Morrissey has once again turned his fire on Johnny Marr, and this time he did it in a now-deleted essay that reads like another open wound in the long, ugly post-Smiths feud. In a post titled “The Art Of Forgery” on Morrissey Central, the singer accused his former bandmate of helping to “destroy” The Smiths’ legacy and claimed Marr has spent his adult life attacking him in public. Far Out reports that the essay was removed after it went online, but not before it reignited one of rock’s most bitter breakups.
The timing of the outburst matters. Morrissey’s attack was tied to a forthcoming BBC radio documentary on The Smiths, which he said would air on July 13. In the essay, he complained that the BBC had warned the program would be critical of him, and he said he was not invited to participate. He also mocked the idea that Marr repeatedly gets center stage in Smiths documentaries while Morrissey is cast as the villain, writing that Marr is the “unchanging face of discord.”
That framing was only the beginning. Morrissey accused Marr of portraying him as an “executioner,” claimed the guitarist cannot do anything with his life except look backward, and rejected the old story that he fired Andy Rourke by leaving a note on the bassist’s car. Morrissey called that claim a “tired lie,” saying he had no authority to fire Rourke because he never hired him in the first place.
The most explosive line in the deleted essay was saved for the end of the attack: Morrissey said Marr has “devoted his entire life to killing Morrissey in whatever way available.” He also argued that Marr is “destroying the legacy of the Smiths” and planting doubt everywhere around the band’s history. For Morrissey, the issue is not just personal resentment. It is an argument over who gets to control the story of one of the most important bands in British indie music.
This latest flare-up did not come out of nowhere. The pair were already locked in a public war of words in 2024, when Morrissey said Marr had rejected a lucrative Smiths reunion and accused him of making trademark and release decisions without consultation. Marr pushed back, saying the trademark move was meant to stop third parties from profiting from the band’s name and that he did not ignore the reunion proposal — he simply said no.
That dispute is the real fuel behind the current hostility. Morrissey has long argued that The Smiths was fundamentally his project, saying the lyrics, titles, artwork, and vocal melodies were all his vision. In the deleted essay, he repeated that line almost word for word, insisting that when people praise the band but criticize him, they are talking about a story that never truly existed. Marr’s response, by contrast, has been that the trademark actions were meant to protect the band rather than seize it.
Morrissey also aimed at others connected to the BBC documentary. He called producer Grant Showbiz’s comments “slanderous” and attacked The Guardian as well, saying the paper had spent years making him its favorite target. At one point he even accused Marr of influencing that coverage, saying he supposedly had a chance to steer people away from seeing The Smiths as Morrissey’s project.
The deleted essay also leaned into Morrissey’s usual theatrical style: third-person references, hyperbole, and self-mythologizing. He wrote about “Morrissey” as if he were a character in his own saga, then closed with a line about “pie-fights,” saying he would “always be reborn.” That kind of grandstanding is exactly why these outbursts keep landing so hard. They are part grievance, part performance, and part attempt to control the narrative before anyone else can.
Far Out says it contacted a spokesperson for Johnny Marr for comment. So far, there has been no public response to the deleted essay, but the damage is already done. Whether fans see Morrissey as defending his legacy or simply reopening an old feud for attention, one thing is obvious: he is still treating Johnny Marr as the central enemy in The Smiths story.
