Kurt D

FWIW I think Decker is explaining why Michaels' decision as an entertainment executive was legitimate, regardless of whether O'Connors actions were righteous or not. (They definitely were, and she just unfortunately made her statement during time when a post-Reagan reactionary stance could still be very powerful.)

JasonF

Black Boys on Mopeds is as timely as when it was released a third of a century ago (unfortunately). And still (fortunately) as haunting and beautiful.


What a talented person she was.

BDB

https://www.morrisseycentral.com/mes...-couldn-t-last


he’s correct but also very wrong. I think he wants to be there where she is was. But that’s not it at all

Decker

You may not be aware of this, but it is possible to have a completely admirable opinion and still express it at an inappropriate time. Like if your drunk uncle grabs the microphone during your Best Man's toast and starts screaming that we need to stop human trafficking. That might be absolutely the right sentiment, but clearly not the right time to express it.
I remember the Oscars had a run where presenters like Richard Gere went off-script on Political topics like Tibet. Nothing wrong with his opinion, but that was neither the time or the place for it. The Oscars cracked down : A winner can make whatever statement he wants, as that's his time in the spotlight to talk. A presenter can't. I thought that was a wise policy.

Also she said "Fight the real enemy" while tearing up a picture of the Pope. I didn't know for sure what she even meant, as I am sure many others were confused as well.

In addition, if she is allowed to make a surprise statement like that on SNL, so should Jason Aldean at the end of his set, and so can everyone else. It becomes a political statement free-for-all on a comedy variety show, and that's not what Lorne wants and it's not what the public wants.

If she did something like that in her own show (like the Dixie Chicks and Linda Ronstadt did, with bad outcomes for their careers), I'm fine with it. It's her show, she can say what she likes. And as I mentioned, she had a huge platform at the time and could have gotten her message out in the way that U2 and Springsteen and Neil Young did over and over again.

The SNL move was wrong, even though I agree that what the Church did was far worse. Both can be true at the same time.

RayChuang

O'Connor took a huge artistic risk with what she did that night on Saturday Night Live, back when the show was far more popular. She should have made such a statement on MTV back when MTV was far more relevant, and while it would have been controversial would probably been a lot more accepted by MTV's intended audience. In my personal opinion, you begin to wonder if in recent years she privately regretted the decision, because otherwise, she could have been one of the truly great musical stars of at least the 1990's.

LurkerDan

Elvis Costello pulled a sudden move on SNL and was "banned" for a time, but he apparently was forgiven and invited back. Why not Sinead?

Decker

He played "Radio Radio" instead of "Less Than Zero". Lorne was pissed, but it's not close to the same thing as pissing off millions of Catholics on live TV. I'm sure you know that.

JasonF

She most certainly did not:

RayChuang

But how long ago did she make that statement? Was it said in the last 4-5 years? I believe she admitted no regrets just after 2000, but I haven't heard much recently.

Rival11

Honestly, this news definitely upsets me a little. Always though she was very talented.

Decker

And where exactly did I say that what she did was "more egregious than sexually assaulting thousands of children"? I just said it was inappropriate at that time, in that setting, and that she had plenty of other opportunities and setting in which she could "speak her truth". Way to break out the Straw Man.

PerryD

you replied to his post already, and more eloquently at that

LurkerDan

I do know that, but "pissing off millions of catholics on live TV" says nothing about how pissed off Lorne was. Elvis directly went against something he was expected to do, she did something unexpected. I doubt Lorne's grievance was specifically related to Catholicism, it was more likely related to things like ratings, his authority, trying to keep some semblance of order on a live TV show, etc. My only point was that Lorne apparently could get over a performer going off-script.

JeffTheAlpaca

Peter Gabriel shared his thoughts

https://www.brooklynvegan.com/read-s...le-monae-more/

Count Dooku

SNL had her on to perform Bob Marley's "War." The song is a political statement. The only reason for her to sing a 16 year old song like that is to make a political statement, which SNL completely endorsed.

