Official thread for Brian & Al's Official Response to Mike/Bruce Band Tour in the LA Times

[Steve Mayo]

lots of people do

[Shady]

You guys are taking this thread to locked territory again..

Who has the small dick in this debate?  

[Letsgoawayforawhile]

You guys are taking this thread to locked territory again..

Who has the small dick in this debate?  

I have 3.

[GuyOnTheBeach]

Brian and Mike are leading you all on, they are actually working on something for the new album: "Amir Love Vs Lamont Wilson"..  

[Andrew G. Doe]

For me, the funniest thing about all this nonsense - and it is luminous nonsense - is the Blooies who, having previously stated loudly they didn't want their Brian anywhere near the evil they perceive to be Mike Love, are now equally vociferous that they want exactly this to happen for the immediate and long-term future. You just couldn't make it up, could you ? 

Your tribal obsession with people with whom you don't even bother to engage is unhealthy. If you're so concerned about the posters on Brian's site, reason with them; if there's no reasoning with them, accept it and move on. Whatever you do, please spare us your tantrums about how unfair it all is.

Trying to reason with most Blooies - there are, or were, some nice folk over there, knowledgeable too - about Mike is about as productive as debating evolution with a Fundamentalist south of the Mason-Dixon Line, and for many of the same reasons. I spent maybe 13 years there, trying to reason with them and infuse a little accurate history, but when the feeding frenzy erupted over the "BW fired" non-story (manna from heaven for the Love haters), I said the hell with this, or something like that, and deleted my account, because frankly it was like trying to teach advanced relativity to a troupe of baboons. About as noisy, too.

[SMiLE Brian]

Not all people who are not happy with Mike's choice are blooies.

[Shady]

Yeah, we just have a heart

[Mike's Beard]

Mike - dammed if he does, dammed if he doesn't. If Brian really wants them to all continue working together as The Beach Boys then he needs to call Mike and arrange to meet him and discuss options one on one. No managers, no wives and no lawyers - just the two guys who founded the band all those years ago making up their own minds between them. Is that really so hard to do Brian? Maybe for once you shouldn't just sit back and let Melinda decide what's best for you. If you want it to carry on so bad then fight for it.

[Jason]

Yeah, we just have a heart

You've one up on the Brianistas...they don't have brains.

[Andrew G. Doe]

We get it Andrew. You're friends with Bruce and you are taking their side, because you want your "inside source" still. It's cool.

Get this: We are unhappy with Mike because he doesn't want to continue the group with Brian and Al. Nobody cares about his little half-assed shows!

Nothing to do with my contact with Bruce, rather a lot to do with considering the current farrago dispassionately and ignoring all the media assumptions. Everyone agreed to do 50 shows, then agreed to do 20-odd more. Then Brian & Alan decide they want to carry on, and of course that makes Mike - who also agreed to the extension - the Bad Guy. Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

[Jim V.]

We get it Andrew. You're friends with Bruce and you are taking their side, because you want your "inside source" still. It's cool.

Get this: We are unhappy with Mike because he doesn't want to continue the group with Brian and Al. Nobody cares about his little half-assed shows!

Nothing to do with my contact with Bruce, rather a lot to do with considering the current farrago dispassionately and ignoring all the media assumptions. Everyone agreed to do 50 shows, then agreed to do 20-odd more. Then Brian & Alan decide they want to carry on, and of course that makes Mike - who also agreed to the extension - the Bad Guy. Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

No. But we'd still be bummed that after a great year the group wouldn't be sticking together. It is also different because Mike wants to continue as "The Beach Boys" without the creator of The Beach Boys greatest works. If Brian decided he didn't wanna work with Mike, and then went out on tour as "The Beach Boys" that would be just as lame.

[I. Spaceman]

We get it Andrew. You're friends with Bruce and you are taking their side, because you want your "inside source" still. It's cool.

Get this: We are unhappy with Mike because he doesn't want to continue the group with Brian and Al. Nobody cares about his little half-assed shows!

Nothing to do with my contact with Bruce, rather a lot to do with considering the current farrago dispassionately and ignoring all the media assumptions. Everyone agreed to do 50 shows, then agreed to do 20-odd more. Then Brian & Alan decide they want to carry on, and of course that makes Mike - who also agreed to the extension - the Bad Guy. Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

No. But we'd still be bummed that after a great year the group wouldn't be sticking together. It is also different because Mike wants to continue as "The Beach Boys" without the creator of The Beach Boys greatest works. If Brian decided he didn't wanna work with Mike, and then went out on tour as "The Beach Boys" that would be just as lame.

