|
Befitting
a band verging on greatness, the Smiths have a keen sense of their own
history.
In its annals are recorded such celebrated moments as the fated (and
feted) meeting of tuneSmith Johnny Marr and wordSmith Morrissey, the
release of their daunting debut "Hand In Glove" and "the Smiths as child
molesters" scandal that would have destroyed lesser groups - and rocked
this one not a little.
A messy affair that has still to be completely cleaned up, the sordid
details do not bear repeating here (see other music papers for a full,
fatuous account glorying in deed and misdeed).
After all, this piece isn't designed to cross-examine anyone about the
harmful outcome of wilful ambiguity and reckless interpretation, simply
to investigate further the hysterical rumblings that threaten to crease
the very carpets of the Sounds office in their clamour to be
heard. The message? That the Smiths are just the most important band
around at the moment.
But there's no forgetting the gravity of the accusations levelled against
the Smiths - or its source. With Sounds in the red corner and
the band's label Rough Trade in the blue corner, where does that leave
Bill Black - in the doghouse?
"It's all past history as far as the group is concerned," comforts their
instantly likeable manager Joe Moss as we wait in a West London recording
studio for the Smiths' imminent return from a Thames-side photo session.
But when the four of them return from the muddy location chosen for
the shoot there is, for the first few minutes at least, a certain hugging
of our respective ropes. Drummer Mike Joyce and bassist Andy Rourke
busy themselves by making cups of reviving tea before slipping quietly
away to challenge each other on the obligatory PacMan while the interview
takes place.
Morrissey, guarded at first, soon warms to the challenge of self analysis
and with the mop-topped, slightly elfin Marr, exudes a confidence in
the strength and resilience of the Smiths that is unquestionably honest.
These charming men? Morrissey and Marr share a polite yet earnest nature.
They are unflinching in their views; often uncomfortably so. One can
only seek solace in the knowledge that they are invariably right.
We agree to skirt around the legal minefield that has now taken the
place of the battleground of charge and counter charge over the nature
and intent of Morrissey's contentious lyrics, but not before the wordSmith
has taken the opportunity to unleash an eloquent and elegant tongue-lashing
on the hypocrisy of contemporary morals. 'Nuff said. The Smiths have
a keen sense of their own history and that's just what the whole matter
is now - history.
"We
want to make friends, we want to have people around us. Isn't that what
everybody wants deep down? I'm sure when you were at school all you
really cared about was being popular. All we really care about is being
popular and that's why we try hard to please."
Morrissey responds succinctly, unnervingly (only someone with the skill
and temperament of McEnroe truly enjoys having the ball hurled back
into his own court) to an observation that the Smiths, above all else,
seem keen to please.
It's telling that he should bring it all back to childhood and the constant
if often fruitless pursuit of happiness. His own memories of teenagerdom
are of "Morrissey: The Wilderness Years". Like some nightmarish Lost
Weekend, his teens were a period of isolation and self-hatred.
Until that day towards the end of last year when a youthful Johnny Marr
came knocking on his door to see if he would be interested in collaborating
on some songs. Marr had discovered from the wise Joe Moss that Morrissey's
needs had for some time been "exclusively literary". Just what Marr
needed, he thought, to complement his own approach to strumming his
Rickenbacker (once owned by Roger McGuinn) - an escape into sanity.
For Morrissey life began again - at 23.
"I had quite a happy childhood until I was six or seven, after that
it was horrendous. At the age of eight I became very isolated - we had
a lot of family problems at that time - and that tends to orchestrate
your life. I had a foul adolescence and a foul teenage existence. Except
you couldn't really call it an existence. I just sort of scraped through,
escaping into films and books until the Smiths happened and allowed
me to live again!
"I think if I'd led an acceptably frivolous teenage life I wouldn't
be singing in this group. I'm sure if you have a great time and get
everything you want, all the friends you want, then you tend not to
be so ambitious. If you're deprived of certain things it makes you very
resilient and you kick very hard for what you want. And I wanted something
very special because I'd led such an unspecial life previous to the
Smiths."
