I Will See You - Pitchfork Review

D

'delzoni

Guest
Morrissey: "I Will See You in Far Off Places"
genre: rock

I was going to write this review in hypothetical Moz song titles, but that seemed a little cheap. Besides, I could only think of two: "My Best Stuff, Unlike You, Is Behind Me" and "God Is on Your Side But I Stand Alone, Don't I?" The former isn't necessarily true (Moz can still pull a few gems out of his pompadour), but the second still applies: This song is a humble cry of allegiance to all the world's religions, specifically Muslims ("If your God bestows protection upon you/ And the U.S.A. doesn't bomb you/ I believe I will see you someplace safe").

Thing is, Moz's empathy is undermined; if "far off places" really does mean the afterlife (as he seems to intend), then Moz might actually be offensive here, presuming everyone's heaven is the same. Even more baffling is the song's dated industrial beat and, worse, that sub-"Kashmir" riff that always signifies Middle Eastern mysticism to Western ears. When "Far Off Places" reaches its climactic finale and Moz starts burbling "ya-da-da-da-dum" over and over, the entire enterprise finally descends into the utterly ridiculous. Still, I appreciate that he's trying. [Stephen M. Deusner] 1 1/2 stars
 
> Thing is, Moz's empathy is undermined; if "far off places"
> really does mean the afterlife (as he seems to intend), then Moz might
> actually be offensive here, presuming everyone's heaven is the same.

The old racism charge again. Some people can't help themselves, can they?

Thing is, I don't think Morrissey does mean the afterlife. I think he does literally mean far off places as the last verse makes clear.
 
Re: I Will See You - Pitchfork Review Reviewed

Ah, well, another ill-informed, illiterate, unimaginative reviewer!

> I was going to write this review in hypothetical Moz song titles, but that
> seemed a little cheap. Besides, I could only think of two: "My Best
> Stuff, Unlike You, Is Behind Me" and "God Is on Your Side But I
> Stand Alone, Don't I?"

What an incredibly bad idea? Why does he tell us that?

> The former isn't necessarily true (Moz can
> still pull a few gems out of his pompadour)

A few? Whilst reviving his entire career single-handledly...

> but the second still applies:

No, it doesn't.

> This song is a humble cry of allegiance to all the world's religions

No, it isn't.

> specifically Muslims ("If your God bestows protection upon you/ And
> the U.S.A. doesn't bomb you/ I believe I will see you someplace
> safe").

Why Muslims and nobody else? A ludicrous statment.

> Thing is, Moz's empathy is undermined; if "far off places"
> really does mean the afterlife (as he seems to intend),

In no way does it mean the afterlife, of course.

> then Moz might actually be offensive here, presuming everyone's heaven is
> the same.

He's not saying that at all, of course... so he's not being offensive.

> Even more baffling is the song's dated industrial beat

Doesn't sound dated.

> and, worse that sub-"Kashmir" riff that always signifies Middle Eastern
> mysticism to Western ears.

Not to mine - maybe his.

> When "Far Off Places" reaches its
> climactic finale and Moz starts burbling "ya-da-da-da-dum" over
> and over, the entire enterprise finally descends into the utterly
> ridiculous.

The babbling, warbling crescendo is a fantastic, classic piece of Moz vocal trickery.

> Still, I appreciate that he's trying. [Stephen M. Deusner] 1
> 1/2 stars

Not as trying as this reviewer. An almost vintage mis-reading of a song. It's clearly a personal statement to a specific person couched in almost transcendental terms.

0 stars for him.
 
His religious interpretation of it is dubious.

Since he thought the music was so bad--and it is--he probably didn't follow the lyrics very closely.

And why should he? And why should we?

Fortunately the other two tracks are fine.
 
irony

Why do people consistently fail to consider that the song just might be an open letter to Bin Laden? What happened to reading between the lines? The irony behind the song is just brilliant.
 
Re: irony

The premise of the review is that it's a single, which it isn't. (yet)
 
Re: irony

> The premise of the review is that it's a single, which it isn't. (yet)

You're wrong. The feature is called "Track Reviews." They review non-singles all the time.
 
Re: irony

Yeah but it says "single" above the review.

I generally like the song (especially the end which reminds me of the headmaster's ritual). I could do without the "middle eastern" sounds it does scream trying to be international, etc. It's definately (in my mind) a non-single. Nothing particular excellent about it, but a solid track. I guess this is part of the reason that artists don't so mind file sharing (unless they are metallica) but they do leaks. Morrissey never wanted this track to stand alone from the rest. Imagine hearing some of the albumn track of of "classic" albumns and how we would have reacted (i.e some girls or Lazy Dykes).

As to the other tracks, I think "Dear God" is wonderful, beautiful, and on par with his best work...and the single is good, albeit average for Morrissey. There's nothing knee-weaking about it. but that being said, I'm happy with the tracks thus far.

Yet again...I think Malajusted had stronger songs on it then Quarry or Southpaw. The albumn didn't work, especially "Sorrow will come to you in the end" but "Trouble Loves me" is the best thing he has written in the last ten years, period. And Satan, the title track (which way underrated) and the track featuring the lyrics 'and I don't get along with myself' can't think of it's name right now.

> You're wrong. The feature is called "Track Reviews." They review
> non-singles all the time.
 
Re: irony

> Why do people consistently fail to consider that the song just might be an
> open letter to Bin Laden?

Because clearly it isn't.
 
Re: irony

> Yeah but it says "single" above the review.

I see that nowhere.

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/tracks/06-02-07.shtml

I see "Track Reviews" beneath the ad at the top of the page. I see the date beneath that. I see Morrissey's name and the track's name beneath the date. I see "Genre: Rock" beneath that. Then the review itself.

It doesn't even call it a single in the sidebar menu of the page, though it calls many other tracks singles.

I don't care, but you're wrong.
 
Re: irony

Before you get your panties in a twist, know that Pitchfork earlier had the word "single" on it. They changed it, because it's not true.

> I see that nowhere.

> http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/tracks/06-02-07.shtml I see "Track
> Reviews" beneath the ad at the top of the page. I see the date
> beneath that. I see Morrissey's name and the track's name beneath the
> date. I see "Genre: Rock" beneath that. Then the review itself.

> It doesn't even call it a single in the sidebar menu of the page, though
> it calls many other tracks singles.

> I don't care, but you're wrong.
 
Re: irony

> Before you get your panties in a twist, know that Pitchfork earlier had
> the word "single" on it. They changed it, because it's not true.

yeah, it did say single, and now it don't. everybody is right! everybody wins! peace!
 
Back
Top Bottom