New Morrissey statement, and comment from Love Music Hate Racism

[Maurice E]

There's some news (on the Guardian website) about a new Morrissey statement where he elaborates on his views about the Chinese, but no source is given, and it's not on True to You. Anyone know where this can be found?

Morrissey said in a statement tonight: "If anyone has seen the horrific and unwatchable footage of the Chinese cat and dog trade – animals skinned alive – then they could not possibly argue in favour of China as a caring nation. There are no animal protection laws in China and this results in the worst animal abuse and cruelty on the planet. It is indefensible."

Also, some fresh comment from the Love Music Hate Racism fella, which will hurt Moz as he bailed out one of their pop concerts, financially, a couple of years back.

A spokesman for Love Music Hate Racism, which received a donation of £28,000 from the singer in 2008 after his apparently anti-immigration comments made in music magazine NME convulsed the media, said it would be unable to accept support from Morrissey again if he did not rescind or dispute today's comments. "It really is just crude racism," said Martin Smith. "When you start using language like 'subspecies', you are entering into dark and murky water. I don't think we would, or could, ask him to come back after that."

 

[Worm]

you are entering into dark and murky water.

Like the brain of Martin Smith, I imagine.

 

[Dave]

They want to insult Morrissey by not taking his money?

 

[Orson Swells]

They want to insult Morrissey by not taking his money?

They'll be paying him back any day now.

 

[Qvist]

What exactly is a "subspecies"? Because if I heard that term out of any context, I would assume it means "a sub-group of a species", in the sense of leopards and tigers being sub-groups of cat animals. From that perspective, calling the chinese a sub-species would simply imply that they're not like other people - in this specific context, in a negative way that few would dispute. Everyone however seems to assume it was meant as something like "sub-human". Not that I have any idea what Morrissey actually meant to convey (My best guess would be that he intended to express that the treatment meted out to animals in China is unworthy not just of humanity but of any species), but it is at least something to take into consideration.

Mr. Martin Smith might at least entertain the possibility that the remark wasn't meant in the worst sense imaginable, and do something to find out more before mouthing off to the Daily Mail. Much as I approve of the general function organisations like these fulfill, it is rather annoying that they are always so ready to find offense wherever possible.

cheers

 

[Harsh Truth]

this is all so boring. When is the next tour and/or new material?

 

[Worm]

What exactly is a "subspecies"? Because if I heard that term out of any context, I would assume it means "a sub-group of a species", in the sense of leopards and tigers being sub-groups of cat animals. From that perspective, calling the chinese a sub-species would simply imply that they're not like other people - in this specific context, in a negative way that few would dispute. Everyone however seems to assume it was meant as something like "sub-human". Not that I have any idea what Morrissey actually meant to convey (My best guess would be that he intended to express that the treatment meted out to animals in China is unworthy not just of humanity but of any species), but it is at least something to take into consideration.

Mr. Martin Smith might at least entertain the possibility that the remark wasn't meant in the worst sense imaginable, and do something to find out more before mouthing off to the Daily Mail. Much as I approve of the general function organisations like these fulfill, it is rather annoying that they are always so ready to find offense wherever possible.

cheers

You may be right, but the obvious reading is probably the correct one: he meant they were less than human. It's what people commonly say when they see what they regard as a great crime: the perpetrator is said to be a "monster" of some sort.

Moreover, anyone who has paid the slightest attention to Morrissey knows he almost always exaggerates. "I'm not saying that Americans are models of perfection, but 'diseased orangutans' is a little extreme. I'm sure they're a couple of steps up from that!" I'm a "couple steps up" from a "diseased orangutan"! I was doused with Martin Smith's murky waters all the way back in 1988 and somehow I survived.

There's no real story here, as we might suspect considering the Guardian was running an article about the "controversy" before the offensive interview was published. They want page hits and circulation. Morrissey wants his name in a few headlines. That's all.

 

[Vauxhall95]

There's no real story here, as we might suspect considering the Guardian was running an article about the "controversy" before the offensive interview was published. They want page hits and circulation. Morrissey wants his name in a few headlines. That's all.

