Who hated SMiLE?

[cablegeddon]

Tony Asher said that during the recording of Pet Sounds, as soon as BW was in another room, the entire band would bash the songs saying things like "why are we even singing these stupid songs".

I imagine that the same thing happened during the smile sessions. It was probably worse at that point. Seems like they were all full of themselves

Play some unsurpassed masters. They couldn't even take Girls on The Beach seriously 

I guess it makes me stupid that I listened to what Tony Asher said and took him seriously. After all he was just there in the studio when it happened. 

[Autotune]

bashing from a bandmate could not stop 1966 BW from finishing his album. I mean, the guy edited Mike's lyrics for Good Vibrations, wrote with whom ever he wanted, released a solo single that also appears on a a BB album. He quit the road, just to write and record, dammit! He was king of the Beach Boys, no one argues or agued that. And he did as he pleased up until he more or less abdicated. 

It always seemed to me that blaming Mike for Smile's non-release, like Anderle and others did, came from personal spite, and that Brian's opinions on Beautiful Dreamer are informed by that faction.

In the end, it cannot be argued that the Beach Boys went along for the ride, up until Brian shelved the project.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Who hated Smile the most ?

Brian, patently, as he decided to abandon it. One thing everyone concurs on is that it was his call and his alone.

That doesn't mean he hated it either, though. Someone who believes in euthanasia doesn't believe in it because they hate the person. And really, I think that euthanasia is the best metaphor for what ended up happening with Smile. Although in this case, the patient donated his parts to science (Smiley Smile).

[Paul J B]

bashing from a bandmate could not stop 1966 BW from finishing his album. I mean, the guy edited Mike's lyrics for Good Vibrations, wrote with whom ever he wanted, released a solo single that also appears on a a BB album. He quit the road, just to write and record, dammit! He was king of the Beach Boys, no one argues or agued that. And he did as he pleased up until he more or less abdicated. 

It always seemed to me that blaming Mike for Smile's non-release, like Anderle and others did, came from personal spite, and that Brian's opinions on Beautiful Dreamer are informed by that faction.

In the end, it cannot be argued that the Beach Boys went along for the ride, up until Brian shelved the project.

+1

People did what Brian wanted, not the other way around.

A lot of petty comments or finger pointing from those that may or may not have been there all of those years ago have been blown out of proportion.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

I blame it on Phil Spector and Murray Wilson for bugging Brian's house!     

[Bicyclerider]

I understand "second hand". Mike's account of whether he did or did not like SMiLE would be a first hand account. Brian's, Marilyn's, David's, Carl's would be their opinion as a "second hand" account.

In other words, you don't actually understand what "first hand" or "second hand" account means and you will only accept Mike Love's word on the issue. 

Exactly.  This is similar (but obviously not identical to!) only believing the murderer who says he's innocent, and discounting the eyewitnesses who saw him do the crime.  And may I remind you I am NOT calling Mike a murderer, it's an analogy!

[Bicyclerider]

bashing from a bandmate could not stop 1966 BW from finishing his album. I mean, the guy edited Mike's lyrics for Good Vibrations, wrote with whom ever he wanted, released a solo single that also appears on a a BB album. He quit the road, just to write and record, dammit! He was king of the Beach Boys, no one argues or agued that. And he did as he pleased up until he more or less abdicated. 

It always seemed to me that blaming Mike for Smile's non-release, like Anderle and others did, came from personal spite, and that Brian's opinions on Beautiful Dreamer are informed by that faction.

In the end, it cannot be argued that the Beach Boys went along for the ride, up until Brian shelved the project.

There's no reason for this thread to degenerate into the "Mike killed Smile" or for a Mike hate-fest.  The thread is who hated Smile, or at least actively disliked it.  It wouldn't surprise me if at some point all of the other Beach Boys didn't lose all enthusiasm for the project as the sessions wore on and Brian seemed no closer to completion.  And ultimately Brian's love-hate relationship with the material is what killed it - on this we can all agree with Andrew.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

bashing from a bandmate could not stop 1966 BW from finishing his album. I mean, the guy edited Mike's lyrics for Good Vibrations, wrote with whom ever he wanted, released a solo single that also appears on a a BB album. He quit the road, just to write and record, dammit! He was king of the Beach Boys, no one argues or agued that. And he did as he pleased up until he more or less abdicated.  

It always seemed to me that blaming Mike for Smile's non-release, like Anderle and others did, came from personal spite, and that Brian's opinions on Beautiful Dreamer are informed by that faction.

In the end, it cannot be argued that the Beach Boys went along for the ride, up until Brian shelved the project.

+1

People did what Brian wanted, not the other way around.

To an extent. But it didn't take much to change Brian's mind about his own music - such was the fragile state of his confidence. While, say, John Lennon could criticize a McCartney song endlessly, McCartney would only be hurt insofar as it would hurt him that John couldn't understand that his was song was, in fact, brilliant. In Brian's case, though, he could be told by his father that he sounded old on Caroline, No, and that would actually compel Brian to change the speed of the song. Now, like it or not, in that case, Murry is a key agent in making the change to the record, since it more than likely would have not have been changed without his comments. Murry plays a decisive role in the song being changed even though Brian himself does the actual changing.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

OK, I got an idea!!!!!

