Morrisey's melodies with The Smiths

[Kev Adams]

I never got into The Smiths. I was probably too old when they appeared, not enough residual teenage angst. Despite all the hyperbole since, I've not been tempted. Every time I see or read anything about Johnny Marr I think that I ought to have a go, but I'm always put off by Morrisey.

I could forgive the delivery, and some of the lyrics are great; I can see why people relate to them so much. But his melodies are incredibly boring! (This is based on a quite narrow sample, admittedly).
Is it just me?
Can anyone point me in the direction of an interesting Morrisey melody that can match his lyrics and Marr's inventiveness?

[The Elf]

Nope, not just you. The 'melodies' repeatedly pulled back to the same note over and over, like the vocals were on elastic. Couldn't stand any of their stuff myself.

[Kev Adams]

Nope, not just you. The 'melodies' repeatedly pulled back to the same note over and over, like the vocals were on elastic. Couldn't stand any of their stuff myself.

Like the way you put 'melodies' in inverted commas, and glad I'm not the only one. So next question- Johnny Marr? Guitar great or not?

This train of thought was all kicked off by an article about JM in today's Guardian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/ja ... litics-pop#

[The Elf]

Well they must have had something. A lot of people liked their stuff, and you can't knock that.

A 'great' guitarist? Depends on your perspective I'd say. Too often *popularity* is used as a wedge of 'greatness'. Let's face it, anyone who has worked in studios for (ahem) a few years has met that truly 'great' player that makes your jaw drop, yet nobody has heard of them. And we've all met tedious mediocrity in the form of 'stardom'.

Maybe he's a very fine guitarist, but I haven't heard enough beyond The Smiths to really comment. With them he just seemed to be a competent rhythm guitarist.

[Kev Adams]

No-one leaping to their defence here. Maybe we're all to old and wise on this forum.

As part of my research to establish whether had really missed something about The Smiths I looked at some Youtube clips, and reading the comments it cannot be denied that they have a very faithful and passionate following. I think with pop music that for each of us, as we go through that angsty late teenage to very early adulthood, bands come along and strike a chord which is indefinable and not linked to the actual quality of the music, musicianship or songwriting. However, my hackles rose when I read that Morrissey and Marr were superior as songwriters to Lennon-McCartney!:roll:

Anyway, I'm now content that I really didn't miss anything. Not always the case; I find myself doing these checks back every so often, and have come to enjoy some great music that I didn't get first time round.

[hollowsun]

Right time, right place, hype, zeitgeist and all that. I never 'got' The Smiths either.

But there are lots of bands/artists I don't 'get' either but I can understand why others might rave about them. I never 'got', for example, Zep or Bob Marley but can perfectly understand why they struck a chord (so to speak) with their fans. Then there are some (like Coldplay and U2 for example) which I don't 'get' and don't/can't see what anyone else sees in them.

But back to The Smiths... Morrisey's an amusing character (when he's not being a vegetarian fascist) and he did write some whimsical lyrics sometimes but I agree ... melodically, their stuff is a tad yawnsome and never did much (if anything) for me. But then I doubt that some/much/most of the stuff I favour did/would do much for him. So...!

But I am with The Elf...

"Too often *popularity* is used as a wedge of 'greatness'. Let's face it, anyone who has worked in studios for (ahem) a few years has met that truly 'great' player that makes your jaw drop, yet nobody has heard of them. And we've all met tedious mediocrity in the form of 'stardom'."

Let's not forget that Joe Dolce's 'Shaddupayaface" kept Ultravox's 'Vienna' off the #1 slot. And I remember being in WH Smiths some years back and some guitar magazine had voted Liam (or was it Noel?) Gallagher as 'the greatest guitarist EVER'. Ermmm! They'd clearly not listened to anything by Julian Bream!

It's nonsense, a knobbly knees popularity contest and not to be taken too seriously

[Scramble]

I've never liked The Smiths much either, and can't claim any great acquaintance with their material. But I do like 'How Soon is Now'. The melody is nothing special, but the creative guitar work is really nice.

[The Bunk]

As regards Marley, mentioned above, I read in an interview with him that he felt it was important for the song to have a melody so that people would listen to it and thus hear whatever point he was trying to make. Which seems the direct opposite from The Smiths. I was a student at the time they were in their prime so to speak ('82 to '86) and a heck of a lot of my mates then were massively in to them. I guess their completely dirgey approach was, er, maybe refreshingly different for students.
Not one person at the time said what a good guitarist Marr was though.

[TheReson8or]

In defence , the message is all......and single note vocal delivery often reflects a strong movement in the chords, which I think is the case with many Smiths songs...allow the chords to dictate the melody...relatively...if that makes sense. Dave

[GlynB]

The 'melodies' repeatedly pulled back to the same note over and over, like the vocals were on elastic.

