Has Mike Expressed Remorse On Whatever Role He May Have Played in Smile's Demise

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm surprised VDP doesn't get me flack for his reaction to Mike's questioning of the Cabinessence lyrics.

Why was he so bothered by Mike wanting an explanation of what he was singing

Because art speaks for itself and if you can't understand that then you shouldn't even be in the business of making it.

Quite right. But Mike is in the band and he has every right to question lyrics he's being asked to sing. He shouldn't just have to shut up and sing.

Question them? Maybe ask a question about them. But if you're hired to be an actor in a Shakespeare play, is it really your business to question the lines or make the playwright defend what they have written (and here, I am using Van Dyke's own understanding of the exchange).

really?

Or I should ask: If Shakespeare himself was busy writing a play and was asking the lead actor who was also his cousin to recite the lines as he was writing them: you think it would be outlandish for this actor to ask what a line or two meant??

Well, but like I suggested, that wasn't quite Van Dyke's understanding of the situation. He said he felt he was being made to defend his lyrics. In other words, when he was asked, "What do these lyrics mean?" it was not simply a case of, "I just want to know what I'm singing about" it was "I don't think these words mean anything" (and indeed, Mike's "acid alliteration" remarks reinforce that) and "why should I be singing something that I don't think actually makes any sense." And, yes, I think it would be outlanding for an actor to make remarks like that to any playwright.

Ha! I'll go ask a co-worker a few doors down, who writes/directs plays, if that never ever in hell happens ........ I'll get back with you

[Dancing Bear]

I'm surprised VDP doesn't get me flack for his reaction to Mike's questioning of the Cabinessence lyrics.

Why was he so bothered by Mike wanting an explanation of what he was singing

Because he onde said that Mike Love's lyrics were all basically about "sex in the back of a truck" (paraphrasing). How would you feel if you were asked to explain your lyrics to someone whose work in the same field you considered so mediocre?

But they weren't sitting down and writing a song together. Mike was in the band in question and was being asked to sing these lyrics. VDP should have had enough respect for the situation if not Mike himself and he should have explained to his ability....

Yeah, I agree. I was just trying to understand where Van Dyke Parks' head was in 66/67.

This issue is beyond tiresome. Bands fight all the time, usually much more aggressively, and with much harsher words, and more often with fists, but somehow The Beach Boys are the only band in history where is matters....

The Lifetime Project was a complete failure - Who's Next was a bestseller though - yet you never see Townshwnd blaming the rest of the band or management.

It's Lifehouse, not Lifetime, but anyways actually Townshend did blame manger and producer Kit Lambert's lack of enthusiasm for the project (as Lambert wanted to make a movie of Tommy) and he's also commented on how his bandmates didn't understand his vision. Now in his bandmates defense, Lifehouse is somewhat incomprehensible.

Thanks for the correction. I just reread Townshend's essay on the 90s Who's Next remaster and he's very ambivalent about Kit's "lack of support". He certainly doesn't blame him in a Brian Wilson's "oh poor me" way. He may have commented that about his bandmates but this even more so never sounds like him pointing his finger. He basically says it was a stillborn project that couldn't be saved anyway. You see, some rock stars aren't assholes like our Beach Boys. 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm surprised VDP doesn't get me flack for his reaction to Mike's questioning of the Cabinessence lyrics.

Why was he so bothered by Mike wanting an explanation of what he was singing

Because he onde said that Mike Love's lyrics were all basically about "sex in the back of a truck" (paraphrasing). How would you feel if you were asked to explain your lyrics to someone whose work in the same field you considered so mediocre?

But they weren't sitting down and writing a song together. Mike was in the band in question and was being asked to sing these lyrics. VDP should have had enough respect for the situation if not Mike himself and he should have explained to his ability....

Yeah, I agree. I was just trying to understand where Van Dyke Parks' head was in 66/67.

This issue is beyond tiresome. Bands fight all the time, usually much more aggressively, and with much harsher words, and more often with fists, but somehow The Beach Boys are the only band in history where is matters....

The Lifetime Project was a complete failure - Who's Next was a bestseller though - yet you never see Townshwnd blaming the rest of the band or management.

It's Lifehouse, not Lifetime, but anyways actually Townshend did blame manger and producer Kit Lambert's lack of enthusiasm for the project (as Lambert wanted to make a movie of Tommy) and he's also commented on how his bandmates didn't understand his vision. Now in his bandmates defense, Lifehouse is somewhat incomprehensible.