Let's hire F. Lee Baily and take this thing to trial!

rockandroll, you can be the prosecutor, I'll be the defense, and Mike will be forced to take the stand! (oldsurferdude will be the bailiff)

Once we've reached a jury verdict, we can put this thing to rest and Mike's contributions, writing credits, and royalty $ for anything Beach Boys related will cease if he's found guilty of being a merdahole and hating Smile and his bad vibes highhandedly forcing poor Brian to abandon his life's work.

Then could we finally be over this silly argument???

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It's remarkable how much this burns you up.

[Autotune]

bashing from a bandmate could not stop 1966 BW from finishing his album. I mean, the guy edited Mike's lyrics for Good Vibrations, wrote with whom ever he wanted, released a solo single that also appears on a a BB album. He quit the road, just to write and record, dammit! He was king of the Beach Boys, no one argues or agued that. And he did as he pleased up until he more or less abdicated.  

It always seemed to me that blaming Mike for Smile's non-release, like Anderle and others did, came from personal spite, and that Brian's opinions on Beautiful Dreamer are informed by that faction.

In the end, it cannot be argued that the Beach Boys went along for the ride, up until Brian shelved the project.

+1

People did what Brian wanted, not the other way around.

To an extent. But it didn't take much to change Brian's mind about his own music - such was the fragile state of his confidence. While, say, John Lennon could criticize a McCartney song endlessly, McCartney would only be hurt insofar as it would hurt him that John couldn't understand that his was song was, in fact, brilliant. In Brian's case, though, he could be told by his father that he sounded old on Caroline, No, and that would actually compel Brian to change the speed of the song. Now, like it or not, in that case, Murry is a key agent in making the change to the record, since it more than likely would have not have been changed without his comments. Murry plays a decisive role in the song being changed even though Brian himself does the actual changing.

He still controled pretty much every aspect of the group, including the drastic (if short-lived) change of their live sound and performance style, no earlier than August 1967. He called the shots, even if the role of the BBs was not that of mere "messengers".

Bottomline: Mike did not hate Smile, nor hates it.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

It's remarkable how much this burns you up.

It doesn't burn me up. It just gets silly is all.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

He still controled pretty much every aspect of the group, including the drastic (if short-lived) change of their live sound and performance style, no earlier than August 1967. He called the shots, even if the role of the BBs was not that of mere "messengers".

Perhaps but one can't ignore the factors that may have led him to call some shots over others and that those factors share responsibility, in some cases share even more responsibility for those shots than the "caller" himself.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I also wouldn't consider someone (me) trying to plead the case of: let's just all be friends and admit we can't blame Mike completely for Brian abandoning Smile as an example of someone getting all burned up over something.

However insisting no matter what the evidence that Mike alone caused Smile to collapse ..... THAT feels like someone getting all burned up over something!

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

He still controled pretty much every aspect of the group, including the drastic (if short-lived) change of their live sound and performance style, no earlier than August 1967. He called the shots, even if the role of the BBs was not that of mere "messengers".

Perhaps but one can't ignore the factors that may have led him to call some shots over others and that those factors share responsibility, in some cases share even more responsibility for those shots than the "caller" himself.

At what point does someone in the position to call the shots take responsibility for calling the shots?

No matter what the factors, if this person has the power to veto them ALL: and still decides to abandon ship: isn't he basically solely responsible?

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I also wouldn't consider someone (me) trying to plead the case of: let's just all be friends and admit we can't blame Mike completely for Brian abandoning Smile as an example of someone getting all burned up over something.

However insisting no matter what the evidence that Mike alone caused Smile to collapse ..... THAT feels like someone getting all burned up over something!

The fact that you frequently resort to this strawman in which someone blames Mike "completely" or that someone is calling Mike "Satan", and so on, and so on, suggests precisely that you are burned up about it. The slightest criticism against Mike (and note, my first post on this thread is for the most part, sticking up for Mike) seems to bother you so much that you tend to represent that small criticism as a much larger, more hurtful, and more ridiculous criticism.

At what point does someone in the position to call the shots take responsibility for calling the shots?

This isn't about anybody taking responsibility. Brian, in many ways, did take responsibility over the years.

No matter what the factors, if this person has the power to veto them ALL: and still decides to abandon ship: isn't he basically solely responsible?

No. To ignore the factors that lead people to make the decisions they do is dangerous and rests on an incorrect assumption about the way the world works and how individual actions in the world work. Nevertheless, this incorrect assumption is a popular way of looking at things, like for instance, when people argue that the homeless and the poor are responsible for their position in the economic hierarchy. You hear stuff like this all the time. But it's always bullsh*t.