You're right dammit, never managed to put my finger on it previously. Is that why his voice sounds so whinging/whining to my ears?

I didn't like Smiths at the time, but have learned to appreciate Morrisey since, quite like his solo stuff... this is in spite of the sound of his voice though TBH.

[BJG145]

Very tiresome stuff. I took one glance at that article hero-worshipping Johnny Marr the other day and threw it down in bafflement.

[Daniel Davis]

I never did 'get Morrisey, but I think Johnny Marr had something going. After all, what does it mean to be a great guitarist? Solos? Take Andy Summers as an example - he reacted against all the cock-rock of his time and decided to do something different expertly avoiding all those ott solos (apart from taking the piss out fo that style on the odd song ) and instead had great chord voicings amongst other things. I'm not suggesting that Marr is in the same league, but whilst not much of his playing is about technical prowess, it did pretty much define the sound of british indie guitar playing for quite some time.

[Richard Graham]

Bah! and bollocks to (nearly) all of you (and with the greatest respect, of course!). The Smiths were not everybody's cup of tea, really more like everybody's Marmite on toast, but this dismissive twaddle is just as bad as the hero-worshipping thing some of you are complaining about.

5 great things about the Smiths...

They invented their own sound, totally them and unlike anybody else.
Magnificent lyrics, and yes, by and large superior to Lennon / McCartney imnsho. (I should add that I love the Beatles, Revolver was never off my headphones once I heard it as a kid of about 8 or 9, and it remains one of my favourite albums... But Beatles lyrics rarely had the bite, humour or poetry of SPM's)
Great image, they briefly made Nashy Health specs, hearing aids and gladioli glamourous... easy to pull off?
They spoke volumes directly to people who were completely turned off by the aspirational "club tropicana" type nonsense of the day.
Morrissey continues to excel musically and lyrically, and has done since Viva Hate.

I'm not even *that* much of a fan! As a drummer I was far more into prog metal (Rush) at the time (mid-80s) , I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though, though i was a bit dismissive, and then a guy I was in a band with said... "Actually you should listen again" so I did, and was converted. He was a talented guitarist, and he thought Marr was great at the time.

Admittedly they are not for every one, but I'd pick them over quite a few other classic bands if I had to choose. So many great songs...

Next thread, why we all think Bob Dylan's voice is a bit crap, why Led Zeppelin suck because they ripped off the blues, why Queen are overrated except for Bohemian Rhapsody, why Motörhead were too loud for me etc.

[Kev Adams]

Next thread, why we all think Bob Dylan's voice is a bit crap, why Led Zeppelin suck because they ripped off the blues, why Queen are overrated except for Bohemian Rhapsody, why Motörhead were too loud for me etc.

All of which examples could be argued, I'm sure. My initial post was just to point out that I couldn't get into The Smiths, tried to analyse why, and realised that I found the melodies were tedious and simplistic. Was I alone? Turns out not.

My personal taste is for a more rounded style of song writing where lyrical content, melody, harmonic progression and rhythmic interest are all given equal weight. I think the Smiths fall down with regard to the second and third of those. Just my taste, and as i freely admitted above, based on a narrow sample- I simply got bored!

[Richard Graham]

Next thread, why we all think Bob Dylan's voice is a bit crap, why Led Zeppelin suck because they ripped off the blues, why Queen are overrated except for Bohemian Rhapsody, why Motörhead were too loud for me etc.

All of which examples could be argued, I'm sure. My initial post was just to point out that I couldn't get into The Smiths, tried to analyse why, and realised that I found the melodies were tedious and simplistic. Was I alone? Turns out not.

My personal taste is for a more rounded style of song writing where lyrical content, melody, harmonic progression and rhythmic interest are all given equal weight. I think the Smiths fall down with regard to the second and third of those. Just my taste, and as i freely admitted above, based on a narrow sample- I simply got bored!

Indeed, and it wasn't you I was getting so mock-riled at, as much as the general tenor of the "debate" which was very one-way! I agree with you and the other posters that SPMs melodies (taken in isolation) are often tedious and simplistic, too. I think the most fervent Smiths fan would be hard pushed to claim that Morrissey's vocal melodies were complex, or interesting, any more than Ringo's drumming in the Beatles was complex or interesting in its own right. I would say though that there is a wealth of character in Morrissey's vocals (and in Ringo's drumming) and that his melodies suit the emotional tone of the music as well as giving the guitar plenty of room to sparkle. If you start from the viewpoint that the vocal melody should be the main item of musical interest in a song, then the Smiths music is bound to disappoint. Perhaps this is why a lot of people don't "get it": they are looking for something which just isn't there, instead of relishing what there is. By the way, I do think that The Smiths' music would be diminished if it has less monotonous melodies, as much as the Beatles' music would suck greatly if Ringo had played like Keith Moon on every track.

