I follow your blog daily, and was wondering if you would be willing to share your insight on the whole Smiths reissue subject, as the man himself has made some interesting comments.
I thought he did get royalties (that's what the big legal battle was about a while back) -- rights? I figured of anyone I "know", on or offline, you'd be the deepest font of such knowledge. Anyway, I really appreciate any perspective you might share on the subject, and thanks for keeping up the villainy!
Best,
Patty
I was flattered to say the least by Patty saying I'm the deepest font of knowledge....I see myself simply as someone who fell in love with the music when the band first came to our collective attentions back in the early 80s and have remained a fan ever since, albeit some of the solo output of Morrissey has got on my tits now and again. There are many more fans out there better qualified to offer views on anything Morrisseyesque.
Patty has specifically asked for my views on this story:-
Morrissey tells netdepressives to boycott his re-releases
By Gavin Clarke in San Francisco : Posted in Music and Media, 14th August 2009 23:29 GMT
Lyricist and sardonic crooner Morrissey has urged loyal fans to steer clear when the big music labels re-release his old tunes.
Mozzer has asked fans not to buy either a planned boxed set of his solo work or a re-released set of CDs and vinyl from his days with the legendary Smiths.
The EMI, HMV and Parlophone record labels in November plan a boxed set of Morrissey singles and B-sides from his post-Smiths years spanning 1985 to 1999.
But Morrissey told the True to You site: "Morrissey does not approve such releases and would ask people not to bother buying them. Morrissey receives no royalty payments from EMI for any back catalogue, and has not received a royalty from EMI since 1992."
Morrissey - the inspiration to a generation of lonely and awkward adolescents who fumbled with their feelings along with themselves in their bedrooms and the empty disco halls of the 1980s - has also taken exception to a planned set of Smiths CDs from entertainment label Rhino and Warner's re-release of Smiths LPs on 180 gramme vinyl.
Again, Morrissey does not approve of, and was not consulted on, the Rhino set. "Morrissey last received a royalty payment from Warners ten years ago, and, once again, he would ask people not to bother buying the reissued LPs or CDs," the statement said.
Stop me if you think you've heard this one before, but this is the second time the queen of the North has thrown his daffodils at entertainment giant Warner. He urged fans to avoid Warner's Morrissey live at the Hollywood Bowl last August, slamming it as the slapdash work of cash hounds.
Morrissey said in a statement on True to You at the time, he'd not been consulted on the release, which he claimed was a "breach of contract".
"I am not signed to Warner, and no royalties from this DVD will come to me. Please spend your money elsewhere," Morrissey said.
As is mentioned in the article this is the second time in 12 months that the great man has complained about material being released without his consent - it happened in August 2008 when the Live At The Hollywood Bowl DVD was issued. On both occasions, he has made a big issue about a lack of royalties.
I reckon this obsession with royalties goes back to the infamous court case that he lost to Mike Joyce when he was forced to pay out millions after a judgement went against him. Read here for a quick summary.
My initial reaction is to have sympathy with Morrissey and say that fans should be careful of shelling out cash for product when none of it will end up in his bank accounts.
But then I think a bit more about things such as the umpteen greatest hits LPs that have been released over the years (with yet another compilation due this side of Xmas), the outrageous prices for t-shirts and other merchandising at gigs, and then there's the fact that having jumped from one major to another throughout the 90s, he's probably not done too bad in terms of advances and so on. Problem now seems to be the short-terms gains from his various contracts turn out to be a poor deal in the long-run.
Plus....it really is a bit careless to have a situation when you've signed contracts that allows this to happen again and again with so many different record labels, so Morrissey really only has himself to blame.
When he had the row about the DVD I thought he could have done something about it by releasing an alternative concert - even if it had to be one that was hastily arranged and filmed - but clearly he was content simply to moan about things. Granted, its a bit more difficult to do something about old material being re-issued - but hasn't he really done the record labels a big favour by drawing attention to the very fact that these releases are imminent? I'd be surprised if any hardcore fans don't already have the songs in their collections, either from buying them first time around or scouring the internet for second-hand copies. Who knows, some may even have been downloading from the myriad of sites that post Morrissey/The Smiths songs of days of old.....
And without this oxygen of publicity would all that many people have noticed these releases? I think not.....
Patty asked for my insight, and for all that it matters in the grand scale of things, I'm not sympathetic to the great man's call to boycott these products. I know that if I was a relatively new fan who was desperate to get a hold of a long-deleted song that I loved and the only way to do was through these releases, then I'd be at the local record store on the day of release.
mp3 : The Smiths - You Just Haven't Earned It Yet Baby
mp3 : Morrissey - You're Gonna Need Someone On Your Side
As ever, feel free to join in the debate.
13 comments:
"Reissue, repackage, repackage"
I am surprised that he gets no royalties. The advances must have been huge. In any case, I don't think it can just be greed. Morrissey's cynical attitude to record company reissues and greatest hits goes right back to the early days and has remained constant.
"Best of ! Most of! Satiate the need. Slip them into different sleeves! Buy both, and feel deceived"
As you say, if I didn't already have them then I too would buy and dance my legs down to the knees.
But only if they came with extra tracks and a tacky badge?
Morrissey recently said in an interview that all the royalties from The Smiths era were going towards paying Mike Joyce's court victory. So... by asking fans not to buy any Smiths related re-issues what he is actually asking is for people to stop giving money to Mike Joyce.
I agree with the man. If you are a new fan and desperately want to get the music, it's easy to find in both new and second hand shops. There is absolutely no reason to have more Best Of compilations.