[Cam Mott]

What I don't get is admitting blame to those who deny it and denying blame to those who admit it. Mike says he didn't hate SMiLE, he didn't like some of the lyrics.

Brian didn't like the lyrics either and he scrapped SMiLE not because of the band's wishes but in spite of and against the band's wishes. That is from Brian himself within a year of the events. Not what somebody thought Brian thought 10 or 60 years after the fact, but what Brian thought. Let's get over it, we don't agree with Brian's choices but there they are. He's the genius, not us.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

"No. To ignore the factors that lead people to make the decisions they do is dangerous and rests on an incorrect assumption about the way the world works and how individual actions in the world work. Nevertheless, this incorrect assumption is a popular way of looking at things, like for instance, when people argue that the homeless and the poor are responsible for their position in the economic hierarchy. You hear stuff like this all the time. But it's always bullsh*"




OK, then in your lawyerspeak:

As evidence against Mike, what do we have?

We have VDP's account of Mike asking him what a certain lyric meant.

We have Brian saying Mike hated Smile.

We have Brian's friends saying Mike wasn't going for it.

Evidence for Mike, what do we have?

We have actual recorded evidence of Mike singing Smile parts as Brian dictated and singing well.

We have Mike saying he didn't care for the lyrics but liked the music. He gushes over Wonderful in particular.

I'm going to go with the recorded evidence.

Until someone comes forward saying Mike refused to come to the studio and sing, or that he begged Brian to abandon Smile, I'll go with the likely reality that life is complicated and steeped in shades of grey and that Brian made the decision to abandon Smile.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Why don't we liken this to the Manson murders?

Sure, there were complicated reasons for the murders and Manson certainly couldn't have pulled it off on his own, but he sits in prison (on an original death sentence) because HE made the decision to carry out the murders.


Sure, he didn't actually commit the murders, but he's guilty all the same and even more so because it was his decision and his baby!

No one seems to be completely guilty or completely innocent in the Smile sage. Can we leave it at that?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Who hated Smile the most ?

Brian, patently, as he decided to abandon it. One thing everyone concurs on is that it was his call and his alone.

That doesn't mean he hated it either, though. Someone who believes in euthanasia doesn't believe in it because they hate the person. And really, I think that euthanasia is the best metaphor for what ended up happening with Smile. Although in this case, the patient donated his parts to science (Smiley Smile).

 

[Bicyclerider]

What I don't get is admitting blame to those who deny it and denying blame to those who admit it. Mike says he didn't hate SMiLE, he didn't like some of the lyrics.

He's the genius, not us.

And Brian and van Dyke and others say he hated it.  You prefer to believe Mike, fine but you should recognize that those that choose to believe the greater number of eye witnesses have an equally valid (and probably with greater numbers more valid) point of view.  What, you think Brian and van and David and Marilyn aren't remembering correctly, are lying, or have an axe to grind?  The same can be said of Mike.

And I'm a genius too!  Murray told me!

[Mike's Beard]

Why don't we liken this to the Manson murders?

Sure, there were complicated reasons for the murders and Manson certainly couldn't have pulled it off on his own, but he sits in prison (on an original death sentence) because HE made the decision to carry out the murders.


Sure, he didn't actually commit the murders, but he's guilty all the same and even more so because it was his decision and his baby!

No one seems to be completely guilty or completely innocent in the Smile sage. Can we leave it at that?

Manson killed Smile?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

NO! I was making an analogy!

Manson sits in prison because HE made the decision to commit the Manson murders.

Brian killed Smile because he made that decision.

I don't think anyone's trying to argue that Mike loved Smile (pun intended), but he did not kill it!

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Why don't we liken this to the Manson murders?

Sure, there were complicated reasons for the murders and Manson certainly couldn't have pulled it off on his own, but he sits in prison (on an original death sentence) because HE made the decision to carry out the murders.


Sure, he didn't actually commit the murders, but he's guilty all the same and even more so because it was his decision and his baby!

No one seems to be completely guilty or completely innocent in the Smile sage. Can we leave it at that?

Manson killed Smile?

Did he kill 20/20 though???

[Cam Mott]

What I don't get is admitting blame to those who deny it and denying blame to those who admit it. Mike says he didn't hate SMiLE, he didn't like some of the lyrics.

He's the genius, not us.

And Brian and van Dyke and others say he hated it.  You prefer to believe Mike, fine but you should recognize that those that choose to believe the greater number of eye witnesses have an equally valid (and probably with greater numbers more valid) point of view.  What, you think Brian and van and David and Marilyn aren't remembering correctly, are lying, or have an axe to grind?  The same can be said of Mike.

And I'm a genius too!  Murray told me!

No, I assume they are giving their impression. What Mike thought trumps their impression. Anderle also said arguments and dislike between Brian and Van Dyke of their respective lyrics and music is what killed SMiLE and that was within a year of the time, is this true because he said it? It too seems like it is his impression [although he is more specific about this than Mike], probably partly true and partly mistaken. Would we take Van Dyke's and Brian's word on this over Anderle's?