesn't even believe that people are 100% of either one. So are you
trying to say only a pure "gay" man could say to another man, "It's
gruesome that someone so handsome should care." I disagree. A lot of
practising hetereosexuals say those kind of things to other men. Just
listen to Love Line, every night Adam Corrola tells Dr. Drew how handsome
he is. Guess you're wrong (again.)
> la la this CHAAAAAAARRRRMMMIIINNGGG man!" with such a wistful air. Girl,
> open your eyes.
Don't call me girl, I find it sexist and offensive. And I'm sick of this
homosexist attitude of yours. Like only "gay" men can talk with a
"wistful air." You need to get out more!
> There are countless other examples of this sort of thing. Take a song
What "sort of thing"? That Morrissey writes songs that are sexually
ambiguous? I don't think anyone who listens to the Smiths could've
possibly missed that. You are insulting everyone's intelligence here.
> like "These Things Take Time" - what sex do you assume the principles
^^^
Do you mean gender?
> involved are? What does "I'm spellbound **but a woman divides**" mean?
> (emphasis mine)
Why don't you tell us.
> What sex is the lover he never had in "I Know It's Over?"
Gender you mean. Which lover are you referring to? There's the speaker,
(Morrissey), the groom, and the bride.
> What kind of "boys" are being spoken to in "The QUEEN is Dead?" Why are
> they out "on a limb?" Could this be a reference to lineage and family
> trees? And if they are alone/lonely on this limb of their proverbial tree
> does that not mean that there is no spouse listed there? Perhaps the
> family is ready to cut this limb from the tree...? This "on a limb" also
> has the double-meaning of referring to people going against the grain -
> against society. How are they doing that? Why does the protagonist want
> to discuss "castration?" How has he been castrated? Why? (For the
> record, I say that "limb" could refer to a family tree because earlier in
> the song he mentions looking into his lineage and discovering he is a
> descendent of "some old queen or other." So he has been thinking about
> this sort of thing. The allusion is not as far-fetched as it may seem.)
Good interpretation, but why must you bang a mallet on the table? The
song isn't exactly black and white.
> What on earth do you think "What Difference Does It Make?" is about?!?!
> How it can be viewed as anything other than a coming-out-session-gone-bad
> is beyond me.
Well, presonally I think the song is an advocation of indifference to
overcome obsession. Again the song does not specify gender.
> Lines like "shove me on the patio" are rather suggestive, don't you think?
It suggests physical abuse. Anything else must be inferred.
> No? How abaout "pin and mount me like a butterfly?" Nothing suggestive
> there...?
So you are relating killing a butterfly and displaying it to....?
> Why is the character in "Pretty Girls Make Graves" "too delicate?" How
> has "Nature played this trick on [him]?" Do you know that this line
> quotes a homosexual character in the film _Victim_?
So? What's your point? You are asking me all these questions yet you are
not making a statement. I'm bored of answering your petty questions. You
want to make an arugment then explain your citations! Sheesh, did you go
to college?
Wallace J.McLean
Get a grip of your bird, aol-boy. There is a big difference between saying:
Person X wrote a song about child molestation.
and
Person X is a child molester.
I wrote a poem once about being a seagull.
Incidentally, for a thoughful post on the subject in question, read the
one Kent Burt put up yesterday.
Kent C. Burt
Thrill wrote:
>On 23 Aug 1996, Kent C. Burt wrote:
>> You know, I bet that all of us queerfolk on the list don't need
>> evidence to support what Wallace is saying.
> If you don't have evidence then your words are meaningless (as usual.)
What I was trying to say, Thrill, is that some of us don't need Wallace to
point out what is so blatantly obvious to us. For the benefit of those
who do not see a gay subtext in Smiths lyrics, I attempted to highlight
some instances from a variety of songs which suggest a queer sensibility.
I do believe that qualified as "evidence." You may have not liked the way
I presented said evidence, but it was evidence nonetheless.
If I may interject a personal attack, as you are so often wont to do, it
seems that "evidence" is your new word of the day, following past crowd-
pleasers such as "harass," "stalker," "sexist," and "murder." I am
beginning to think that you see alt.music.smiths as a mystery novel.
> I never said I didn't see any "gay" subtext in Smiths songs.
If you see a gay subtext in Smiths songs, why on earth do you need someone
to provide "evidence?"