That is fair-minded, but the people Andrew is speaking of would be absolutely fine with it. They would claim that the new "Beach Boys" have better voices than the original group as well, something that has already been said many times over the years regarding Brian's touring group.

[Andrew G. Doe]

All Mike is doing is what he's been doing since summer 1998 - touring as "The Beach Boys" with the blessing of the BRI voting members. Oh, and earning said voting members (even the one who voted against him) a not inconsiderable sum each year.

[SMiLE Brian]

2012 Brian & Al>1998 Brian and Al on BBs matters.

[Wirestone]

So Andrew -- just to be clear. You believe that Brian Wilson continuing to tour and record as a Beach Boy is a bad idea?

A lot of things have changed, haven't they? And they ain't just the Brianistas.

Mike - dammed if he does, dammed if he doesn't. If Brian really wants them to all continue working together as The Beach Boys then he needs to call Mike and arrange to meet him and discuss options one on one. No managers, no wives and no lawyers - just the two guys who founded the band all those years ago making up their own minds between them. Is that really so hard to do Brian? Maybe for once you shouldn't just sit back and let Melinda decide what's best for you. If you want it to carry on so bad then fight for it.

I think that this is Brian fighting for it. A lot more desire expressed from him in the last few weeks than I've heard from him for a few years. As for the no wives or lawyers nonsense -- it would be an exceptionally dumb musician who would allow such a deal to be worked out without adequate representation.

All Mike is doing is what he's been doing since summer 1998 - touring as "The Beach Boys" with the blessing of the BRI voting members. Oh, and earning said voting members (even the one who voted against him) a not inconsiderable sum each year.

So it's all about money, in the end, then? And it's certainly not like MSG gigs would make Mike and everyone else money, would they? Nope, only Biloxi casinos have the fat paydays, apparently.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I think the tour and the album was a classic case of lightening caught in a bottle: to try and repeat it again next year without the impetus of the 50th anniversary could very well be a huge mistake. I never expected the shows to be this good or the album to be anything like as great as it is. Go out on a high. Leave them wanting more. Preserve the legend.

However, this being The Beach Boys, the likelihood of them trying to repeat an unrepeatable triumph is pretty high.

[Pretty Funky]

Hence the reason they should give it a break IMO.

That or sign up with Mike for smaller gigs with smaller pay checks, and I can't see that happening anytime soon.

[the professor]

we need to end this thread and wait to set up a new one called: "news on the band's status post Mike's and Brian's LA Times articles" (or a more laconic presentation of that eventuality).

I suggest: stop spinning our wheels and, rather, wait for the coming news of resolution.....

[HeyJude]

For your consideration:

June 26th - in a Rolling Stone article, Mike announces he's booked post-C50 dates with the BRI-sanctioned lineup. Brian comments "I wasn't aware that Mike had some shows in South America. News to me."

September 23rd - at the opening of the BB exhibit at the Grammy Museum, Mike issues a press release underlining the composition of the band touring in October. Brian expresses surprise (at something he knew about and commented on three months previously), stating "I'm disappointed and can't understand why he doesn't want to tour with Al, David and me. We are out here having so much fun. After all, we are the real Beach Boys."

October 5th - Mike sends a letter to the LA Times explaining that, amongst other things, he issued the original press release at the request of Brian's representative.

October 7th - also in the LA Times, Brian responds to Mike's explanation, stating that "my attorney merely suggested to Mike's attorney that a possible press release in those markets might be appropriate to stop the confusion, which was in no one's best interest"... and also "I'm disappointed that Mike would now say that the release was done at the request of my representative".

Someone care to explain to me exactly how Mike's emerged from this as the bad guy when he did not only exactly what Brian's representative requested, but also something Brian had been aware of for three months ?

I don't think is neccesarily precise, though. Clearly, Brian (or his "camp") does not feel that what they "suggested" (which may or may not be different from "asked", not that it really matters) about a press release from Mike is what they ended up with. It sounds like they wanted some low-key, locally-targeted press releases to make sure the folks in Biloxi weren't expecting Brian, Al, and David to show up. Mike's statement was apparently targeted at all media everywhere (yes, I know even locally targeted press releases can hit the net instantaneously), and more importantly, did not simply discuss the "October show", but indicated that his lineup was the lineup going forward, and that we would see more bookings in the future from this band.