So, you cannot say that performance in that place at that time was inappropriate for her to make a political statement. She was invited there to make a political statement. She just chose to make more of statement than she let on.

I do not acknowledge the validity of any slippery slope arguments. Saying that she was right does not mean that anyone else who tries something similar about some other issue is also right because each artist and issue is it's own island to be judged individually.

If any artist wants to try to use the SNL stage to make a surprise political statement that Lorne doesn't like, they can cut the sound or go to black at the flip of a switch. Maybe the chance that someone would do something spontaneous would make the show more interesting. And any argument that "you let Artist X say this, but you stopped Artist Y from saying that" is unfair is not something anyone should care about. Fairness is irrelevant. For almost 50 years, SNL has been making approved political statements that push a political agenda. It's all just a matter of who approves.

I'm certain Lorne Michaels had his reasons for his reaction in 1992. We all have done things in the past that we had reasons for doing that later on we regret and apologize for. As I posted, I think Michaels should at some point regretted his reaction, just like everyone of those people who booed her at the Bob Dylan tribute should have realized later on that they did something once that was absolutely fucking moronic and wrong.

She was right. People didn't realize it and didn't want to hear it, but she was right. Would have been nice if an esteemed figure like Lorne would have been willing to admit it.

The Antipodean

Love how even a thread about someone dying has to devolve into an argument here these days.

RIP, Sinead.

RayChuang

It's not hard to swerve into a political argument given how extremely controversial what O'Connor did at the time.

But yet, her popularity essentially ended with that statement. Her first two albums were major artistic and sales successes and O'Connor had just released a third album at the time. It became a case of what could have been.

PerryD

Her politics line up with those vocal in this forum, so this is hardly a political argument, just some nuance of the time. Wait until Ted Nugent dies and you'll see the real gross behavior come out

JasonF

It’s from her 2021 memoir. She was consistent in her public statements her whole life that she had no regrets at all about what she did and the effect of her actions on her career.

Paff

Quick correction here, it was more than just Elvis "going off script". Radio Radio is a song that rails heavily against corporate radio stations, and at the time WNBC was the biggest radio giant in the area. Lorne's stance only softened as radio became less influential in the music world (Elvis' song was pre-MTV). Elvis singing that song then would be like the Dead Kennedys going on 120 Minutes and playing MTV Get Off the Air.

Since we're talking Sinead and SNL, anyone now feel a little guilty about laughing at Jan Hooks' turns at portraying her on the show? Or Phil Hartman's "next topic! This bald chick! What's with her head? Uncle Fester, we'll start with you". And then how sad it is that all 4 people (Sinatra, O'Connor, Hartman, and Hooks) are no longer with us. Such great musical and comedic talent.

Count Dooku

My politics are diametrically opposed to Nugent's, but I won't have a comment to make when he dies. Except for a few great songs that he recorded 50 years ago, he is irrelevant.

Nope, not at all. Just reading the words written out, I remember how hilarious that sketch was. She was a public figure and SNL mocks public figures. Fair game all around.

Count Dooku

performance is more like rough karaoke but it's the thought that counts

northeast11

There are many public figures with viewpoints I disagree with. But it doesn't mean I will celebrate when (s)he passes away.

milo bloom

I have come to take issue with how SNL goes after public figures because too often it feels like they're either punching down or at least punching parallel instead of punching up and going after public figures that truly have power and are being problematic.
But Sinead was clearly not that, and I wonder if they had done a moment's research into what she was talking about, if SNL could have started going after the Catholic church sooner and maybe turned the tide of public opinion a little sooner. They have a large platform, and when they use it for good, I truly think they can make a difference.

beavis69

Negative. She knew what she was doing, she knew the consequences (although probably not how extreme they would get) and choose to do it on a program that had a diverse audience. Why would I make a political statement at an event attended by people who probably hold the same opinion as myself. Goofy.

And you're analogy is dumb.