The Smiths are special. They combine rock's primary colours of guitar,
bass and drums in a fascinating way: you get the feeling of pleasant
familiarity as if you've heard it all before, but you can take immense
and almost criminally intense pleasure from the knowledge that there
are boundaries as well as hearts being broken.
Morrissey
has only been partially successful in making use of his own teenage
traumas. He has come to terms with his own celibacy ("An involuntary
decision!" he assures me) but little else. The Smiths, he knows,
will change that.
"I remember for a long time feeling totally charmless and unhandsome
and I know there are so many others who still feel the same way. It's
time that all those people moved in on this whole shebang and
if necessary pretend to have charm. For too long this sphere
of entertainment has been dominated by the big mouths and the small
minds."
If there is a central issue that lies at the heart of the Smiths' motivation,
this must be it.
Johnny: "The reason why Morrissey and I got together in the first
place to write songs - and the reason why it was so successful - was
because we both felt the need to react against what we'd been hearing
over the past X years. Basically, we had a lot of gripes. I don't think
groups can succeed unless they've got something they feel uncomfortable
about. If you're happy with the music you're making and the music around
you then you're going to be complacent, boring and safe."
Morrissey: "Nothing spurs you on like anger and we were angry about
all the ugly people who control this business and all the ugly faces
on Top Of The Pops. Why all the ugliness?
"It's very strange - this complete lack of intellect and complete lack
of sensitivity. And of course there was nothing more repellant than
the synthesizer, so it was really time to sweep all that down the drain.
"To say everything is hopeless, which is what people have been saying
up till now, is a pointless attitude and that's where our belief in
beauty and charm comes in. It's not to do with having a perfect profile
or alabaster teeth."
Johnny: "It's a very optimistic feel that people get from our records
and our gigs and that is of paramount importance to us. Even our name
ties in with it. We're really sick of all this dressing up in designer
clothes and having your hair done by whatever hairdresser is in vogue.
"All those sort of groups were very remote and that might be one of
the reasons the Sixties have become so attractive again. The fact that
someone like Sandie Shaw, who wasn't particularly beautiful or glamorous,
could be a massive star is tremendous. Morrissey's lyrics offer a great
deal of hope to people who are normal because they're saying
there's nothing wrong with that. The Smiths are saying it doesn't matter
who you are or what you do, as long as what you're saying is positive."
The Smiths
are saying normality is making a comeback and they're saying it positively,
but let's backtrack a minute and pick up Johnny's remark about the Sixties.
It was prompted by the continuous links that are being made between
attitudes prevalent during that debauched and de-bunked era and our
own wonderful Smiths.
OK, so Morrissey might wear a forest of beads around his neck and get
through the contents of a small market garden during a live set as he
charms all with his bunches of gladioli, but yet another stab at reviving
psychedelia?
The Exploding Plastic Inevitable the Smiths ain't.
But it needs saying more forcefully than that. Despite their "conventional"
instrumentation, the Smiths are rooted (pun not intended) more firmly
in the present than any of the so called "fingers on the pulse" industrial
groups - Test Dept, SPK - can ever be.
Because (and it's been noted before) the sound of contemporary urban
decay is not simply the clanking of steel plates or the chomp of a metal
grinder. It is much more than that, infinitely more human.
At the risk of straining the point, the soundtracks of post industrialism
is the sound of misery. The sound of suffering humanity, the scream
of a million English roses flailed against the landscape of depression
- or a few dozen gladioli thwacked against Morrissey's handsome thigh.
Regard or discard as you like, but the Smiths are NOW. No argument.
Which doesn't stop the Sixties tag cropping up in reviews, so how do
they feel about the connotations?
Johnny: "Well we were very conscious when we started of not being
preconceived. Even that sounds preconceived! When me and Morrissey
got together to write a catalogue of songs it became immediately apparent
that the songs we were writing needed bass and drums to make them work
- so the 'conventional' set up was completed.
