Artist News Brands & Merch Legal

Morrissey takes up modelling, decides it’s not for him

By | Published on Tuesday 16 February 2016


Adverts for fashion brand Supreme featuring that Morrissey began showing up around the world last week. But the normally very amiable and easy to work with singer has distanced himself from the campaign already, claiming that the company breached their contract.

“I apologise enormously for the enfeebled photograph of me issued this week by Supreme”, said Morrissey via his True To You website. “The shot was taken in October 2015. I considered the photograph to be fit only for a medical encyclopaedia and I pleaded with Supreme not to use it. This was before I learned that Supreme were sponsored in part by the beef sandwich pharaoh known as White Castle”.

That latter point being a problem, of course, because of Morrissey’s strict vegetarianism. He added: “Supreme were issued with a legal caution not to use the photograph and [told] their fee would be returned. Evidently Supreme have ignored my lawyer. No safety within the corridors of law. Ugh”.

As can usually be expected in these circumstances, the company Morrissey accuses of being completely unreasonable claims that it actually bent over backwards to work with him.

“Morrissey required a substantial fee for his participation in this project which Supreme paid up front and in full”, a spokesperson for the firm told Stereogum. “The photo shoot lasted two hours and Morrissey was free to do, and pose as he wished. The agreement prohibits Morrissey from ‘unreasonably’ withholding approval of the use of photographs taken at the photo shoot”.

Contractually bound not to be unreasonable, what do you think Morrissey did next? Supreme explained: “After offering Morrissey several options of images from the shoot, Morrissey rejected them all with no explanation. Instead, Morrissey insisted on using a photo that he had taken of himself wearing a Supreme t-shirt for the campaign”.

The company says it then offered three options: to do a complete re-shoot at its expense, for Morrissey to choose another photo from the original shoot, or for him to return his fee and everyone go their separate ways.

“Morrissey repeatedly ignored all three options with no reason given as to why”, the Supreme spokesperson continued. “He then proceeded to assert a sudden and ridiculous claim that because Supreme had used the White Castle logo on a group of products in the past, and because he is a known vegetarian, that the agreement was supposedly terminated”.

“After many attempts to solve this problem, and left with no other viable options, Supreme proceeded to publish these images as per it’s agreement with Morrissey”, they concluded.

Luckily for all involved, Morrissey was on hand to clear up all confusion. Writing a new statement, he says: “As a matter of fact, I do not have, do not want, nor do I need, any money from the company called Supreme. If Supreme have sent money in my name then they could track it down and reclaim it – if they had NOT printed that photograph of me for their 2016 campaign. By running prints of the photograph they have derailed their own negotiations. This is why they are angry”.

“The photograph is dreadful and will help neither myself nor Supreme”, he continues. “Who needs it? Nobody. Supreme were warned by my lawyer and accountant that the photograph should NOT be used. Supreme ignored this advice. Hence this mess”.

Why is Morrissey bothering to write all these statement, you may wonder. Does he get some kind of joy from doing so? “I write these statements because there is no one else to write them”, he writes, pre-empting you. “The joy I receive from such statements is non-existent”.

Ugh indeed.