> Uh oh! Kent's high horse has gotten out of the barn!
As opposed to you, for whom one would have to build the barn around to
ever get the horse inside.
>> listened to "This Charming Man?" Have you listened to the way the
> If you remember, this discussion about "How Soon Is Now." If you are
> trying to compare it to "This Charming Man" then you aren't doing a very
> good job.
Wallace had already discussed "How Soon Is Now?" quite admirably and I saw
no reason to retread the ground he had covered with his mare. I galloped
down other pastures so as to prove that a gay subtext exists in many
different songs by the Smiths.
>> characters speak to each other? Straight men don't talk to each other
>> that way, darling, I'm sorry. And even the *way* Morrissey says "la la
> First of all, Morrissey doesn't label anyone "gay" or "straight." He
> doesn't even believe that people are 100% of either one.
Well, I am sorry to disagree with the omniscient one, but I am firmly 100%
homosexual with no heterosexual leanings whatsoever. He is wrong.
> So are you
> trying to say only a pure "gay" man could say to another man, "It's
> gruesome that someone so handsome should care."
In the context of the song "This Charming Man," yes I am. Let's survey
the situation - the speaker has a flat tire on a hillside. A man stops
his car to give him a ride. Suddenly the speaker is suggesting that he
cannot go out tonight because he hasn't "got a stitch to wear." He
wouldn't be saying this if the "charming man" hadn't asked him to go out.
And what is the man's reaction to the speaker's refusal to go out? "It's
gruesome that someone so handsome should care." So, we have one charming
man asking a handsome man to go out. That sounds like cruising to me -
one man cruising another.
> I disagree. A lot of
> practising hetereosexuals say those kind of things to other men. Just
> listen to Love Line, every night Adam Corrola tells Dr. Drew how
> handsome he is. Guess you're wrong (again.)
And what is the context in which this is said? Had Dr. Drew just asked
Adam to go out? I didn't think so. You can take anything out of context
and try to make it seem like reason, Thrill. You are a master at that.
For the record, not everyone on this newsgroup lives in California and
recieves KROQ so as to hear _Love Line_. Don't be so ethnocentric.
>> la la this CHAAAAAAARRRRMMMIIINNGGG man!" with such a wistful air.
>> Girl, open your eyes.
> Don't call me girl, I find it sexist and offensive.
I'm afraid that it was not meant in any sexist way whatsoever. As I
mentioned to you via private e-mail, acting "campy" has been an integral
part of gay culture for centuries. Using the word "girl" is not a
put-down of women, but an exploration of femininity. We are all girls -
all equal. I'm a girl. You're a girl. Wallace is a girl. Morrissey is
a girl. What, do you want me to suppress my culture just so as not to
offend you? I find that offensive and homophobic.
Morrissey has oft used the word "girl." I don't see you calling him
sexist, even when he is being that way (see "William It Was Really
Nothing," "Rusholme Ruffians," and especially "Pretty Girls Make Graves
with the awfully incriminating line "I've lost my faith in womanhood.").
> And I'm sick of this > homosexist attitude of yours.
Calling me "homosexist" is such poppycock. Provide some evidence for this
slander, sister. (Is "sister" sexist? I've been calling my sister "my
sister" for 24 years and I'd hate to think I've been sexist toward her all
this time.)
> Like only "gay" men can talk with a "wistful air."
In retrospect, "wistful" was not exactly the best choice of words.
"Tremendously exhilarated" would have been more appropriate. Once again,
in the context of the song as described above, saying "this chaaaarrrming
man" the way Morrissey does is the auditory equivalent of swooning. This
charming man has made the handsome man weak at the knees. *sigh*
> You need to get out more!
I'm out! (any other _Caroline In The City_ fans out there??! 8)
>> There are countless other examples of this sort of thing. Take a song
> What "sort of thing"? That Morrissey writes songs that are sexually
> ambiguous? I don't think anyone who listens to the Smiths could've
> possibly missed that. You are insulting everyone's intelligence here.
Oh, Morrissey's songs are about as sexually ambiguous as RuPaul. And I
doubt that I am insulting you - you'd need intelligence for that. As for
what I was referring to by "that sort of thing," naturally I meant "songs
with a gay subtext." I'm sorry if you had trouble remembering what my
post was about.
>> like "These Things Take Time" - what sex do you assume the principles
^^^
>Do you mean gender?