So true, this is right out of the pre-record release playbook. Any day, there will be a quote in which Morrissey intimates the "Bona Drag" re-issue is "the best re-issue I have ever done," and that ought to round out the pre-release portion of this year.

 

[Worm]

"the best re-issue I have ever done,"

?

No:

 

[billybu69]

I fully understand Love music hate rascism point, and they should have nothing more todo with Morrissey. They should give him his £28,000 back and wash their hands.

Yeh right.

 

[lainey]

I fully understand Love music hate rascism point, and they should have nothing more todo with Morrissey. They should give him his £28,000 back and wash their hands.

Yeh right.

If his money isn't good enough, return it!
Let's e-mail Martin.

 

[jdbabz]

Of course I understand what he was saying but it was expressed very badly Am I the only one who can see this?

 

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

Of course I understand what he was saying but it was expressed very badly Am I the only one who can see this?

No, I agree- it was a very unfortunate choice of words.

 

[lainey]

I've e-mailed LMHR, I'll post the reply.

 

[Raphael Lambach]

If he'd said it about Japaneses , this could be posted here?

 

[Kewpie]

Re: animal cruelty

If he'd said it about Japaneses , this could be posted here?

Morrissey at least acknowledges that dogs and cats haven't been skinned alive in Japan!

Yes, Japan has been often criticised by whaling and killing dolphins which he didn't mention during The Guardian interview.

Obviously he is extreamly upset about animal cruelty in China which prompted him to mention about it.

 

[Raphael Lambach]

Re: animal cruelty

Morrissey at least acknowledges that dogs and cats haven't been skinned alive in Japan!

Yes, Japan has been often criticised by whaling and killing dolphins which he didn't mention during The Guardian interview.

Obviously he is extreamly upset about animal cruelty in China which prompted him to mention about it.

Did I mention dog and cats? No.
I was joking around.
Japaneses love Morrissey and Morrissey loves them. It wouldn't be happening w/ them (and that's great. Morrissey has one of his biggest audiences in Japan and he made wonderful gigs there).

 

[joe frady]

You may be right, but the obvious reading is probably the correct one: he meant they were less than human. It's what people commonly say when they see what they regard as a great crime: the perpetrator is said to be a "monster" of some sort.

Moreover, anyone who has paid the slightest attention to Morrissey knows he almost always exaggerates. "I'm not saying that Americans are models of perfection, but 'diseased orangutans' is a little extreme. I'm sure they're a couple of steps up from that!" I'm a "couple steps up" from a "diseased orangutan"! I was doused with Martin Smith's murky waters all the way back in 1988 and somehow I survived.

There's no real story here, as we might suspect considering the Guardian was running an article about the "controversy" before the offensive interview was published. They want page hits and circulation. Morrissey wants his name in a few headlines. That's all.

All this.
As we all know (and love), in some parts of his brain, Morrissey remains the 15 year old obstreperous Stretford letter-writer. In this case he was just searching for the ultimate pejorative epithet, as a reaction to actions he considers utterly obscene. Inhumane? Inhuman? Subhuman? Subspecies? Bingo.
And before someone says he's not a stroppy teen he's a 51 year old intelligent poet (f.u Simon); We're all capable of reverting to our youth now and again, aren't we? When the passions stir...
I'm unsure as to how much of the subsequent brouhaha Morrissey could have planned. It would appear to have been a throwaway remark in the midst of a fairly testy 'interview' with someone who was clearly not a trained journalist. Armitage barely referred to it in the course of the interview, and certainly didn't challenge him on it. 'The Guardian' appears to have wanted to make more of it than the poet they stupidly sent to interview Morrissey. (You can just imagine the meetings can't you? )
But the pictures are smashing.
And, yeah, it is getting very boring, very quickly. All the usual suspects crawling out of the woodwork, etc...

 

[Brel]

Now, I'm not normally one to add to the conspiracy, but I'm beginning to wonder if he saw this and it sent him over the edge?...

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...s-dianas-image-on-anniversary-of-her-death.do

 

[anon x]

That's just not true,he needs to do some research before opening his mouth sometimes.