The Smiths official Twitter account is now live

King Leer

Leering since '97
In the early days of the Roses reunion, they said they'd record new music together. Was that idea ever mentioned again or just quietly put out to pasture?

Even if a Smiths reunion became a reality, would new music be part of the plans?
Should it be?

I never said I wouldn't be there like a shot, of course I would. :lbf:
What I am asking is if you think it will bring back the past, be as good as the original incarnation, I somehow doubt it.
I went to the Stone Roses reunion gig a couple of years back, not that I am comparing them to The Smiths (heaven forbid!) (lol), and even though it was a pleasant evening in itself it was nothing like on their heyday in 1989.
I dunno, I really feel it would ruin things even more for some reason.
 

Irregular Regular

Forget my fate.
In the early days of the Roses reunion, they said they'd record new music together. Was that idea ever mentioned again or just quietly put out to pasture?

Even if a Smiths reunion became a reality, would new music be part of the plans?
Should it be?

The Stone Roses had gone all quiet on that front since then.
Coincidentally, only this week Ian Brown has confirmed that they are working on new material, apparently being recorded at The Church Studios, in London.

If The Smiths (or Moz and Johnny) ever reunited, my personal preference would be for them not to record new material.
It would either be criticised for not being as good as their original output, or equally for trying too hard to replicate what they produced back then.
 
Last edited:

joe frady

Vile Refusenik
The Re-Unification will definitely happen.

But only if Dirty Little Sam can do the official 'montages'...

:sick:
 
Last edited:

rifke

bodhisattva
what i dont understand is this: why would people who make nothing but nasty, vile criticims about morrissey's person want to see him in concert, enjoy his music at all? to me the art a person makes is not some disembodied thing, not just some detached output of sensory data for the masses to scoop up and make what they want of it (except in those very manufactured cases, but lets not call that art). i take the art that a person (authentically) makes to be very much the essence of the artist himself--his essence distilled and woven into his art. not detached, not lopped off once it has been put out there in the universe, still not belonging to anyone else no matter what format or medium is used. if you like what the person does, i think this calls for some kind of reverence for the person himself. to be blatantly disrespectful and then to go and sit and watch this person in the flesh, absorbing their essence--having shown yourself to be quite insufficiently receptive to it--just seems profoundly wrong to me: outrageously philistine, and somehow, bloodthirty.
 

marred

Member
In the early days of the Roses reunion, they said they'd record new music together. Was that idea ever mentioned again or just quietly put out to pasture?

Even if a Smiths reunion became a reality, would new music be part of the plans?
Should it be?

I think anyone who uses their brain to contemplate a reunion of a band like The Smiths, knowing what we know needs to get out more. There are definitely a few here.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Morrissey in 2013

"Smiths reformation rumors persist all the time every day, every year, constantly, and I constantly have requests to reform. But people forget that I did not break up the Smiths, so I don't know why people ask me about reformations, but I would always say no because we're all very different people now, and it's been a very long time, and the truth is, we don't know each other, we're not friends, so why would you be in a band with people who you don't really know? We're linked because of the distant past, but we have no links in our lives now. So it doesn't really make any sense to me. Also, I'm very, very happy with my life, with my musical life as it is now, so I don't feel any need for a musical reformation. I don't see the point. If I'm so happy singing now, why would I want to play with strangers? I think people become obsessed with things they can't really have, and then once they get it, they say, "really, well, it wasn't that good" and then they move on. Because every time groups reform, it's insane news for 2 weeks and then it's very ho hum, and it's very "uh, what's next?" I don't think any reformation has ever been incredible, I don't think it's made the world free or excited people beyond recognition. Can you think of one?It's fake excitement, I don't get it, and also when bands reform I find they go straight into stadiums and they have big merchandising deals. But you never hear of a band reforming quietly, and rehearsing for a year, in the countryside, and playing together. They always reform and go straight for the money and straight for the stadiums. And it doesn't bode very, very well. Because when you first form a band you have a certain attitude, the world isn't listening to you, and you want to make it listen to you. But if you're in a situation where everybody's waiting it's not the same thing. And it can never be the same thing. And you're not the same person. But people have it fixed in their mind, when they listen to music and when they listen to older music, that the person who made that music is still the same person. But they're not. And if you meet many people, like David Bowie etc, etc, and you talk to him about the past, he doesn't really know. Because he's not that person anymore. He's not there and he doesn't feel all those things anymore, and he's quite rightly, living in the now. But the listener, the person who listens to the music always thinks, that the person is still the same, and it's not true."
 