No, I meant the biological maleness or femaleness of the characters
involved - i.e., their sex. If I were discussing the cultural
expectations placed on masculinity and femininity (i.e., gender, or gender
roles), I would have said that. Perhaps you should take a course on the
psychology of sex and gender roles - it might help clear up those
definitions. Oh right - sorry, they don't teach those things in
pre-school. I guess you'll have to wait.
>> involved are? What does "I'm spellbound **but a woman divides**" mean?
>> (emphasis mine)
> Why don't you tell us.
Because I wanted you to think about it yourself. It means he is
spellbound by a man who is involved with a woman - the speaker sees her as
the obstacle keeping him from "his" man.
>> What sex is the lover he never had in "I Know It's Over?"
> Gender you mean. Which lover are you referring to? There's the speaker,
> (Morrissey), the groom, and the bride.
Don't tell me what I mean. And obviously by "the lover he [the speaker]
never had" I meant the groom - because THAT is to whom he is singing. The
bride is always mentioned in the third person. It is the groom who is the
"you" of "Love is Natural and Real/but not for such as you and I my love."
[my interpretation of various lines from "The Queen Is Dead" deleted]
> Good interpretation, but why must you bang a mallet on the table? The
> song isn't exactly black and white.
Obviously, if I am stating my interpretation then it is black and white
for me.
>> What on earth do you think "What Difference Does It Make?" is about?!?!
>> How it can be viewed as anything other than a
>> coming-out-session-gone-bad is beyond me.
> Well, presonally I think the song is an advocation of indifference to
> overcome obsession. Again the song does not specify gender.
The song advocates "indifference to overcome obsession?" And I guess
"Interesting Drug" is a dissertation on the Columbian drug wars? Give me
a break, Thrill. You can't have made it through college this far with no
greater ability for analysis than that. You're going to make a smashing
journalist, Thrill.
>> Lines like "shove me on the patio" are rather suggestive, don't you
>> think?
> It suggests physical abuse. Anything else must be inferred.
No, Thrill, it doesn't suggest abuse. It suggests some sort of sexual
act. Do people really see worth in those who want to beat them up? They
want to spend fifteen minutes with this sort of person? They whine
because this person did not want them to take him to bed? What kind of
reasoning is that? It shows a complete lack of reason, I say. No victim
of abuse calls his/her abuser "the bee's knees." The song is not about
physical abuse. It doesn't make any sense.
>> No? How abaout "pin and mount me like a butterfly?" Nothing
>> suggestive there...?
> So you are relating killing a butterfly and displaying it to....?
In the context of the song, Thrill, being pinned and mounted is referring
to, well, being pinned and mounted for sexual play. What else are we to
think when he follows this with "but take me to the haven of your bed/was
something that you never said?"
>> Why is the character in "Pretty Girls Make Graves" "too delicate?" How
>> has "Nature played this trick on [him]?" Do you know that this line
>> quotes a homosexual character in the film _Victim_?
> So? What's your point?
My point is Morrissey uses a lot of references to queer culture in his
songs and on record sleeves - Oscar Wilde, Sheilagh Delaney's _A Taste Of
Honey_, _Victim_, Truman Capote, drag queen Candy Darling, etc. etc. etc.!
> You are asking me all these questions yet you are
> not making a statement. I'm bored of answering your petty questions. You
> want to make an arugment then explain your citations!
I just did. What do you have to say now?
> Sheesh, did you go to college?
I did. The question is, should you be bothering?
Tim Sorrell
Morrissey has quite often said that what he writes about is not
necessarily about himself. Who says that he has to sing from the male
point of view? Why the obsession with whether he is gay/not gay? He's
said himself that he is in fact neither. This whole thread is
interesting, but ultimately pointless. Face it, Morrissey's lyrics, like
the man himself, are contradictory and tell us little or nothing about
him. OK?
As for child molestation, I always thought that "The hand that rocks the
cradle" was just a song that was supposed to evoke in the listener a
feeling of impending violence. It seems to me to be a kind of reverse
lullaby, wherein the "reassuring" hand on the cradle is in fact
threatening. Why does it have to be child abuse, and not simply a good
old murder?
Just a thought
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Sorrell - e/mail: tps...@york.ac.uk
website: http://www.york.ac.uk/~tps101/
"I talk to God but the sky is empty" Sylvia Plath
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Sorrell
What gives you the God given right of interpretation over what a lyric
does or does not mean, Kent?
