Curious discrepancies between the Penguin UK/Putnam US editions of Autobiography

An anonymous person writes:

I picked up my copy of the American edition of Autobiography today and started reading through it, and when I reached the part of the book where Jake is introduced, I noticed that his picture was missing. I didn't really think anything of it, but then I realized that his section of the book is heavily edited, with certain paragraphs detailing the relationship truncated considerably and some lines and anecdotes omitted entirely. What's really strange is how trivial some of these changes are; for example, in the UK version of the book, Morrissey describes a night out with Jake and Chrissie Hynde at a Battersea pub, but in the American version it is only Morrissey with Chrissie.

This part of the book contains the only editorial differences between the UK/US editions I've noticed so far, though I haven't read through it all so there could be more. However, I find these changes very odd and they stymy the flow of Morrissey's prose somewhat, to the extent that it actually lessens the emotional intensity of what I consider to be one of the most moving sections of the book. I'm wondering if the press frenzy that followed the publication of the book made either Jake or Morrissey uncomfortable, which led to these revisions. Obviously, this is purely conjecture as there's no way I could possibly know for sure. I just can't really think of any other explanation.

Has anyone else noticed this?

---

UPDATE Dec. 4:

joe frady also adds:

The British Hard Version is similarly trimmed. No 'walked in and stayed for 2 years, or 'I becomes we'. No British Airways brothers/lovers anecdote, whole Dublin/Dr Anthony Clare/Sherborne episode excised, no tea in the bath, someone to answer the telephone, etc. No teenage pic neither. And he drinks only with Chrissie in the British Flag pub.

---

Media coverage:

• MORRISSEY’S GAY RELATIONSHIP REPORTEDLY EDITED OUT OF US COPIES OF AUTOBIOGRAPHY - FACT Magazine. Link posted by wemissumoz.
• Morrissey - Morrissey's Male Lover Edited From U.s. Book Release - WENN / ContactMusic.com
• 5 Intimate Lines Cut From U.S. Version of Morrissey's Book - Fuse. Link posted by an anonymous person.
• Morrissey's Intimate Relationship With Another Man Reportedly Removed From U.S. 'Autobiography' - Huffington Post. Link from Lee.
• Morrissey’s Relationship With Jake Walters Omitted From American Release & British Hardcover Editions of His Autobiography - 2020k. Link posted by 2020k.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

He also dedicated his story to Julia Riley. Think he is sleeping with her as well? First of all, we don't even know that Tina is real. Is she a plant--a fictitious person introduced in the book to paint a bisexual image for the reader? Or a pseudonym for Moz himself or another person? No pics of them together. No pics of her on the Net. No social media for her. No history, shy of an address in Woodland Hills. Could be Tina. Maybe not. Could be another Tina. There are quite a few with her name out there. That is all you have to go on to formulate your hypothesis that the Swords cover is related to her.

Even if there was a Tina. It was more companionate love than passionate love. She may still be near and dear to him. But not as a lover. I don't think for a second he spends so much time in LA because of 'Tina.' He has been residing there since the late nineties... way before he supposedly met her. And apparently he still owns property there. He loves LA for un-Tina reasons, obviously.

I think it is you who cannot accept that he is gay. It ruins all chances for you--in your mind. You need to keep the fantasy alive. You are not the only hetero female that experienced cognitive dissonance when reading the book. So you make that little Tina molehill into that hetero mountain. You had to. The truth is too painful. I could care less who he sleeps with. Or which sex he desires. I am not sexually attracted to the man. You are. Gay is not an aphrodisiac for the obsessed hetero-female Moz fan.

Notice how all the Go-Tina cheerleaders are hetero females? You may be too wrapped up in the delusions to see it?

You're the one who drops the tidbit he owns property in LA and did extensive Tina research and I'm the obsessed one? I'm just deducing they're quiet lovers, I have no facts.

 

[Anonymous]

Damon's daughter and girlfriend are proof enough. Do you have anything better to do that post on this site 28 hours a day? Go interact with humans you might someday become one. You should be sued for libel.

I'm friend with Damon on facebook, for the little bit I know he got no girlfriend or daughter, the pic of the new born on his facebook page belongs to his cousin's daughter. We are not angry and not unpolite or jelous, Inthink Realitybites got her life to and quite happy, we simply got a brain and trying to reading under the lines. this thread is not about Tina, there is another one on this site and no one posted something reasonable about that. The discussion ends in simply gossip because some people refuse to accept different points of view. Anyway Jake was exchanged for his personal assistentn at the start of their relationship, do you remember?