"We try and be adventurous but not to be overbearing, but then again
we'd hate to be trapped by some revivalist tag, whatever it might be,
because that's not what we're about.
"At the same time I can see some of the similarities and that's fine
- if you dig into either of our collections you will find music of quality
from every era and we're very aware of the fact that there is good to
be had from every period of popular music.
"For instance, in the Sixties records were actually worth something.
People went out and bought a seven inch piece of plastic and they treasured
it, which they don't seem to do any more. We're trying to bring back
that precious element which is, I suppose, reminiscent of an earlier
time, but then so what? It's good to take a part of pop culture and
bring it alive again and bring the human spirit back into it.
"It's exactly the same with the songwriting partnership Morrissey and
I have. The whole idea of two people getting together with lots of common
ground but with separate influences to bring out something we believe
to be the best we've ever heard is something we feel has been missing
since the Sixties. The Seventies was the decade of the solo artist and
the solo writer and that doesn't appeal to me at all. I really get a
buzz from the unpredictability of the way a Smiths song turns out. It's
joyous the way we work together and if that's reminiscent of the Sixties
that's fine."
It's time to talk around the subject a bit more and make some enquiries
about the band's home town Manchester. Is it, as McCullough would have
us believe, deserving of thorough investigation to find the reason for
its consistently crucial musical outpourings? Morrissey is bemused,
preferring to see the Mancunian fetish as a release for the capital-weary
breed of London-based music journalists.
After all, he reminds us, the Smiths can take no credit for the place,
having only been born and brought up there, not responsible for its
size and stature. Come now...
Morrissey: "I can't pass judgement on James because I haven't heard
any of the records or seen them live, but if what they say is how they
feel then I'm in complete agreement."
Another name synonymous with forward-thinking Manchester is the Hacienda.
Morrissey: "We've had a great deal of personal support from the people
at the Hacienda when they could easily have ignored us for signing with
Rough Trade in London rather than Factory in Manchester and that's good
because, as Johnny says, that means attitudes are at last changing."
Personal support? It suggests a shoulder to lean on when the going got
tough a few months back following the muck-raking. It's also time to
challenge Morrissey on the purposefully ambivalent nature of his lyrics.
He chooses to write in a genderless style to remove the greatest block
to understanding and acceptance - sexuality.
This inevitably leads to gender confusion and dangerous interpretations,
so isn't well-intentioned obscurity a commercial as well as artistic
liability? I suggest the Smiths are out to confound people.
Johnny: "You confound people by using gimmicks like having long unintelligible
names and that's exactly what we're reacting against.
"Morrissey's so confident about himself that he doesn't have to cloud
his lyrics in metaphor. A lot of writers verge on saying something important
but because they're afraid of their own stature they use imagery as
a way of saying 'if you can work it out you're "in"'. That doesn't
appeal."
Morrissey: "My lyrics are only obscure to the extent they are not
taken directly from the dictionary of writing songs. They're not slavish
to the lyrics rule book, so you'll never catch me singing 'Oh baby,
baby yeah'. My only priority is to use lines and words in a way
that hasn't been heard before."
Despite the efforts of the "school fool" writers, Morrissey believes
popular music is not a washed-up creative force yet; there's still plenty
of things that need communicating and he's ready and willing to man
the Morse key. And the bass, drums and guitar set up is far from redundant.
Morrissey enthuses about the fluid yet wonderfully fractured playing
of Marr ("Johnny can take the most basic, threadbare tune and you'll
just cry for hours and hours and swim in the tears!") before announcing
triumphantly:
"As far as I'm concerned the guitar hasn't even been picked up yet!"
Never mind the Svensons, you've got to keep up with the Smiths.
This
article was originally published in the November 19, 1983 issue of
Sounds magazine. Reprinted without permission for
non-profit use only.
|