Thanks for the correction. I just reread Townshend's essay on the 90s Who's Next remaster and he's very ambivalent about Kit's "lack of support". He certainly doesn't blame him in a Brian Wilson's "oh poor me" way. He may have commented that about his bandmates but this even more so never sounds like him pointing his finger. He basically says it was a stillborn project that couldn't be saved anyway. You see, some rock stars aren't assholes like our Beach Boys. 

I think it's more like, rock stars are mostly assholes but none seem to inspire the sort of blind and irrational hero worship Brian gets, which surely would make him uncomfortable if he were aware of it .... These discussions and blame being put on Mike are basically irrational and illogical from any point of view other than being on one's knees and praying up at a huge, divine, floating head in the sky.....

[Gabo]

he betta

[KittyKat]

There is a small minority of people who deify Brian Wilson, but they are very vocal and persistent. Not only do they deify Brian, but they feel the need to blame Mike for Brian's mental illness. I also see people posting comments on YouTube or places such as the comments section of the LA Times when the guys had their back and forth about the end of the C50 reunion. The same names posting over and over again and making the comments threads go on a lot longer if they didn't post the same thing over and over again, all defending the great Brian Wilson and vilifying Mike Love.

I used to be a pro-Brian person and "felt sorry" for him, but considering how well Brian has done for himself since over ten years ago, I can't feel sorry for him. He's fine. Brian lives in several mansions and wears Gucci shoes and drives several nice cars. I don't think he needs fans to defend him or make him feel better or to "protect" him from "evil" Mike Love.  He already has gotten plenty of praise and recognition and the press seems biased towards him, so Brian has won.

[Jason]

This thread is six pages of the same brouhaha that appears every time someone brings up the topic of Michael and Smile, so...again - bolded, italicized, underlined, striked-through, glowed, shadowed, marquee'd, and BLOWN UP TO HUGE PROPORTIONS -

BRIAN KILLED SMILE

[oldsurferdude]

There is a small minority of people who deify Brian Wilson, but they are very vocal and persistent. Not only do they deify Brian, but they feel the need to blame Mike for Brian's mental illness. I also see people posting comments on YouTube or places such as the comments section of the LA Times when the guys had their back and forth about the end of the C50 reunion. The same names posting over and over again and making the comments threads go on a lot longer if they didn't post the same thing over and over again, all defending the great Brian Wilson and vilifying Mike Love.

I used to be a pro-Brian person and "felt sorry" for him, but considering how well Brian has done for himself since over ten years ago, I can't feel sorry for him. He's fine. Brian lives in several mansions and wears Gucci shoes and drives several nice cars. I don't think he needs fans to defend him or make him feel better or to "protect" him from "evil" Mike Love.  He already has gotten plenty of praise and recognition and the press seems biased towards him, so Brian has won.

Yes he won which is as it should be. (did I say anything wrong?)

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

There is a small minority of people who deify Brian Wilson, but they are very vocal and persistent. Not only do they deify Brian, but they feel the need to blame Mike for Brian's mental illness. I also see people posting comments on YouTube or places such as the comments section of the LA Times when the guys had their back and forth about the end of the C50 reunion. The same names posting over and over again and making the comments threads go on a lot longer if they didn't post the same thing over and over again, all defending the great Brian Wilson and vilifying Mike Love.

I used to be a pro-Brian person and "felt sorry" for him, but considering how well Brian has done for himself since over ten years ago, I can't feel sorry for him. He's fine. Brian lives in several mansions and wears Gucci shoes and drives several nice cars. I don't think he needs fans to defend him or make him feel better or to "protect" him from "evil" Mike Love.  He already has gotten plenty of praise and recognition and the press seems biased towards him, so Brian has won.

Yes he won which is as it should be. (did I say anything wrong?)

Not in the least...Brian has more than deserved the accolades he has gotten; he is IMHO the greatest American songwriter of the rock era.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I'd imagine they'd be worried about not coming off macho enough to admit they didn't know what ram induction was.

Also, VDP is much shorter and less carburetor-oriented. I can't blame him for just leaving the room, really. Plenty of ego to go around with that crowd! He seems regretful that he wasn't strong enough to fight for it in the Leaf doc and at least admits failing on that front. What an obnoxious subject to be prodded about every time you stick your face out in public tho, huh? At one of those last record store signings the flyer made sure to specify A Q&A ON HIS POSTSMILE WORK. I think the first and last questions were about Smile. Wah wah wah waaaaaah! No wonder they all get so cranky.

If only he gave Mike a straight answer.