 

[Anonymous]

He also dedicated his story to Julia Riley. Think he is sleeping with her as well? First of all, we don't even know that Tina is real. Is she a plant--a fictitious person introduced in the book to paint a bisexual image for the reader? Or a pseudonym for Moz himself or another person? No pics of them together. No pics of her on the Net. No social media for her. No history, shy of an address in Woodland Hills. Could be Tina. Maybe not. Could be another Tina. There are quite a few with her name out there. That is all you have to go on to formulate your hypothesis that the Swords cover is related to her.

Even if there was a Tina. It was more companionate love than passionate love. She may still be near and dear to him. But not as a lover. I don't think for a second he spends so much time in LA because of 'Tina.' He has been residing there since the late nineties... way before he supposedly met her. And apparently he still owns property there. He loves LA for un-Tina reasons, obviously.

I think it is you who cannot accept that he is gay. It ruins all chances for you--in your mind. You need to keep the fantasy alive. You are not the only hetero female that experienced cognitive dissonance when reading the book. So you make that little Tina molehill into that hetero mountain. You had to. The truth is too painful. I could care less who he sleeps with. Or which sex he desires. I am not sexually attracted to the man. You are. Gay is not an aphrodisiac for the obsessed hetero-female Moz fan.

Notice how all the Go-Tina cheerleaders are hetero females? You may be too wrapped up in the delusions to see it?

You are WRONG. He stays at a hotel in LA. You're the one that found her on google and said how old she is and keeps bringing her up. She'd not an imaginary friend. I don't know if they were/are lovers.

 

[realitybites]

You're the one who drops the tidbit he owns property in LA and did extensive Tina research and I'm the obsessed one? I'm just deducing they're quiet lovers, I have no facts.

I'd hardly call utilizing the basic free tools of the Internet, which are available to all, as doing extensive research.

I'm not obsessed. I'm just not buying that he is in any way, shape, or form attracted to women sexually. I read his book. That was enough evidence for me. Men who desire women sexually, don't describe them as nasty creatures, while at the same time glorifying the male form.

Either he is bi and a misogynist--sleeps with women but devalues them. Or, he is gay--women are a little yucky down there but he loves them as fellow human beings, none the less. I choose to believe it is that latter. Because the first option is too painful to accept.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

I'd hardly call utilizing the basic free tools of the Internet, which are available to all, as doing extensive research.

I'm not obsessed. I'm just not buying that he is in any way, shape, or form attracted to women sexually. I read his book. That was enough evidence for me. Men who desire women sexually, don't describe them as nasty creatures, while at the same time glorifying the male form.

Either he is bi and a misogynist--sleeps with women but devalues them. Or, he is gay--women are a little yucky down there but he loves them as fellow human beings, none the less. I choose to believe it is that latter. Because the first option is too painful to accept.

Wow. That's some pretty ace rationalization of the fact you're basically a nosey little f***er. You should get a job writing polemics for the National Enquirer.

 

[realitybites]

Wow. That's some pretty ace rationalization of the fact you're basically a nosey little f***er. You should get a job writing polemics for the National Enquirer.

You are bonkers!

Only idiots don't do Google searches for people... whether they are celebrities, acquaintances, potential employers or employes, neighbors, tenants etc. What the hell is a credit check? We are searched all the time by companies. The Net democratizes search. It empowers us. Things that are in the public record, are public for a reason. No one's privacy rights are being violated. Can you honestly say you have not Google searched your own name?

I am suspicious of anyone who says they don't search Google for people. They are either Luddites, lazy, not curious (bad thing to be), or lying. I have people tell me all the time they searched my name. I am sure there are even more who do, who don't say so.

You are a lying sack of shit if you are claiming you don't search people. You have searched for images of Morrissey. There is no difference. Public data is public data. It is what you do with that data that means something. Entering my address into your phone book is not as bad as wanking off to my photo you found online. I have a feeling you have violated Moz's privacy in that very way. I have not. I wonder if anybody has wanked off to a photo of you they found on Solo?

Btw, how do you think reporters and other journalists get their info? Research. It is all about what you do with the information. Information itself, is never a bad thing.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

You are bonkers!

Only idiots don't do Google searches for people... whether they are celebrities, acquaintances, potential employers or employes, neighbors, tenants etc. What the hell is a credit check? We are searched all the time by companies. The Net democratizes search. It empowers us. Things that are in the public record, are public for a reason. No one's privacy rights are being violated. Can you honestly say you have not Google searched your own name?

I am suspicious of anyone who says they don't search Google for people. They are either Luddites, lazy, not curious (bad thing to be), or lying. I have people tell me all the time they searched my name. I am sure there are even more who do, who don't say so.

You are a lying sack of shit if you are claiming you don't search people. You have searched for images of Morrissey. There is no difference. Public data is public data. It is what you do with that data that means something. Entering my address into your phone book is not as bad as wanking off to my photo you found online. I have a feeling you have violated Moz's privacy in that very way. I have not. I wonder if anybody has wanked off to a photo of you they found on Solo?