Uncleskinny

It's all good
Subscriber
Morrissey in 2013

"Smiths reformation rumors persist all the time every day, every year, constantly, and I constantly have requests to reform. But people forget that I did not break up the Smiths, so I don't know why people ask me about reformations, but I would always say no because we're all very different people now, and it's been a very long time, and the truth is, we don't know each other, we're not friends, so why would you be in a band with people who you don't really know? We're linked because of the distant past, but we have no links in our lives now. So it doesn't really make any sense to me. Also, I'm very, very happy with my life, with my musical life as it is now, so I don't feel any need for a musical reformation. I don't see the point. If I'm so happy singing now, why would I want to play with strangers? I think people become obsessed with things they can't really have, and then once they get it, they say, "really, well, it wasn't that good" and then they move on. Because every time groups reform, it's insane news for 2 weeks and then it's very ho hum, and it's very "uh, what's next?" I don't think any reformation has ever been incredible, I don't think it's made the world free or excited people beyond recognition. Can you think of one?It's fake excitement, I don't get it, and also when bands reform I find they go straight into stadiums and they have big merchandising deals. But you never hear of a band reforming quietly, and rehearsing for a year, in the countryside, and playing together. They always reform and go straight for the money and straight for the stadiums. And it doesn't bode very, very well. Because when you first form a band you have a certain attitude, the world isn't listening to you, and you want to make it listen to you. But if you're in a situation where everybody's waiting it's not the same thing. And it can never be the same thing. And you're not the same person. But people have it fixed in their mind, when they listen to music and when they listen to older music, that the person who made that music is still the same person. But they're not. And if you meet many people, like David Bowie etc, etc, and you talk to him about the past, he doesn't really know. Because he's not that person anymore. He's not there and he doesn't feel all those things anymore, and he's quite rightly, living in the now. But the listener, the person who listens to the music always thinks, that the person is still the same, and it's not true."

An awful lot has changed in Morrissey's life and career since that was said.
 
Last edited:

joe frady

Vile Refusenik
It was a miracle that Billy Duffy gave birth to The Smiths.

It was a miracle that they even made it that far.

I think three miracles is being a tad greedy, even for this Catholic.


Morrissey will never share a public stage with Joyce again (unless it's as his hangman...)

Morrissey & Marr? Maybe someday. I think, like so much in life, it will take a death to change things.
 

Flibberty

Well-Known Member
Morrissey in 2013

"Smiths reformation rumors persist all the time every day, every year, constantly, and I constantly have requests to reform. But people forget that I did not break up the Smiths, so I don't know why people ask me about reformations, but I would always say no because we're all very different people now, and it's been a very long time, and the truth is, we don't know each other, we're not friends, so why would you be in a band with people who you don't really know? We're linked because of the distant past, but we have no links in our lives now. So it doesn't really make any sense to me. Also, I'm very, very happy with my life, with my musical life as it is now, so I don't feel any need for a musical reformation. I don't see the point. If I'm so happy singing now, why would I want to play with strangers? I think people become obsessed with things they can't really have, and then once they get it, they say, "really, well, it wasn't that good" and then they move on. Because every time groups reform, it's insane news for 2 weeks and then it's very ho hum, and it's very "uh, what's next?" I don't think any reformation has ever been incredible, I don't think it's made the world free or excited people beyond recognition. Can you think of one?It's fake excitement, I don't get it, and also when bands reform I find they go straight into stadiums and they have big merchandising deals. But you never hear of a band reforming quietly, and rehearsing for a year, in the countryside, and playing together. They always reform and go straight for the money and straight for the stadiums. And it doesn't bode very, very well. Because when you first form a band you have a certain attitude, the world isn't listening to you, and you want to make it listen to you. But if you're in a situation where everybody's waiting it's not the same thing. And it can never be the same thing. And you're not the same person. But people have it fixed in their mind, when they listen to music and when they listen to older music, that the person who made that music is still the same person. But they're not. And if you meet many people, like David Bowie etc, etc, and you talk to him about the past, he doesn't really know. Because he's not that person anymore. He's not there and he doesn't feel all those things anymore, and he's quite rightly, living in the now. But the listener, the person who listens to the music always thinks, that the person is still the same, and it's not true."

