"November Spawned a Monster" what's up with this song?

Morrissey was condemned for wrapping himself in a union jack at a live concert. But Primal Scream were not condemned for putting the confederate flag, a much more 'rightist' symbol, on their 'Give Out, But Don't Give Up' album sleeve. Later, the same journalists invented 'Britpop', which used the union jack at every opportunity.

Morrissey's comments on the encroachment of globalism -- 'We are the last truly English people you will ever know' -- were considered suspiciously rightist, but when Billy Bragg later picked up the same theme it was seen as leftist, a logical extension of the identity politics of racial minorities to the white English themselves.

Morrissey was condemned for his aesthetic conservatism -- for not, for instance, jumping onto the dance bandwagon in the early 90s, sticking instead stubbornly to guitars. Certainly he didn't make things easy for himself by declaring reggae 'vile', but we have to ask if any reggae artists were chided for failing to incorporate indie rock music into their style, and whether their dislike of other music genres would have been held against them as a sign of their reactionary politics?

It was all too often assumed that because Morrissey depicted the difficulties of Asian immigrants in the UK he was anti-immigration. This is like saying that anyone who writes a sad song about problems and disappointments in love is anti-love. And all the artists who fail to depict a Britain in which ethnic minorities, especially Asian ones, even exist at all, they're morally better, right?

Asian Rut depicts an Asian boy who has come to avenge the racially-motivated killing of his friend. But he in turn is beaten up. A disgusted Morrissey editorialises:

'I'm just passing through here
On my way to somewhere civilised
And maybe I'll even arrive
Maybe I'll even arrive'

The statement could be the Asian boy's, or it could be his own. There's no reason why either of them should feel at home in England.

'According to the garbled and inaccurate article [in The Sun newspaper] the track in question was entitled 'Handsome Devil' - and it contained "clear references to picking up kids for sexual kicks". When questioned by The Sun about his "controversial lyrics" Morrissey is reported as saying "I don't feel immoral singing about molesting children."

'What man would sign his own death warrant thus?.. Following the spot-the-pervert accusations in The Sun, Sounds ran a damning indictment of the band in their gossip colum Jaws - penned by none other than Garry Bushell, a fervent enemy of the Mancunian quartet.'

Morrissey is quite right: it is not inherently immoral to sing about child molestation, any more than it is racist to sing about racial problems.

Anyone who knows British journalism knows that the name Garry Bushell is synonymous with the populist right, Morrissey's true enemies.

I, along with the majority of people on the planet, no longer have any interest whatsoever in Morrissey (I never did have) but I have enjoyed Momus' defence of the old tart, all of which strikes me as being totally OTM until this last part about "reggae artists" - when did U Roy ever say "all indie music is vile"?

Morrissey became used to this kind of taunting, but at a certain point he decided to stop being drawn. So there's a marked difference between Morrissey in the 1983 article I link above, making a strong condemnation of child abuse, spelling out for the 'hard of thinking' what the song was about, and the later Morrissey, who refused to spell out the meanings of his Asian songs, preferring to leave their ambiguities intact.

In fact, it's his refusal to give interviews that was in fact the final straw for the NME, pushing them (in a well-documented editorial meeting) to do a hatchet job on him.

WTF?

Jim: That's very interesting! So we can see Morrissey as the ideological architect of Britpop, a kind of prophet who had to be killed in order to let the religion thrive? Why not? I mean, what would Christianity be like if Christ were still around to tell the Pope 'That's not what I meant at all!'

This Morrissey slain for Britpop argument is spot on: Smiths have been used totemistically by Blur (Graham Coxon caught the 'Hang The DJ' noose at their last gig and said in their South Bank show that it was kind of like being passed the baton), Suede, Oasis (they were signed to their management because J. Marr's brother Ian was friends with Liam G and yeah do share the 2G Irishness thing, v. significant) and in content terms Pulp are Smiths plus sex. Which is why Morrissey hates Jarvis so. Morrissey also 'did' Riot Grrrl-style feminism with Linder *well* before groups in both America and Britain (and in fact even before C Love was dosing Liverpool bands with LSD) and early interviews - the last time music writers seemed capable of discussing such things with intelligence and rational lack of hyperbole - made a great deal of him reading Molly Haskell and Andrea Dworkin. It suggests as well some kind of aversion to all forms of violence as cruel, invasive, or lacking in dignity (but in the case of bits of rough of whatever race or sexuality, who display other violence, you get the OMG HOTT!!! response immediately followed by a distancing through lapsed-Catholic guilt).

Morrissey is in a long line of 2G Irish writers (back to the equally sexless Shaw, Wilde) who engage with the Englishness of their day (or that of the recent past) as a form of social critique, especially in terms of social mores and the hypocritical handling of same by the establishment and more humble individuals alike.

Also in terms of criticism of Morrissey for having such a narrow aesthetic, you've got to remember that he is an autodidact. You can see how an interest in James Dean, radfem, glamour/squalor juxtaposition (classic schizoid stuff; you're simultaneously too good and not good enough), sexual ambiguity and pop as romance might actually produce a person engaged with his exact interests.

Hands up anyone who isn't an autodidact?

No matter what "it" is about, taking "truly English" to mean "100% English ancestors" is not good.

I know about Morrissey's background. I live in an area of London where a large minority (possibly even a majority) of the residents are first or second generation immigrants. I'm not wandering round saying those people are not "truly English". You seem to be.

Look Dadaismus the sort of message board I want to be on is the sort where if posters make what look like clumsy or unfortunate statements on sensitive issues it's possible to talk about that. I have a problem with people taking 'truly English' to mean '100% English ancestry' (as if there's any such thing) as you did upthread. I would have preferred it if you had wanted to talk about that and I'm sorry for my part in any fighting. Interweb fighting's rubbish.

Of course H managed to leave out the qualifiers 'often' and 'in a sense' when he quoted my statement, therefore making a caveat-laden cravat into a blanket big enough to fall asleep beneath.

...which is where we came in I think. OK fighting is stupid, jumping to conclusions about people is equally as stupid but if you can't detect any irony in Morrissey's "Englishness" then you don't really know much about Morrissey or growing up "Irish" in England or Britain.

""My Irishness was never something I hid," says Morrissey. "I was called Paddy from an early age. It was always odd later on with The Smiths when I was described as being extremely English, because other people would tell me that I looked Irish, sounded Irish."

And he did, he did.

PS. That line is 'The last truly British people you will ever know', not 'English'.