God save the Internet for allowing me to listen to so many great songs. Some releases don't make it to bicycle-towns so I do feel surprised when those kind of things get in sight at some store nearby, obviously with a high import price. Nah, I don't have to bother about any of these issues. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on the Hollywood Bowl DVD, tho'. Greetings.
I second that emotion, VV.
Well it's about time someone brought up The Smiths.
I know villan that you love Morrissey but I am afraid that try as I might, I just cannot get into his solo stuff. It's very very average.
The Smiths were one of the best bands this country has ever produced.
You either loved or hated Morrissey, there is no middle ground. For me the 2 real God's of the band were Marr & Rourke. Johnny is a true guitar hero and being an amateur bass player myself, I adore the awsome playing of Andy Rourke. Mike Joyce?...well anyone could have done his part!
I believe Morrissey made the situation worse by fleeing England for Los Angeles back in the '90s and never paying the $2.1 million awarded to Joyce. So, not only does Morrissey owe Joyce the principal amount, he also owes Joyce a great deal in accrued interest. I also remember reading that Joyce had gone after Morrissey's relatives for payment in Morrissey's absence. As a means of resolving the situation, I believe all of Morrissey's UK Smiths' royalties have been garnished and are paid to Joyce, instead. I think this is only applicable to Morrissey' UK Smiths' royalties, not his solo work or any Smiths royalties he receives outside of the UK. In any event, I agree with VV -- "Morrissey really only has himself to blame."
Steve
VV keep up the good work
Steve - I love the Moz but he is wrong on this one. He stiffed Joyce for all those years and Joyce cant even get paid back, has to wait for it to dribble in. And the Moz is the king of the singles compilation. So if you need a quick fix, i see no problem with Joyce getting paid. This actually reminds me of a quote about baseball: a couple hunderd of millionaires arguing about how to split up the pot. Substitute Moz, Joyce and Warner Brothers and there you go.
although I am not surprised that Morrissey and The Smiths had usurious contracts, I would never put the blame at Morrissey or the bands feet. Managers make deals, musicians make music...it is rare that the musicians ever achieve the competence or clout to write their own ticket... even Mick & Keith didn't start to get their way until the early 80's. I doubt that the Gallagher brothers have much say over their early catalogue, but probably have complete control over their more recent dross...I bet Morrissey's current contract isn't all it that when you shake out the legalese.
Well, usually the problem is that an artist can't get their back catalogue released despite strong demand by their fans. This is a situation I consider abominable. I think that a record company owes a duty to an artist to either make their product available, or else release the rights back to the artist so that they can get it released elsewhere.
In this case, seems the RC are making the product available, but the artist just cut a bad deal in his contract. Well, if it had been one company that then I'd feel sympathy. But so many basically tells me Moz only has himself to blame for this. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, guess I'm just a right prat.
I also find there to be some ironic justice in that, he and Marr screwed Rourke and Joyce...So a bit of comeuppance, here. Anything derogatory he has to say about the record companies is rather the pot calling the kettle black, innit?
Moz is a bundle of contradictions. Sympathy is the last thing he needs.
Stars are made by us, the fools that buy them up. Record companies are made by accountants and schysters who think of profit and not of fame, of commodities and not of fans. You mix the two: the star with his fans and the accountant/schyster with his greed and you get a vinaigrette that will never blend. It's always oil and vinegar yet each needing the other in order to thrive. We fans are MADE by them, not by ourselves, you see.
Do superstars like Morrissey become immune to greed? Can they remain immune in the business they have chosen to remain a player in? We can't very well worship them and then expect them to go off like Cat Stevens and give it all up, now can we?
No, I'm not sympathetic. But I'll not grant the corporations their rights without having my say in how they've constructed the world of music either. It's been to all our detriment and let's not forget that.
So Basically Moz is telling us to steer clear of, say a ptential Smiths remastered back cat, and boy does it need it.
I for one if they remaster it all, will get them, as much as I like Moz, I think he is a bit of an arse for saying that stuff, but true on the 1 millioneth compilation. No more please.
here endth the lesson
V, I know you are (partially) joking about anyone being able to play Mike Joyce's parts, but as a drummer I have to offer some kind of defence.
I recently had to learn some Smiths songs for a tribute night that my band was involved in.
Perhaps it was just the songs we choose to play - Bigmouth, Frankly Mr Shankly and How Soon is Now - but every one of them was deeply repetitive, basically recycling the same chord sequences again and again as verse moved to chorus and back again, often with little or discernible difference between the two.
The songs were quite boring to play, but at the same time they could also be quite awkward, which I put down to Morrissey's, ahem, mercurial vocal phrasings. No doubt that's part of Morrissey's unique talent.
Sure, Mike Joyce's beats do not appear that complicated, but in many cases they are deceptively so.
As you rightly point out Rourke was a stunning bass player, combing fluid melodies with hard rhythm.
If Joyce had decided to play flash , which I've no doubt he can do, can you imagine what a mess the songs would have sounded like?
The music was essentially a vehicle to carry Morrissey's often idiosyncratic vocals. It needed to be tight and together and for that you need a drummer who is tight and together.
With the exception of the intro for the Queen is Dead, which is an absolute dog of a beat, Mike Joyce performed his role well nigh perfectly.
And you do have to remember the basic maxim - a sh*t band can have a great drummer, but a great band will never have a sh*t drummer.
As for bass players - Adam Clayton is the luckiest man in rock music, no doubt.
Post a Comment