One of Morrissey's greatest quotes.
 

Maurice E Maher

Well-Known Member
I often agree with you more than most here, Peter, but the only logical conclusion I would draw from this is that they are preparing to crank up the corporate greed cycle by foisting some type of best-of/most-of product in tandem with the 30th anniversary of The Queen Is Dead. Besides, Morrissey is too busy pulling pints and Johnny is too busy rinsing his grays.

A Smiths reunion (with all four of them) is totally out of the question.
A Morrissey and Marr reunion, however, is not.
The longer Morrissey struggles to get a record deal, the more likely it becomes...
 

King Leer

Leering since '97
Oh, missed that bit of news! Will Google it now.

And agreed on new Smiths music. You've described the curse of 99% of reunion efforts. New Order seems to have done it, though.



The Stone Roses had gone all quiet on that front since then.
Coincidentally, only this week Ian Brown has confirmed that they are working on new material, apparently being recorded at The Church Studios, in London.

If The Smiths (or Moz and Johnny) ever reunited, my personal preference would be for them not to record new material.
It would either be criticised for not being as good as their original output, or equally for trying too hard to replicate what they produced back then.
 

Viva Mozza

You're the one for me
A Smiths reunion (with all four of them) is totally out of the question.
A Morrissey and Marr reunion, however, is not.
The longer Morrissey struggles to get a record deal, the more likely it becomes...

I totally agree
 

ordinaryboy86

Well-Known Member
A Smiths reunion (with all four of them) is totally out of the question.
A Morrissey and Marr reunion, however, is not.
The longer Morrissey struggles to get a record deal, the more likely it becomes...

So according to your logic, the more Morrissey struggles to find a record label, and the more people he alienates, the more Johnny Marr will be inclined to pair up with him again?? Sorry friend but that makes no sense. You and others, make it sound like a Smiths reunion hinges solely on Morrisseys say so. Do you really think Johnny is sitting at home, waiting for his fax machine to beep? Cos' i don't, and i don't think he gives a second thought to a Smiths reunion
 
So according to your logic, the more Morrissey struggles to find a record label, and the more people he alienates, the more Johnny Marr will be inclined to pair up with him again?? Sorry friend but that makes no sense. You and others, make it sound like a Smiths reunion hinges solely on Morrisseys say so. Do you really think Johnny is sitting at home, waiting for his fax machine to beep? Cos' i don't, and i don't think he gives a second thought to a Smiths reunion

I agree. I think that johnny marr is the one who is against a reunion, not morrissey
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I agree. I think that johnny marr is the one who is against a reunion, not morrissey

Nah, from the press I read he turned around mid-2000's into being open to a reunion but as he's stated in recent years he tried to get the band back together but it's just simply not possible i.e Morrissey wants nothing to do with it. There doesn't even seem to be any cordial communication between the two anymore and both biographies (Marr's to come later this year) will probably further the rift if anything though I think Johnny will probably pull his punches even if criticism of himself and Joe Moss in Moz's book likely still rankles.

As shown in the tedius TTY updates, Morrissey is living in his own bubble and unless circumstances dictate that he and Johnny have to spend time with each other I don't ever see the 2 back on stage together again (regardless of the further lows Morrissey hits) as he allegedly can't "perform" with people he doesn't have relationships with even though the irony is he's probably talked to his current bassist twice...

I think everyone from fans to the band themselves would benefit from Morrissey, Marr and Rourke back together (Si Wolstencroft on drums for heritage?) but the ego is too far gone - if his ex-band mates were animals not humans he'd be there in a shot no doubt but sadly he doesn't do human empathy anymore hence the lyrical dirge now overtaking the threadbare tunes his backing band produce in shitness stakes.
 
Top Bottom