Why are you constantly saying that thrill is wrong and you are right. Arse.
I know it's a radical thought, but could you be wrong? It's tempting to say
that you have allowed your sexual orientation to colour your interpretation of
the lyrics. (And that doesn't make me homophobic either)
r.e. This Charming Man. Maybe we leap from a man with a puncture being
picked up by some other bloke to "I haven't got a stitch to wear" because
Morrissey glued 2 lyrical fragments together to fit Marr's tune? Why
should the lyric have to make sense anyway? Morrissey isn't an
infallible lyricist: "Your boyfriend got down on one knee/ could it be
he's only got one knee?" Brilliant. Any gay subtexts in that one?
How about being a bit more open minded about what other people think
lyrics mean? thrill's right to ask for evidence, and it's not her word
of the week, BTW, she's been saying it to everyone for years. You're
entitled to your opinion, but everyone else is entitled to theirs. I don't
swallow (no pun intended) your arguments, I'm afraid. That, of course, doesn't
invalidate your point of view, but then, that's the point of tolerance
isn't it?
Carolyn
well, looks like
40 - 15
to kent..........
;-)))
Kent C. Burt
Tim Sorrell <tps...@york.ac.uk> writes:
>What gives you the God given right of interpretation over what a lyric
>does or does not mean, Kent?
I think I am permitted to offer my viewpoint. And you are permitted to
disagree. Perhaps my post was a little vicious, but that tends to happen
when one is attacked online (did you go to university? etc.) as I have
constantly been by Thrill since the days of the Bigmouth mailing list.
>Why are you constantly saying that thrill is wrong and you are right. Arse.
>I know it's a radical thought, but could you be wrong? It's tempting to say
You know, it's one thing to say a song is about something, but it's quite
another to really look at a song and offer an interpretation. Christ, if
Thrill wants to believe that "Reel Around The Fountain" is about abuse,
then more power to her. I'd rather believe it is about something
plausible.
This kind of nonsense always comes up on this newsgroup whenever anyone
attempts to really get inside a Smiths song. I didn't say my
interpretation of any song was the be all and end all. Believe what you
want - I don't really care.
>that you have allowed your sexual orientation to colour your interpretation of
>the lyrics. (And that doesn't make me homophobic either)
No? And what does it make you, pal? How about if I were black and you
said that was colouring my interpretation of the lyrics? Or jewish?
Wallace is straight, and he sees these songs in a similar light. You
don't have to be gay to see the songs this way.
Furthermore, it's not like I said every Smiths song has a gay subtext -
just some of them, and quite a lot of the early songs.
>r.e. This Charming Man. Maybe we leap from a man with a puncture being
>picked up by some other bloke to "I haven't got a stitch to wear" because
>Morrissey glued 2 lyrical fragments together to fit Marr's tune? Why
>should the lyric have to make sense anyway?
But the lyric does make sense. It does fit together. If you think that
Morrissey - who was weaned on the androgyny of the New York Dolls and
David Bowie - doesn't know what kind of impression these lyrics make when
fitted together and sung by a man, you are seriously demeaning his
ability as a songwriter. And besides that, why on earth would being
picked up on a hillside warrant having a song written about it? That's a
fairly banal incident - not at all the life-changing sort of thing that
seems to go on in the song. So I can only assume that the bloke gave the
speaker a little more than a lift.
>Morrissey isn't an
>infallible lyricist: "Your boyfriend got down on one knee/ could it be
>he's only got one knee?" Brilliant. Any gay subtexts in that one?
That was uncalled for and it wasn't funny. And for the record, I haven't
listened to that song enough to know what the rest of the lyrics are to
interpret them. AND, I reiterate, I did not say that every Smiths/
Morrissey song has a gay subtext.
>How about being a bit more open minded about what other people think
>lyrics mean? thrill's right to ask for evidence, and it's not her word
>of the week, BTW, she's been saying it to everyone for years. You're
>entitled to your opinion, but everyone else is entitled to theirs.
I never said they weren't. I'd just like to see a bit of logic in them.
>I don't swallow (no pun intended) your arguments, I'm afraid.
Again, you are not being funny. But kudos for trying.
>That, of course, doesn't
>invalidate your point of view, but then, that's the point of tolerance
>isn't it?