I wish I could better target where this disconnect is happening where some fans are stuck on the same loop of "it was mutually agreed upon, it was a set amount of tour dates, Mike had to do the October dates, it's all happening they way they agreed it would."

A big part of this is really simple. Right now, some BB fans would like to see more of the great reunion shows. Right now, Mike is the one apparently keeping that from happening, and adding insult to injury by continuing to use the name for his band as he has in the past. Lack of more reunion activities is what some are bummed about, simple as that.

[HeyJude]

For me, the funniest thing about all this nonsense - and it is luminous nonsense - is the Blooies who, having previously stated loudly they didn't want their Brian anywhere near the evil they perceive to be Mike Love, are now equally vociferous that they want exactly this to happen for the immediate and long-term future. You just couldn't make it up, could you ? 

And why again are we talking about people on another board? That people on some other board are being unreasonable has nothing to do with the discussions taking place here. People being weird on the blueboard doesn't change the fact that Mike is keeping more reunion shows from happening.

[HeyJude]

Nothing to do with my contact with Bruce, rather a lot to do with considering the current farrago dispassionately and ignoring all the media assumptions. Everyone agreed to do 50 shows, then agreed to do 20-odd more. Then Brian & Alan decide they want to carry on, and of course that makes Mike - who also agreed to the extension - the Bad Guy. Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

But this is true. Brian and Al want to do more shows. Mike doesn't. That DOES make Mike the bad guy in this scenario, because he's putting the breaks on it at this moment in time.

As for if the situation was reversed, I can't speak to anybody else's opinion (or the weird "blue board" straw man that keeps getting brought up), but I would be JUST as bummed if Brian was saying no to more reunion shows in the face of everybody else wanting to do it. Even then it probably wouldn't be the same scenario, because of course Brian would then be turning around to do SOLO shows, not "Beach Boys" shows.

[ontor pertawst]

B-b-b-but, that's supposed to be devastating logic that makes you paralyzed and exposed as a rank Brianista! Anything Mike does can be defended by saying, "Well, if Brian did it I bet you would defend it!" This also accomplishes the neat trick of dodging the issue and putting you on the defensive.

Look for Paul Ryan to pull this move tonight with Biden. 40 million people are going to hear the word "Brianista" tonight. I'm looking forward to Biden's stirring, Joe Lunchpailesque defense of "Love You."

[HeyJude]

All Mike is doing is what he's been doing since summer 1998 - touring as "The Beach Boys" with the blessing of the BRI voting members. Oh, and earning said voting members (even the one who voted against him) a not inconsiderable sum each year.

I for one find this argument to fall under the logical fallacy of "appeal to tradition/argumentum ad antiquitatem." This "Mike's been doing it this way for 14 years" business is ridiculous. Mike himself tried to use this reasoning in his first press release, going to great pains to state that this is the lineup he's been using since Carl died. So what? Things have changed. When we didn't know there was any ability to compose a greater "Beach Boys" touring band, then Mike using the name for his show was accepted (or at least tolerated), but some fans feel differently now.

[I. Spaceman]

Nothing to do with my contact with Bruce, rather a lot to do with considering the current farrago dispassionately and ignoring all the media assumptions. Everyone agreed to do 50 shows, then agreed to do 20-odd more. Then Brian & Alan decide they want to carry on, and of course that makes Mike - who also agreed to the extension - the Bad Guy. Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

But this is true. Brian and Al want to do more shows. Mike doesn't. That DOES make Mike the bad guy in this scenario, because he's putting the breaks on it at this moment in time.

As for if the situation was reversed, I can't speak to anybody else's opinion (or the weird "blue board" straw man that keeps getting brought up), but I would be JUST as bummed if Brian was saying no to more reunion shows in the face of everybody else wanting to do it. Even then it probably wouldn't be the same scenario, because of course Brian would then be turning around to do SOLO shows, not "Beach Boys" shows.

The major part of Brian's vocal fanbase carries far more weight then the more common-sense oriented folks here. So a discussion of that viewpoint should factor in. If The Beach Boys never work together again, that virulent group of people are partly to blame, though they shouldn't, because The Beach Boys should take no notice whatsoever of what anyone thinks, other than those in the group itself. Even the handlers and managers should be tossed aside.

[I. Spaceman]

  When we didn't know there was any ability to compose a greater "Beach Boys" touring band, then Mike using the name for his show was accepted (or at least tolerated), but some fans feel differently now.

If the fanbase didn't know that ability even existed, what does that say about their faith?