Anybody Wanna Argue About The Smiths? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Anybody Wanna Argue About The Smiths?



nobody
02-23-2004, 11:35 AM
Just thought I'd throw something out there. Who was more important to the Smiths, Morrisey or Johnny Marr?

I know a lot of times people want to pick the "musician" and steer clear of the singer, especially in light of the fact that p[iocking Morresey may tend to make you come across as a whiny wuss. However, I still have to say that Morresey was far more important to the success of the Smiths than Johnny Marr.

I'll give ya 2 resaons. Morrisey continued on much more strongly than Marr. Marr had a few decent colaborations, but became a sideman more than anything else.

Second, and something my wife, a life-long Smiths devotee, pointed out to me once as an obvious fact is how ever since the Smiths faded away, I've heard this band and that band are the new Smiths. Ya know what, many of them do indeed have a nice musical quality, but what they all lack is a great voice and lyrics that can be both obsessively depressing and quite funny all at the same time.

Anybody agree or disagree?

-Jar-
02-23-2004, 01:21 PM
Just thought I'd throw something out there. Who was more important to the Smiths, Morrisey or Johnny Marr?

I know a lot of times people want to pick the "musician" and steer clear of the singer, especially in light of the fact that p[iocking Morresey may tend to make you come across as a whiny wuss. However, I still have to say that Morresey was far more important to the success of the Smiths than Johnny Marr.

I'll give ya 2 resaons. Morrisey continued on much more strongly than Marr. Marr had a few decent colaborations, but became a sideman more than anything else.

Second, and something my wife, a life-long Smiths devotee, pointed out to me once as an obvious fact is how ever since the Smiths faded away, I've heard this band and that band are the new Smiths. Ya know what, many of them do indeed have a nice musical quality, but what they all lack is a great voice and lyrics that can be both obsessively depressing and quite funny all at the same time.

Anybody agree or disagree?


Agreed.

The Smiths still would have been something without Marr. Probably not as much, but they would have been something. We would be sitting around taking about whether or not Morrissey or (some other dude) was more important.

The Smiths would have been nothing without Morrissey. There wouldn't have been a Smiths. Maybe Marr would have joined New Order or something. Don't get me wrong, Marr is very crucial to my enjoyment of the Smiths.. but I have to say that I can imagine a different Smiths.. with a different guitarist, and Morrissey being Morrissey. A band fronted by Marr w/o Morrissey.. well, they might have existed, but they would have been completely different.

this didn't make much sense. oh well.

-jar

Dave_G
02-23-2004, 01:24 PM
Morrissey I think had way more influence on the success of the Smiths than did Johnny Marr.

Altho the music behind whistle britches' lyrics was very good, it was Mr. Doom and Gloom who carried the band.

At least in my opinion.

Dave

MindGoneHaywire
02-23-2004, 02:43 PM
I'll agree that Morrissey gets the nod, but not by as wide a margin, apparently, as you guys seem to think. I think it was pretty close. I'll point to the first Aztec Camera album as an example. That record is as close as I can imagine to what the Smiths would've been like without Morrissey. Except for one thing...I think it's an outstanding record, and it took me close to 20 years to finally track it down. But it should be plain & obvious simply by comparing these two that Marr's guitar playing is head & shoulders & miles above what just about anybody else was doing in that vein. In fact, I'd say he's easily one of the most innovative guitar players of all time. Maybe not up on the pedestal with Hendrix, but he deserves hero worship when it comes to any discussion of post-punk Britpop 80s stuff. And that's not taking his side because he's the musician, or anything like that. If you listen closely...his lines are way out there.

I've got a video of the Smiths performing in Germany circa 1984. It's real interesting to watch, especially considering I never saw them. I kinda don't regret missing them, because I think I get all I need to from this tape. But what this guy did was pretty remarkable. Morrissey is obviously a dominating presence, what with the gladiolas & all that nonsense. But I've got to tell you, I've got a pretty good ear & can sit down with a lot of rock records & work out the parts on a guitar, at least chord changes, both complicated & not. Hendrix was a guy whose work often stymied me when I tried to pick out chords; playing along with Led Zeppelin records was relatively easy compared to him. And I've got to say that Morrissey's stuff is way beyond anything I can pick up, at least without sitting there & working on it, which I never did with Smiths records. I can't even imagine how long it'd take me to work out those parts.

I saw Marr last year & he's no frontman, nor is his solo work all that compelling (he obviously needs to work with a collaborator). But I don't see what these guys did after the Smiths has to do with it, either. To me, not only was Marr a guy who wasn't simply strumming chords, he combined a (to me) rather advanced style of playing with catchy tunes, not an easy feat. Lots of guys can play that style, but I haven't heard anyone else who came up with tunes that good. So to me they're just about equal.

Dusty Chalk
02-23-2004, 06:19 PM
I agree w/J -- Marr is completely under-rated. I think he likes it that way. Listen to ...uh...dang, I forget if it's "Headmaster's Ritual" or "Barbarism Starts at Home" that has the excellent instrumental break. I think they were just one of those wonderful songwriting teams...