"Tolerance." Clever. But I don't believe in it, myself. I'm more for
acceptance.
I can't believe you are saying this about Thrill, who has absolutely no
tolerance for anyone else's viewpoint, who leaps at the opportunity to say
something is wrong because Morrissey said *this* or *that*, and, when
offering her interpretation of a song, provides precious little evidence
to support her point of view. At least I can back up the things I say.
If she can tell me why she thinks a song is about whatever and make it
logical, then I'll accept it.
Carolyn
sigh! whatever happened to people's sense of humour??!!
In article <Pine.SGI.3.91.960827...@tower.york.ac.uk>, Tim Sorrell <tps...@york.ac.uk> writes:
> What gives you the God given right of interpretation over what a lyric
> does or does not mean, Kent?
>
> Why are you constantly saying that thrill is wrong and you are right. Arse.
> I know it's a radical thought, but could you be wrong? It's tempting to say
> that you have allowed your sexual orientation to colour your interpretation of
> the lyrics. (And that doesn't make me homophobic either)
>
> r.e. This Charming Man. Maybe we leap from a man with a puncture being
> picked up by some other bloke to "I haven't got a stitch to wear" because
> Morrissey glued 2 lyrical fragments together to fit Marr's tune? Why
> should the lyric have to make sense anyway? Morrissey isn't an
> infallible lyricist: "Your boyfriend got down on one knee/ could it be
> he's only got one knee?" Brilliant. Any gay subtexts in that one?
>
> How about being a bit more open minded about what other people think
> lyrics mean? thrill's right to ask for evidence, and it's not her word
> of the week, BTW, she's been saying it to everyone for years. You're
> entitled to your opinion, but everyone else is entitled to theirs. I don't
> swallow (no pun intended) your arguments, I'm afraid. That, of course, doesn't
> invalidate your point of view, but then, that's the point of tolerance
> isn't it?
>
spitfire thrill
On 29 Aug 1996, Carolyn wrote:
> sigh! whatever happened to people's sense of humour??!!
Are you trying to say that Kent was trying to be comedic? Guess again!
thrill
[1;33m
spitfire thrill
On 28 Aug 1996, Kent C. Burt wrote:
> This kind of nonsense always comes up on this newsgroup whenever anyone
> attempts to really get inside a Smiths song. I didn't say my
> interpretation of any song was the be all and end all. Believe what you
> want - I don't really care.
Your every claim about a song was a rhetorical question as if all the
answers were obvious--and they were all YOUR answers. You just forgot to
explain or support them. You talk down to people who believe Smiths songs
can be more than gay. That's why I said you were homosexist, budd.
> I can't believe you are saying this about Thrill, who has absolutely no
> tolerance for anyone else's viewpoint, who leaps at the opportunity to say
> something is wrong because Morrissey said *this* or *that*, and, when
> offering her interpretation of a song, provides precious little evidence
> to support her point of view.
Can you cite any evidence for those claims?
> At least I can back up the things I say.
If you can then why don't you?
> If she can tell me why she thinks a song is about whatever and make it
> logical, then I'll accept it.
I am secure enough to not have to put a label of sexuality on Smiths
songs. Smiths lyrics never alienated anyone, but you have.
thrill
Kent C. Burt
spitfire thrill <ball...@coyote.csusm.edu> writes:
>On 29 Aug 1996, Carolyn wrote:
>> sigh! whatever happened to people's sense of humour??!!
>Are you trying to say that Kent was trying to be comedic? Guess again!
Just to clear this up...
Thrill, I am touched that you care enough to try to decipher my
intentions, or that you think you know me well enough to be able to say
what my intentions were, but I must admit that I was, indeed, trying to be
comedic in parts of my post - see the section on "Reel Around The
Fountain" in particular.
- Kent
--
"After a heated exchange
the thought of another woman
touching you
gets my back up" - Carole Pope
Kent C. Burt
Well, I put off responding to this for days because I just didn't want to
get into it with Thrill again so quickly - and now I find that Wallace has
followed up her post for me (thanks) rather well, so I'll just go with the
points not yet covered.
spitfire thrill <ball...@coyote.csusm.edu> writes:
>You talk down to people who believe Smiths songs
>can be more than gay. That's why I said you were homosexist, budd.