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

[drbeachboy]

There is a small minority of people who deify Brian Wilson, but they are very vocal and persistent. Not only do they deify Brian, but they feel the need to blame Mike for Brian's mental illness. I also see people posting comments on YouTube or places such as the comments section of the LA Times when the guys had their back and forth about the end of the C50 reunion. The same names posting over and over again and making the comments threads go on a lot longer if they didn't post the same thing over and over again, all defending the great Brian Wilson and vilifying Mike Love.

I used to be a pro-Brian person and "felt sorry" for him, but considering how well Brian has done for himself since over ten years ago, I can't feel sorry for him. He's fine. Brian lives in several mansions and wears Gucci shoes and drives several nice cars. I don't think he needs fans to defend him or make him feel better or to "protect" him from "evil" Mike Love.  He already has gotten plenty of praise and recognition and the press seems biased towards him, so Brian has won.

Yes he won which is as it should be. (did I say anything wrong?)

Not in the least...Brian has more than deserved the accolades he has gotten; he is IMHO the greatest American songwriter of the rock era.

Nobody said Brian wasn't a great American songwriter. It's all the other crap that is the problem.

[drbeachboy]

I'd imagine they'd be worried about not coming off macho enough to admit they didn't know what ram induction was.

Also, VDP is much shorter and less carburetor-oriented. I can't blame him for just leaving the room, really. Plenty of ego to go around with that crowd! He seems regretful that he wasn't strong enough to fight for it in the Leaf doc and at least admits failing on that front. What an obnoxious subject to be prodded about every time you stick your face out in public tho, huh? At one of those last record store signings the flyer made sure to specify A Q&A ON HIS POSTSMILE WORK. I think the first and last questions were about Smile. Wah wah wah waaaaaah! No wonder they all get so cranky.

If only he gave Mike a straight answer.

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

Believe me, I completely understand both sides of the argument. I was just being facetious.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'd imagine they'd be worried about not coming off macho enough to admit they didn't know what ram induction was.

Also, VDP is much shorter and less carburetor-oriented. I can't blame him for just leaving the room, really. Plenty of ego to go around with that crowd! He seems regretful that he wasn't strong enough to fight for it in the Leaf doc and at least admits failing on that front. What an obnoxious subject to be prodded about every time you stick your face out in public tho, huh? At one of those last record store signings the flyer made sure to specify A Q&A ON HIS POSTSMILE WORK. I think the first and last questions were about Smile. Wah wah wah waaaaaah! No wonder they all get so cranky.

If only he gave Mike a straight answer.

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

I have to disagree here..... A painting is not music and the song in question was not a solo composition for piano but a "pop" (using the term as loosely as possible) song with various instruments and vocal parts that separate individuals were assigned to play. Each one bringing their own unique talents and touch (sorry, Alter Of Brain) ... Mike was not being asked to simply hum a melody but to sing words. An exercise, largely to his experience up until that point, required genuine emotion to be utilized. This was a collaborative work. Picasso never (to our knowledge) grabbed his cousin, handed him a brush and said "Hey, paint this right over here" ... Mike had every right to ask what the lyrics meant. Hell, I could explain them in a literal sense, so could VDP! ... I wonder if Brian ever asked VDP what any of his lyrics meant. If he had, I'm sure we'd all agree he'd have been in the right to ask. Not that he would have been OWED an answer (nor was Mike really) but I'm damn sure VDP coughed one up if this happened.... This is such a pointless topic to keep dredging up just in order to trash Mike..... BRIAN WON, as someone pointed out earlier. If Mike were somehow legally declared non-evil over this stupidity, it would never change the fact.

[Sheriff John Stone]

It's hard to imagine any time when Van Dyke Parks was at a loss for words...

[Nicko1234]

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

I agree that many artists can`t or don`t want to explain their work. But it seems from your playwright comparison that you think the conversation should have gone,

Mike: What do these words mean?
VDP: I have no idea what they mean.
Mike: Fair enough, let`s get back to work.

I don`t think that was ever going to happen and while VDP may not have wanted to explain his lyrics, he must have known when he began working with The Beach Boys that he was working on a commercial enterprise. He knew that it would have to sell and that it would have to be performed in public by the group. If he thought that they wouldn`t question his work at all then he was very naive.

To contine your play comparison. If a play had a director and cast in place and they hired a brand new writer who came up with obscure ideas which they didn`t understand or felt might be unpopular with the public then they would undoubtedly question it. It happens in movies and TV shows all the time after all.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

RockNRoll, I should clarify: even though I feel the way I do about this issue in principle: I still do, just as equally, wish to God Mike had just gone "Oh, OK. I get it" and went back to work.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

I agree that many artists can`t or don`t want to explain their work. But it seems from your playwright comparison that you think the conversation should have gone,

Mike: What do these words mean?
VDP: I have no idea what they mean.
Mike: Fair enough, let`s get back to work.

