Mike the dominant creative force when it came to conceptual content?

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I could list the more than 500 songs that BW is credited with in the BMI database. So?

Exactly. Hell, I've written and recorded 527 songs (not a typo) since 2001...does that mean I'm dominant conceptually? Am I Brian's equal?!

[sea of tunes]

To me, the ultimate distinction in this "debate" is that Mike Love never wrote a hit song that wasn't attached to Brian Wilson.  Brian did write hit songs that weren't attached to Mike Love.  

And don't bring up "Kokoschmoe" because that was basically done before the BBs ever got involved.

[sea of tunes]

Hell, I've written and recorded 527 songs (not a typo) since 2001

That's Robert Pollard territory.

[SMiLE Brian]

Hell, I've written and recorded 527 songs (not a typo) since 2001

That's Robert Pollard territory.

it's why billy is the fucking man!

[Please delete my account]

Let's break it down by Top 40 songs. This would doubtless be the way Mike prefers to think about it, right? So let's look at the songwriting credits to the band's biggest hits.

Brian / Mike cowrites

"Surfin' Safari"
"Little Deuce Coupe"
"Be True to Your School"
"Fun, Fun, Fun"
"When I Grow Up"
"Dance, Dance, Dance" (with Carl)
"California Girls" (though originally credited to BW solo, there has never been serious debate that Mike wrote the lyrics)
"Good Vibrations" (Tony likely deserves a credit for his first-draft lyrics)
"Darlin"
"Wild Honey"
"Do It Again"
"It's OK"

Roger Christian is credited with LDC lyrics.

Conversely, I think I read somewhere Brian admitting the the lyrics to Surfin' USA were written with help from Mike.

Then again, when people see a Mike Love credit on a song they automatically assume Mike alone is responsible for the lyrics when it seems just as often they were written with Brian. I read a critique of "She Knows Me Too Well" written with an anti-Mike slant which just assumed he was behind the questionable sexual politics, whereas I'm more convinced by the theory that the song is just one song in a series inspired by Brian's guilty doubts about how he treated his woman (Good To My Baby, Don't Hurt My Little Sister, You're So Good To Me).

[Wirestone]

To me, the ultimate distinction in this "debate" is that Mike Love never wrote a hit song that wasn't attached to Brian Wilson.  

Don't forget "Getcha Back." Not a huge hit, but a midsize one, and written by Mike and Terry alone. Of course, it did have a memorable BW vocal arrangement.

[sea of tunes]

To me, the ultimate distinction in this "debate" is that Mike Love never wrote a hit song that wasn't attached to Brian Wilson.  

Don't forget "Getcha Back." Not a huge hit, but a midsize one, and written by Mike and Terry alone. Of course, it did have a memorable BW vocal arrangement.

 

[Wirestone]

Roger Christian is credited with LDC lyrics.

Conversely, I think I read somewhere Brian admitting the the lyrics to Surfin' USA were written with help from Mike.

Then again, when people see a Mike Love credit on a song they automatically assume Mike alone is responsible for the lyrics when it seems just as often they were written with Brian. I read a critique of "She Knows Me Too Well" written with an anti-Mike slant which just assumed he was behind the questionable sexual politics, whereas I'm more convinced by the theory that the song is just one song in a series inspired by Brian's guilty doubts about how he treated his woman (Good To My Baby, Don't Hurt My Little Sister, You're So Good To Me).

Thanks for the note! I updated the original post to include those notes, including putting "Surfin' USA" in a category on its own. Such an odd song.

And yes, Mike's credits for the more introspective material likely strayed into Tony Asher territory -- he was helping verbalize Brian's anxieties. Of course, that undercuts the notion that he's the conceptual mastermind behind it all. 

[Cam Mott]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

[filledeplage]

To me, the ultimate distinction in this "debate" is that Mike Love never wrote a hit song that wasn't attached to Brian Wilson.  

Don't forget "Getcha Back." Not a huge hit, but a midsize one, and written by Mike and Terry alone. Of course, it did have a memorable BW vocal arrangement.

Many of those songs weren't hits but became part of our season celebrations, or culture...used in setlists, etc.

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts.  

How many fantastic songs have remained "un-named" for a lack of a theme? Not just BB music.  Mike is the guy who can hear a melody and come up with a theme, context and verse to complete it.  Without that, it is just a beautiful melody.  Lyric writing is a gift.  I think he deserves his props.  Those who can't get beyond their personal dislike, refuse to acknowledge that, and resort to ridicule.  

It isn't Brian's gift, but a talent, nonetheless.  

Brian is likely the greatest modern era composer and arranger.  Sloop, absolutely magic arrangement.  

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

[Wirestone]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

What are you talking about?

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

From my post a couple of hours ago: "Mike was important collaborator for BW in the group's heyday, no question. His words are in some of the group's greatest hits."

[Lee Marshall]

Oops Filled...You forgot 'Pisces Brother'.

Still anyone responsible for writing 'Brian's Back' is immediately and completely disqualified FOREVER in terms of being "dominant".  [Unless were talkin' negatives.]

[Cam Mott]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

If nobody is saying that then we all agree Mike is right. Let's all hug!

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

If nobody is saying that then we all agree Mike is right. Let's all hug!

Giving him his fair credit for making important contributions lyrically is not saying the same thing as saying he was the dominant CONCEPTUAL force behind the band.