I talk down to people who say things that are idiotic - that is all. As
Wallace said, I don't think *every* Smiths song has a gay (male) subtext,
but a lot of them do. This doesn't mean that someone can't look at the
songs as being sung by a man to a woman, or a woman to a man/woman,
because we all do feel the same emotions and it is the emotions in the
songs that endear them to us, not the sex of the speaker/love interest/
f*ck buddy/whatever. That is why I can listen to something like "Glory"
by Liz Phair which is about a woman having cunnilingus performed on her by
a man and still enjoy/relate to/love the song even though it is about
something completely alien to me. There's a personal meaning as well as a
literal translation. I try to look at songs both ways.
I said:
>> I can't believe you are saying this about Thrill, who has absolutely no
>> tolerance for anyone else's viewpoint, who leaps at the opportunity to say
>> something is wrong because Morrissey said *this* or *that*, and, when
>> offering her interpretation of a song, provides precious little evidence
>> to support her point of view.
>Can you cite any evidence for those claims?
Well, if you mean can I quote something from one of your previous posts -
no I cannot. I do not have the diskspace, nor the sad inclination to save
every post that you make to this newsgroup when they are barely worth
reading the first go-round IMHO. But I think anyone who has seen a fair
number of your posts in the past can understand why I said what I did
above.
>> If she can tell me why she thinks a song is about whatever and make it
>> logical, then I'll accept it.
>I am secure enough to not have to put a label of sexuality on Smiths
>songs. Smiths lyrics never alienated anyone, but you have.
Who have I alienated and how? Where's the oh-so-precious evidence now?
fatno...@gmail.com
> spitfire thrill <ball...@coyote.csusm.edu> writes:
>
>
> >> southpaw thrill (ball...@coyote.csusm.edu) writes:
> >> > On 19 Aug 1996, Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> ...then why can't you read a little QueerCon into "How Soon is Now?" ?
> >> >> Incidentally, I don't think it can be described as a "coming out of the
> >> >> closet" storyline (or even a storyline, for that matter, there aren't many
> >> >> Morrissey lyrics with plots, he's not a white trash Nashville 'artist').
> >> >> But there is definitely a gay subtext and slant that that lyric takes,
> >> >> whether you wish to concede it or not.
> >> > Explain.
> >> LISTEN. Concentrate.
>
> >You can't make a point can you? Take a writing class and learn how to
> >support your claims with evidence.
>
> open your eyes.
>
> (emphasis mine)
>
>
> they out "on a limb?" Could this be a reference to lineage and family
> trees? And if they are alone/lonely on this limb of their proverbial tree
> does that not mean that there is no spouse listed there? Perhaps the
> family is ready to cut this limb from the tree...? This "on a limb" also
> has the double-meaning of referring to people going against the grain -
> against society. How are they doing that? Why does the protagonist want
> to discuss "castration?" How has he been castrated? Why? (For the
> record, I say that "limb" could refer to a family tree because earlier in
> the song he mentions looking into his lineage and discovering he is a
> descendent of "some old queen or other." So he has been thinking about
> this sort of thing. The allusion is not as far-fetched as it may seem.)
>
> How it can be viewed as anything other than a coming-out-session-gone-bad
> is beyond me.
>
> there...?
>
> has "Nature played this trick on [him]?" Do you know that this line
> quotes a homosexual character in the film _Victim_?
>
> of code used to identify attraction when cruising ("A nod was the first
> step"). It seems to me to concern a closet homosexual who acts on his
> true feelings in a drunken state (bought on stolen wine) and then when it
> comes down to, you know, really *acting* on them he hesitates. "But," the
> speaker claims, "you owe me something" - you came to me.
>
> There are so many other examples - "William It Was Really Nothing," "A
> Rush And A Push And The Land Is Ours," "Vicar In A Tutu," etc.
>
> Perhaps Wallace can follow up with more.
>
> --
>
> Will I still be soiled when the dirt is off...?
I totally agree with your interpretations Kent. In fact, I'd love to hear your interpretations for every one of The Smiths/Morrisseys songs because you've nailed every one so far (in my opinion).
By the way, isn't 'blood on the cleaver' a metaphor for something...else?
I do think people get aggressive when faced with the fact they've been kind of lied to about his songs. It is dishonest in a way. William was never about marriage advise to a straight couple. Shoplifters wasn't about shoplifting. The Thatcher hatred wasn't for her policy on pit closures etc etc.