I don`t think that was ever going to happen and while VDP may not have wanted to explain his lyrics, he must have known when he began working with The Beach Boys that he was working on a commercial enterprise. He knew that it would have to sell and that it would have to be performed in public by the group. If he thought that they wouldn`t question his work at all then he was very naive.

To contine your play comparison. If a play had a director and cast in place and they hired a brand new writer who came up with obscure ideas which they didn`t understand or felt might be unpopular with the public then they would undoubtedly question it. It happens in movies and TV shows all the time after all.

I work in TV and a while back, we aired that movie "The Beach" (no pun intended) by Danny Boyle, and apparently after the last shot fades out, there's like a few minutes of black with no music or anything and then music slowly fades up and the credits begin to roll.... Network control kicked it back, pissed off at QC for missing this "technical problem" .... I had to go explain to the guy that this was an artistic decision by the great auteur Mr. Boyle, to which he replied, "I don't give a flying f*uck! Take it back and cut out those minutes of black" .......

[Cam Mott]

I'd imagine they'd be worried about not coming off macho enough to admit they didn't know what ram induction was.

Also, VDP is much shorter and less carburetor-oriented. I can't blame him for just leaving the room, really. Plenty of ego to go around with that crowd! He seems regretful that he wasn't strong enough to fight for it in the Leaf doc and at least admits failing on that front. What an obnoxious subject to be prodded about every time you stick your face out in public tho, huh? At one of those last record store signings the flyer made sure to specify A Q&A ON HIS POSTSMILE WORK. I think the first and last questions were about Smile. Wah wah wah waaaaaah! No wonder they all get so cranky.

If only he gave Mike a straight answer.

Again, though, really good artistic works are not something that can be explained by the artist. If they could explain it better in other words, then they would have used those words. What Van Dyke was trying to convey could only be conveyed with "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield." A Picasso painting doesn't become clearer when the parts are re-arranged or when Picasso steps in and says, "It's a plane." The point is that it creates an impression and that different people can take different things away from the image. That there could be one, singular, essential point "underneath" it all is fundamentally antithetical to what the actual piece of art is. That's why Van Dyke's line couldn't be explained. The only explanation would confound Mike. "What does 'over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield' mean?" "It means "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" or "What does it mean to you?" Van Dyke was being completely honest in his answer. He could explain the line about as much as Ezra Pound could explain: "The apparition of these faces in the crowd; petals on a wet, black bough."  It explains itself.

Didn't matter because the problem that mattered was between Brian and VDP. Brian had a problem with VDP's lyrics and VDP had a problem with Brian's music. Since Brian was the producer his opinion that VDP's lyrics were too sophisticated was the problem that mattered and VDP's lyrics nearly disappeared as a result.

OK, let's shake it off and focus. The Boys are a fandom red herring, Brian himself said the Boys stood against him scrapping SMiLE.  You can't stand up for it and be against it at the same time. Brian stood alone in wanting SMiLE scrapped.

[Cam Mott]

RockNRoll, I should clarify: even though I feel the way I do about this issue in principle: I still do, just as equally, wish to God Mike had just gone "Oh, OK. I get it" and went back to work.

Isn't that what the Boys did? All these supposedly problem lyrics for the Boys are on tape.

[Rocky Raccoon]

Like I said, no matter how bitter and resentful Mike may have felt, it didn't stop him from doing his job and singing the damn words.  And he sounds great on Cabin Essence.  So it's silly to single that out.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

RockNRoll, I should clarify: even though I feel the way I do about this issue in principle: I still do, just as equally, wish to God Mike had just gone "Oh, OK. I get it" and went back to work.

Isn't that what the Boys did? All these supposedly problem lyrics for the Boys are on tape.

good point

[Sheriff John Stone]

You can't stand up for it and be against it at the same time. Brian stood alone in wanting SMiLE scrapped.

It's possible they (the band) got their dissent and complaining out of their systems early in the game, accepted SMiLE for what it was, and gave Brian the benefit of the doubt - and the respect he deserved - ultimately doing their best at performing Brian's music in the studio. Yes, maybe they did not ACTIVELY protest or boycott SMiLE, but that doesn't mean their true feelings were questioning or even negative. One can carry out an assignment, and perform well, and still have doubts about the project. 