[filledeplage]

Oops Filled...You forgot 'Pisces Brother'.

Still anyone responsible for writing 'Brian's Back' is immediately and completely disqualified FOREVER in terms of being "dominant".  [Unless were talkin' negatives.]

Just for my own info, I pulled up that list.  And was surprised at how really long it was. You know they aren't all hits, but make up a lot of the highlights on MIC.

If you see them this summer, I think you will like that song and see how well it is received by the audience.

[Lee Marshall]

We can hug...after we agree that Mike was...yet again...wrong Cam.  Sometimes important lyrically?  Yes.  Absolutely...100%  The most important HAT wearer in the group?  Yup.

"DOMINANT" conceptually?

Not a snowball's chance in Hawthorne.
------------------

Filled...when Mike was here in November at the Rotary Club Banquet he payed the Pisces Brother video and the song and it was well received by all in attendance.  [He did NOT add in 'Brian's Back'. ]

[filledeplage]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

If nobody is saying that then we all agree Mike is right. Let's all hug!

Giving him his fair credit for making important contributions lyrically is not saying the same thing as saying he was the dominant CONCEPTUAL force behind the band.

It was framed as a dominant writing "team." Or a partnership.  That is how I read it.

Even if it was up and down though the decades.  

[filledeplage]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

If nobody is saying that then we all agree Mike is right. Let's all hug!

Giving him his fair credit for making important contributions lyrically is not saying the same thing as saying he was the dominant CONCEPTUAL force behind the band.

It was framed as a dominant role writing lyrics as part of the "team." Or a partnership.  That is how I read it.

Even if it was up and down though the decades.  

[Cam Mott]

So now we have gone way beyond Mike's words and hold him responsible for things he didn't say.

That seems to be happening with others than just Mike.

Case in point...

It just seems ridiculous to me to assert that Mike did not make huge lyrical contributions and concepts. 

Nobody is saying that!

If nobody is saying that then we all agree Mike is right. Let's all hug!

Giving him his fair credit for making important contributions lyrically is not saying the same thing as saying he was the dominant CONCEPTUAL force behind the band.

Yes, because he only said he was the lyrical and conceptually dominate force in his collaborations with Brian.

[Lee Marshall]

Man!!!  You two don't give up do you?  You're running out of paint.

[CenturyDeprived]

Pretty sure that Mike wrote the music to LTWB, too. Brian re-arranged it a bit.

One of his finest moments, to be sure.

[CenturyDeprived]

Filled...when Mike was here in November at the Rotary Club Banquet he payed the Pisces Brother video and the song and it was well received by all in attendance.  [He did NOT add in 'Brian's Back'. ]

What would happen if Mike performed Brian's Back at a M&B show these days? Something tells me 90% of the audience would just bop their heads and be completely oblivious to the irony 

[Wirestone]

And thus another damning quote from Mike is turned into gold by Cam.

It's totally innocuous! We're putting words in his mouth! Listen, the statement is utterly clear about what's going on, and about what Mike is saying both directly and indirectly.

Love: Find someone with which to collaborate, someone whose strengths complement your strengths. That's the thing I did with my cousin Brian. He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship. Collaboration is key.

We've established Mike wasn't the dominant creative force in the group. (And that was totally the implication Mike was making. You're naive to think otherwise.)

If we need to go through the BW/ML co-writes we can, but I think it's pretty clear that he wasn't "always" the dominant creative force there, either. As though contributing four words to "Wouldn't it Be Nice" or a hook to "I Get Around" or a child's singsong chant to "Kokomo" is being dominant. He's adding a bit of icing to a cake that's already baked and decorated, and then demanding that we all recognize him as a master pastry chef.

[CenturyDeprived]

And thus another damning quote from Mike is turned into gold by Cam.

It's totally innocuous! We're putting words in his mouth! Listen, the statement is utterly clear about what's going on, and about what Mike is saying both directly and indirectly.

Love: Find someone with which to collaborate, someone whose strengths complement your strengths. That's the thing I did with my cousin Brian. He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship. Collaboration is key.

We've established Mike wasn't the dominant creative force in the group. (And that was totally the implication Mike was making. You're naive to think otherwise.)

If we need to go through the BW/ML co-writes we can, but I think it's pretty clear that he wasn't "always" the dominant creative force there, either. As though contributing four words to "Wouldn't it Be Nice" or a hook to "I Get Around" or a child's singsong chant to "Kokomo" is being dominant. He's adding a bit of icing to a cake that's already baked and decorated, and then demanding that we all recognize him as a master pastry chef.

Maybe speaking for myself, but I really do think that if Mike just used the term "often" or "at times" instead of "always", and "a" instead of "THE", that we'd be less annoyed. It would have its roots closer to accuracy. It's a big distinction, and I don't think it's splitting hairs.  We are talking about a very famous, much dissected writing partnership, to one of the most famous and important bands of the 20th century. It's not an unimportant distinction.

By this logic, Mike should say "Dennis was drunk and belligerent at EVERY show".

Also, is it just me, or is it mighty awkward to use the term "dominant" which has its origins with the word "dominate" when speaking in terms of a relationship with Brian Wilson? To use such a term shows a lack of awareness of how icky a term that is to associate with a one-on-one relationship with Brian specifically, because of his relationships with Murry and Landy especially.