Some might ask: "Why start such a crazy debate?"
Well that's what rock nerds do sir or maddam. Here are my first few points to explain why Belle beats The Smiths.
-Numbers Don't Lie: Belle and Sebastian have 5 studio albums that fall somewhere between good and classic. The Smiths have 3, though some might argue the merits of
Meat is Murder it is widly accepted to be an artistic short fall for such a significant band.
- Stuart Murdoch has been able to hold Belle And Sebastian together through several lineup changes. Sadly Morrisey was unable to keep an on par Smiths without the able guitar work and songwriting assistance of Jonny Marr.
-The Overwhelming quality of Belle and Sebastian's B-Sides and EPs is rarely called into question. It is widly accepted that Belle and Sebastian have one of the most valuably rareties catologues around. The Smiths lack greatly in the area of quality vault material.
-It is important to have a singular sound. However it is also valuable to be able to adjust your singular sound to other influences. This is something that The Smiths never even seemed to try , while Belle and Sebastian have spent the new decade refurbishing and reanimating their sound.
- While some mid period Belle and Sebastian albums (
Fold Your Hands Child, You Walk Like a Peasant in particular) have been just plain shitty Belle and Sebastian have been able to achieve the rare feet of having a second act with their last two albums. This is something that Morrisey's solo albums have rarely even hinted at.
- Popularity does not denote quality, please put these arguments to rest. Of course the Smiths are going to have more support in a broad debate but that lacks the objectivity of people who've been equally exposed to both bands.
I have more of an arguement but we'll leave it at this...
For now.