Btw, how do you think reporters and other journalists get their info? Research. It is all about what you do with the information. Information itself, is never a bad thing.

So you're saying me jerking off to Morrissey is more invasive than you doing extensive research on a potential love interest of his in an attempt to prove or disprove his sexual orientation? Mind. Blown.

 

[realitybites]

So you're saying me jerking off to Morrissey is more invasive than you doing extensive research on a potential love interest of his in an attempt to prove or disprove his sexual orientation? Mind. Blown.

Plugging a name into Google's search bar, is hardly what could be described as extensive research.


Are you saying you jerk off to Moz images?

I searched her name to find out things about her. Like I searched Morrissey and Damon and anyone else I am interested in learning about. Searched 'Charles Lindbergh' last night.

I was not searching for evidence that Moz is gay. The book was all I needed to back that theory.

 

[Anonymous]

You are bonkers!

Only idiots don't do Google searches for people... whether they are celebrities, acquaintances, potential employers or employes, neighbors, tenants etc. What the hell is a credit check? We are searched all the time by companies. The Net democratizes search. It empowers us. Things that are in the public record, are public for a reason. No one's privacy rights are being violated. Can you honestly say you have not Google searched your own name?

I am suspicious of anyone who says they don't search Google for people. They are either Luddites, lazy, not curious (bad thing to be), or lying. I have people tell me all the time they searched my name. I am sure there are even more who do, who don't say so.

You are a lying sack of shit if you are claiming you don't search people. You have searched for images of Morrissey. There is no difference. Public data is public data. It is what you do with that data that means something. Entering my address into your phone book is not as bad as wanking off to my photo you found online. I have a feeling you have violated Moz's privacy in that very way. I have not. I wonder if anybody has wanked off to a photo of you they found on Solo?

Btw, how do you think reporters and other journalists get their info? Research. It is all about what you do with the information. Information itself, is never a bad thing.

The point is you are calling people obssesive for wanting Morrissey to no be gay yet it is equally obsessive you going on about he not be bi, yet it is same difference, you look into Morrissey no less than others, yet you claim you are normal and others are obsessive.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

Plugging a name into Google's search bar, is hardly what could be described as extensive research.


Are you saying you jerk off to Moz images?

I searched her name to find out things about her. Like I searched Morrissey and Damon and anyone else I am interested in learning about. Searched 'Charles Lindbergh' last night.

I was not searching for evidence that Moz is gay. The book was all I needed to back that theory.

You searched to see if she was real (newsflash: not everyone whores themselves on social media) because you couldn't believe that someone as "misogynistic" as Morrissey would have relations with a woman. You said this. You searched for proof of property. You searched Damon. You follow Jake on twitter. It is YOUR RIGHT to meddle into his privacy because the technology you hold so dear (your most prized possession is a f***ing tablet? srsly?) enables you to and anyone who doesn't search for people they're interested in is a Luddite. You are obsessed. It is your right to know the answer and when HE GIVES IT TO YOU... WHEN HE SAYS I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL it's still NOT ENOUGH. YOU ARE THE REASON MEDIA IS RIDICULOUS.

If Morrissey posted a f***ing video of him sticking his dick in a woman it STILL wouldn't be enough, you are programmed NOT TO BELIEVE HIM.

 

[realitybites]

You searched to see if she was real (newsflash: not everyone whores themselves on social media) because you couldn't believe that someone as "misogynistic" as Morrissey would have relations with a woman. You said this. You searched for proof of property. You searched Damon. You follow Jake on twitter. It is YOUR RIGHT to meddle into his privacy because the technology you hold so dear (your most prized possession is a f***ing tablet? srsly?) enables you to and anyone who doesn't search for people they're interested in is a Luddite. You are obsessed. It is your right to know the answer and when HE GIVES IT TO YOU... WHEN HE SAYS I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL it's still NOT ENOUGH. YOU ARE THE REASON MEDIA IS RIDICULOUS.

If Morrissey posted a f***ing video of him sticking his dick in a woman it STILL wouldn't be enough, you are programmed NOT TO BELIEVE HIM.

Look at you, the person who earned the title 'mental patient' for stalking Ms Kristeen Young.

Well, that's really laughable. Ha, ha, ha ...

Nice try, but no, on all counts.

 

[Anonymous]

You searched to see if she was real (newsflash: not everyone whores themselves on social media) because you couldn't believe that someone as "misogynistic" as Morrissey would have relations with a woman. You said this. You searched for proof of property. You searched Damon. You follow Jake on twitter. It is YOUR RIGHT to meddle into his privacy because the technology you hold so dear (your most prized possession is a f***ing tablet? srsly?) enables you to and anyone who doesn't search for people they're interested in is a Luddite. You are obsessed. It is your right to know the answer and when HE GIVES IT TO YOU... WHEN HE SAYS I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL it's still NOT ENOUGH. YOU ARE THE REASON MEDIA IS RIDICULOUS.