I still think the basic point is being missed. Yes, I believe that Brian Wilson - as the composer, producer, leader, whatever - has to ultimately accept the responsibility for scrapping SMiLE, but, part of his decision could've been based or formed by Mike's problems with the lyrics. It at least could've planted a seed.

[Cam Mott]

You can't stand up for it and be against it at the same time. Brian stood alone in wanting SMiLE scrapped.

It's possible they (the band) got their dissent and complaining out of their systems early in the game, accepted SMiLE for what it was, and gave Brian the benefit of the doubt - and the respect he deserved - ultimately doing their best at performing Brian's music in the studio. Yes, maybe they did not ACTIVELY protest or boycott SMiLE, but that doesn't mean their true feelings were questioning or even negative. One can carry out an assignment, and perform well, and still have doubts about the project. 

I still think the basic point is being missed. Yes, I believe that Brian Wilson - as the composer, producer, leader, whatever - has to ultimately accept the responsibility for scrapping SMiLE, but, part of his decision could've been based or formed by Mike's problems with the lyrics. It at least could've planted a seed.

Brian thought VDP's lyrics were too sophisticated. The two of them argued about it. Brian got rid of most of said lyrics. Fans don't seem to see that as the problem with the lyrics. Brian said at the time that he scrapped SMiLE because HE felt the lyrics were too arty. I don't get how this problem between Brian and the lyrics is still the unacknowledged 600 lb. gorilla in SMiLE. Nobody ever even mentions it [as far as I've seen].

The Boys didn't want SMiLE scrapped. They did every bit of it take after take. Brian scrapped it against their wishes. That pretty definitively let's them off of the hook to me.

People complain how these discussions don't go anywhere but actually they have moved a lot in the past 20+ years. Yes, that slow but movement.

[Peter Reum]

 

[Sheriff John Stone]

You can't stand up for it and be against it at the same time. Brian stood alone in wanting SMiLE scrapped.

It's possible they (the band) got their dissent and complaining out of their systems early in the game, accepted SMiLE for what it was, and gave Brian the benefit of the doubt - and the respect he deserved - ultimately doing their best at performing Brian's music in the studio. Yes, maybe they did not ACTIVELY protest or boycott SMiLE, but that doesn't mean their true feelings were questioning or even negative. One can carry out an assignment, and perform well, and still have doubts about the project. 

I still think the basic point is being missed. Yes, I believe that Brian Wilson - as the composer, producer, leader, whatever - has to ultimately accept the responsibility for scrapping SMiLE, but, part of his decision could've been based or formed by Mike's problems with the lyrics. It at least could've planted a seed.

Brian thought VDP's lyrics were too sophisticated. The two of them argued about it. Brian got rid of most of said lyrics. Fans don't seem to see that as the problem with the lyrics. Brian said at the time that he scrapped SMiLE because HE felt the lyrics were too arty. I don't get how this problem between Brian and the lyrics is still the unacknowledged 600 lb. gorilla in SMiLE. Nobody ever even mentions it [as far as I've seen].

This is my last comment on this subject (I can hear the applause echoing in my room).

Yes, Brian might've thought the lyrics were too sophisticated. Yes, Brian got rid of most said lyrics. And, yes, Brian might've felt the lyrics were too arty.

BUT HE DIDN'T ALWAYS FEEL THAT WAY. BUT HE DIDN'T ALWAYS FEEL THAT WAY. BUT HE DIDN'T ALWAYS FEEL THAT WAY.

In the beginning, Brian loved the work that he and Van Dyke Parks were creating. It was only later, much later in the project, did Brian begin to experience and express doubt about SMiLE - and the lyrics. MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE - and in my opinion probably - Brian's doubts and displeasure with the lyrics STARTED with the complaints from others - specifically from Mike. He didn't forget them. The seed was planted. Brian was sensitive to what others thought; it's part of his history.

I don't blame Mike for SMiLE being scrapped and I don't think he owes anyone an apology. Period. End of paragraph. End of my contribution to this thread.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Poor Brian

maybe just saying that will help??

I don't think the debate is that did someone or something help bring about Brian's decision regarding Smile or contribute to that decision. That's life. People (unless they're George W Bush: The Decider) rarely make big decisions in a vacuum. Other folks opinions and whatever way the wind is blowing or what side of bed this person got up on in the morning all play parts.... I think the debate is rather: should Mike be vilified as a the biggest asshole in the history of humanity because he outrageously asked VDP what a few lines of lyric meant.... People seem to think he owes the world a massive apology.... That's the debate.... No one always feels one way about any subject from any amount of time to another, so I don't see what point that makes to repeat over and over.