[Kev Adams]

... I would say though that there is a wealth of character in Morrissey's vocals (and in Ringo's drumming) and that his melodies suit the emotional tone of the music as well as giving the guitar plenty of room to sparkle. If you start from the viewpoint that the vocal melody should be the main item of musical interest in a song, then the Smiths music is bound to disappoint. Perhaps this is why a lot of people don't "get it": they are looking for something which just isn't there, instead of relishing what there is. By the way, I do think that The Smiths' music would be diminished if it has less monotonous melodies, as much as the Beatles' music would suck greatly if Ringo had played like Keith Moon on every track.

Sure. But I think personally I've tried and failed .
There's a list of artists who I didn't get 'at the time' but whom I've come back to later on and really enjoyed:
Robert Wyatt, XTC, The Clash, The Band, King Crimson post mid-70's, Radiohead, for a few off the top of my head.

There's also this list of stuff that I think I ought to enjoy because people are so lyrical and persuasive in their praise of them- and I re-assess, and I still don't get it.
The classic is Beefheart- God knows I've tried!

[The Elf]

I can give you another example: Dream Theater.

Everything about them tells me I should love them. All the ingredients I love are there... but it bore me to tears too.

So I'm quite open-minded about the music I can learn to loathe!

[Frisonic]

I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though

This sums up the Smiths for me. It was always the girls they were playing to. I remember Julia Birchill more of less having a literary orgasm about Morrisey in the NME when they were at their peak. Actually I always thought the two of them would have made a perfect couple, so long as I never personally had to be anywhere near them. That aside it cannot be denied they had their own sound, which is something. But it relied far more on idiosyncratic technique than prowess at composition.

[Richard Graham]

Can anyone point me in the direction of an interesting Morrisey melody that can match his lyrics and Marr's inventiveness?

I think the melodies "improved" later on in Morrissey's career, in the sense of becoming more complex and "satisfying". But if you don't like them or him anyway, there's probably nothing to persuade you. Try "I Have Forgiven Jesus" if you've not heard heard it, see what you think. I think it's magnificent, and the melody in the bridge and chorus isn't straightforward or dull. But I'm guessing most Smiths-dismissers still won't like it.

[TheReson8or]

I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though

But it relied far more on idiosyncratic technique than prowess at composition.

Wow! not sure people with prowess at composition necessarily write good songs. I know people with technique who cannot connect at all with other humans...The Smiths did! I'm no fan , but they communicated well with some and were generally memorable...this is the point of songwriting! Dave

[GlynB]

I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though

But it relied far more on idiosyncratic technique than prowess at composition.

Wow! not sure people with prowess at composition necessarily write good songs. I know people with technique who cannot connect at all with other humans...The Smiths did! I'm no fan , but they communicated well with some and were generally memorable...this is the point of songwriting! Dave

This man speaks truth...study, technique and skill do not necessarily lead to being able to write effectively.

[Frisonic]

I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though

But it relied far more on idiosyncratic technique than prowess at composition.

Wow! not sure people with prowess at composition necessarily write good songs. I know people with technique who cannot connect at all with other humans...The Smiths did! I'm no fan , but they communicated well with some and were generally memorable...this is the point of songwriting! Dave

This man speaks truth...study, technique and skill do not necessarily lead to being able to write effectively.

Well I guess that helps explain why people routinely make successful records without much formal training. But my point was that it was mostly the girls who connected with The Smiths. Not so much the boys. They knew who their audience was (which wasn't me).

[Richard Graham]

I had a girlfriend who was bang into the Smiths though

But it relied far more on idiosyncratic technique than prowess at composition.

Wow! not sure people with prowess at composition necessarily write good songs. I know people with technique who cannot connect at all with other humans...The Smiths did! I'm no fan , but they communicated well with some and were generally memorable...this is the point of songwriting! Dave

This man speaks truth...study, technique and skill do not necessarily lead to being able to write effectively.

Well I guess that helps explain why people routinely make successful records without much formal training. But my point was that it was mostly the girls who connected with The Smiths. Not so much the boys. They knew who their audience was (which wasn't me).

I don't think it was just the girls though, I think it was a pretty even split. They weren't a rock/metal band with an audience of "mostly young boys" (Spinal Tap) or a prog band with an audience of spoddy blokes (Rush, Genesis) or a teeny band like Wham or Duran Duran with an audience of girls. I think their appeal was exactly as it seems on the surface, sensitive "alternative" (or would-be alternative) types, of both sexes. Certainly when I look at Morrissey's 1990 Hulmerist DVD or the 1992 'Malady' DVD (im not sure which one it is cos its a box set i got off my brother) the fans seem pretty much passionate, slightly unconventional white teens and 20 somethings: girls and boys. Of course we're all a lot older than that now!

[Nico 3313]

Morrisey, OK. But what about Beethoven or Bach?

[Richard Graham]

Beethoven was deaf.