The Seductive Paradox of Morrissey: The Smiths’ Meat Is Murder At 40

Steven Patrick Morrissey is an unpleasant person. We can say that now, 40 years since the release of Meat Is Murder, his band’s second record, with complete confidence. He is a battle-hardened culture warrior of the right wing, a man whose political views have slipped far beyond the point of contrarianism into straight-up chauvinism. The complication is that, despite all the terrible stuff he believes and advocates for, Morrissey also happens to be one of the great songwriters and singers of his—and any—generation. He is an artist of profound wit and insight, someone who bears a particular knack for tapping into the sensitivities of the abused and alienated and making them feel seen. He is, plainly, a crooning, seductive paradox.
I arrived at the Smiths fairly late in life, long after the evidence of Morrissey’s shit politics had piled up beyond the point of plausible deniability. Aged 18 or 19, I was properly introduced to them by a friend, who, in the old-fashioned style, lent me a plastic bag full of CDs, of which one was the Sound of the Smiths compilation. I liked it well enough, but did not yet love it, probably due to the fact that, at that particular point, I had only recently discovered the joys of dance music and clubs with low ceilings. I had no need, during those hyperactive days of house music and disco treats, of a dour man’s declarations, set over Johnny Marr’s jangly guitars, of how bloody sad everything is, but that duly changed as life ground on. That little summer of love is long gone, and now, a decade or so later, Morrissey’s exquisite misery often hits just right.
Meat Is Murder, the follow-up to the Smiths’ self-titled debut LP, arrived smack in the middle of the 1980s, on February 11, 1985, which is a fact I’ve always found surprising. The Smiths never sounded to me like an ’80s band; they seemed, to the contrary, older, and entirely antithetical to the synthesizers and glamorous sense of fun I tend to associate with the decade’s music. They always seemed so serious, which, given how funny Morrissey’s writing can be at times, probably isn’t fair, but, with an album title as bleak as Meat Is Murder, it’s an understandable interpretation.
The title track, which appears at the very end of the record, is certainly intended to be serious, but it is, too, probably the weakest of the lot, even if its intentions are admirable. “Meat Is Murder” is a jarring soundscape of violence, bookended by the cold din of buzzsaws and cattle screams, but, as a song, it just doesn’t sound great and its message never quite lands. As someone who flits between vegetarianism and carnivorism every few years, the song has never struck me as an especially persuasive call to reject meat. My meat-eating stupor has never been shaken by moralistic lecturing, nor by illustrations of the incomprehensible violence it entails, but, rather, by the experience of spending time in the countryside and actually being among those animals we love to eat. It is when I see mother cows so obviously express affection for their babies, or when I watch lambs skip about and race each other, that I actually snap out the self-imposed numbness required to eat animals. It is the realization of their joy, not their suffering, that most drives me to empathize, and the song, for perfectly understandable reasons, has no interest in evoking joy.
Morrissey is more adept at inducing empathy for other people. Where his depiction of the violence done to animals is too great and broad to truly land with me, the ordinary human-on-human violence he sings of throughout the album hits closer to home. Meat Is Murder’s first song—a hard, cool slap to the face, if ever an album opener could be—is “The Headmaster Ritual,” an almost Dickensian tale of cruel, military-like teachers in bleak schools subjecting their students to thwacks on knees, knees to groins, elbows to faces. The humdrum violence Morrissey sings of was a very real part of schooling once upon a time, but not one that I, a soft, delicate millennial, ever experienced. Yet the Smiths have this wonderful ability to, through both the music and the poetry of Morrissey’s words, provoke the pleasure and pain of one’s memories, even if the content of the song and the listener’s memories don’t quite align. Their music taps into a well inside us which shouldn’t necessarily even be there.
I did not go to an English school of the mid-20th century, where teacher-commanders worked through the frustrations of their sexless marriages by physically beating their students. But still I respond to the “Headmaster Ritual,” recalling my own days trapped inside Irish schools of the 2000s and early 2010s. There were no beatings there, but I recognize well the “belligerent ghouls” who are “jealous of youth” that Morrissey evokes in the song. These were hostile bastards at the head of plenty of my classrooms, who, but for the good grace of modern child protection laws, would have taken great pleasure in thwacking young knees and elbowing young faces. Some of our teachers were nice, most were indifferent, but a few were cruel fuckers—vindictive bullies, sociopaths and a couple of racists, too.
I, for the most part, kept my head down and checked out during most lessons, itching to get home, away from the pent-up misery of the place, and into my bedroom, where I could freely pursue release through music and excessive masturbation. When Morrissey sings, “I wanna go home / I don’t want to stay,” these are the grey memories of tedium and loneliness that he draws to the surface. In “Barbarism Begins at Home,” he, again, explores the violence that children can have done to them by adults, but, this time, he situates the tale within the family home. Morrissey has the good sense to recognize the damage such cruelty does to kids, and, consequently, he asserts that “unruly boys who will not grow up” and “unruly girls who will not settle down,” should, rather than receiving “a crack on the head,” instead “be taken in hand.” It is a call for compassion, an acknowledgement that treating young people with care, as opposed to beating them into submission, is a more effective way of reaching them, a pertinent point in today’s particular social climate.