If Morrissey posted a f***ing video of him sticking his dick in a woman it STILL wouldn't be enough, you are programmed NOT TO BELIEVE HIM.

Thank you Crystal!!!! I LOVE you.

This is case and point from the NME interview from 2006 that was posted earlier in the thread:

NME: How do you feel when people constantly question your sexuality?

Morrissey: “Sometimes it’s interesting, but it’s not interesting when people don’t question it and just assume, because it seems as if they know more than I do – then it’s quite boring. We all have sexuality and why is mine so unique? So I very childishly feel inclined to say nothing at all and often wonder if I did say to people that I am very close to somebody who is female, what would the reaction be?”

NME: Probably utter shock.

Morrissey: “Well there you go, so it’s best I say absolutely nothing.”

 

[CrystalGeezer]

Look at you, the person who earned the title 'mental patient' for stalking Ms Kristeen Young.

Well, that's really laughable. Ha, ha, ha ...

Nice try, but no, on all counts.

When she said that I wasn't stalking her. In fact, solo was pretty kind to her which is why I went bezerk about it and at the time I was supportive of her. It's different. I don't know who she's having sex with or where she lives or what she puts in her vagina, I just know she says dumb stuff often and ponder what the attraction could possibly be about her as she seems to miss the plot a lot. You don't go on about how you wish you were aborted and kids are a waste of time then tell a South American audience who is 80% Catholic that you love them.

 

[malvachat]

Then why share your opinion at all? Seriously.

Because I want to ya ya bollocks
This not a serious answer.

 

[Anonymous]

He also dedicated his story to Julia Riley. Think he is sleeping with her as well? First of all, we don't even know that Tina is real. Is she a plant--a fictitious person introduced in the book to paint a bisexual image for the reader? Or a pseudonym for Moz himself or another person? No pics of them together. No pics of her on the Net. No social media for her. No history, shy of an address in Woodland Hills. Could be Tina. Maybe not. Could be another Tina. There are quite a few with her name out there. That is all you have to go on to formulate your hypothesis that the Swords cover is related to her.

Even if there was a Tina. It was more companionate love than passionate love. She may still be near and dear to him. But not as a lover. I don't think for a second he spends so much time in LA because of 'Tina.' He has been residing there since the late nineties... way before he supposedly met her. And apparently he still owns property there. He loves LA for un-Tina reasons, obviously.

I think it is you who cannot accept that he is gay. It ruins all chances for you--in your mind. You need to keep the fantasy alive. You are not the only hetero female that experienced cognitive dissonance when reading the book. So you make that little Tina molehill into that hetero mountain. You had to. The truth is too painful. I could care less who he sleeps with. Or which sex he desires. I am not sexually attracted to the man. You are. Gay is not an aphrodisiac for the obsessed hetero-female Moz fan.

Notice how all the Go-Tina cheerleaders are hetero females? You may be too wrapped up in the delusions to see it?

WRONG AGAIN!!! Tina was thanked in the liner notes of My Early Burglary Years. That was 1998 the year before he moved to LA!

 

[realitybites]

Because I want to ya ya bollocks
This not a serious answer.

Cute.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

WRONG AGAIN!!! Tina was thanked in the liner notes of My Early Burglary Years. That was 1998 the year before he moved to LA!

I thought he moved to LA in 1996? I only remember this because it was the year I moved away from LA.

 

[malvachat]

Cute.

OH Thanks

 

[realitybites]

Thank you Crystal!!!! I LOVE you.

This is case and point from the NME interview from 2006 that was posted earlier in the thread:

NME: How do you feel when people constantly question your sexuality?

Morrissey: “Sometimes it’s interesting, but it’s not interesting when people don’t question it and just assume, because it seems as if they know more than I do – then it’s quite boring. We all have sexuality and why is mine so unique? So I very childishly feel inclined to say nothing at all and often wonder if I did say to people that I am very close to somebody who is female, what would the reaction be?”

NME: Probably utter shock.

Morrissey: “Well there you go, so it’s best I say absolutely nothing.”

We've all seen and read the interviews. We had no definitive answers then. We do now. We have the book.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

We've all seen and read the interviews. We had no definitive answers then. We do now. We have the book.

Yeah, the book where he writes he has a loving relationship with a woman IN ADDITION to the loving relationship he had with a man. But he's just gay and banging Damon. Case closed.

Case AGAINST Morrissey being romantically tied to Damon: Doesn't he PAY HIM? Call me crazy, but doesn't the man who has a romantic streak as evidenced by his poetry have the wherewithal to not be f***ing the guy he PAYS to help him pick out his mom's Christmas present at Neimanns? I mean give the guy some credit for having standards.