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

[Lee Marshall]

Brian wanted to change the group's image.  Leave that surf and car sound behind and get on with real life...real feelings...real obstacles.  Mike just wanted to do it again...and again.  Brian dominated.  He set the direction.  Mike pretty much followed suit until Brian stepped away from Mike and the group.

Yes Mike contributed...but Brian chose the course.  [and listened to the whining]

Seems they did pretty well after all.  And they both dominate their current situations.  Brian...living in the 21st century...Mike reliving a glorious past.  [I'll bet THAT never gets 'old'.]

[SMiLE Brian]

It's more like a prison for Mike.

[Lee Marshall]

Don't think so.  I believe he enjoys it.  And he does get to take a break when the 'sched.' allows for it.  Two great variations on a theme.  One for each concept.  Two for the rest of us.  I'll check them BOTH out and enjoy myself while doing it.  Nobody loses...at least not when they do it this way.

[filledeplage]

But that implies that the hits had run out before GV! So Sloop John B was a  bomb?  Seriously...you're not helping your argument.
Your statement basically says going with Asher was a mistake...you might be alone in that.  Even Mike would say you're incorrect.

Sloop was not a monster hit. And had no involvement from Asher. Brian's biggest hits in the 60s with the exception of Surf City are co-writes with Love. So, back to my initial point, Brian did not need Mike to score a hit, but he scored bigger hits with him.

Sloop had excellent airplay.  That is not coming from reading a rock history book and looking at record sales, but having heard it on the radio and was the first BB single I bought.  I'd say it got at least as much airplay, or more, on the "request line" because of its "crossover status" and Kingston Trio's continuing popularity in 1966. PBS was a huge marketer of folk music, activism, and there were about 5 TV stations on, at that time, and they were 20% of that TV dial.  It was #3 in the USA and #2 in the UK and 99 cents!  It was more cost effective to buy the LP, to get it all.  

But back to the discussion at hand.  The question was "Lastly, do you have any words of wisdom for young, aspiring musicians?"  Four sentences.  

Key words used for intent and context: collaborate, complement, collaboration. In the contexts of a "relationship" (sentence 3) - the tone in "giving advice to young, aspiring musicians..." - interesting, because this band had talent coming from many different directions.  That would include David and the emerging electric guitar.  The built-in lyricist was Mike.  The composer was Brian.

Now, I'm wondering if he was misquoted, because, in the first sentence, it says, "Find someone with which..." And it should be "with whom." (My teacher hat)  I've found Mike more articulate, in any interview or on stage, than to use that  pronoun, incorrectly.  That just jumped off the page.  He could have misused the word, but it seems inconsistent, with being pretty well-spoken, a native English speaker, and educated in the 1950's.

People have patterns of language, such that, when they "catch" themselves in a grammatical error, they go back and correct that error. I've found him to have a very good vocabulary, which indicates that he probably reads a lot. And he was educated during that time in the 50's when proper usage set people apart from those in school, now.  

Grammar and usage was essentially a separate subject. Warriner's English book, for those who remember. Yikes!  

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Right, Cam,  he sure did, and it's still incorrect. Perhaps now is the time  to visit good old Websters and look up what 'conceptually ' means. I can wait.

While I await your return,  let me also say this...  the 'concept ' of the Beach Boys? You can say it was Dennis's idea, in that it was his idea to do a song about surfing (when said song had yet to be written ). You can credit Russ Regan  in naming the band.  Cant say it was Mike. Talking about specifically between Mike and Brian...if he was so dominant,  then why in the hell did it take him decades to get the songwriting credits? If he was so dominant,  then why in the hell did he have to even whine about Brian fucking with the formula? If he was so dominant. ...THEN WHY DID THEY NOT DO ANY FUN IN THE SUN SONGS (save Do it Again) for many, many years? Or maybe you think that was Mike's idea too. In that case. ..Mike f***ed with his own formula. Huh. Imagine that. And before you say again that we're just talking about Brian and Mike I'm am well aware of that...just kind of proves that Mike was a one trick pony (at the time). Brian wanted to do different sounds, so he did with others.  When he wanted a return to the old style, he got Mike involved again. I wouldn't call that 'Mike being conceptually dominant '. Some people (not me) would call that him being Brian's bitch (which would explain some of the resentment ).

It means he came up with ideas for lyrics more often than Brian when they wrote songs together.

The first part of your 2nd paragraph doesn't apply because Mike is only talking about he and Brian in collaboration.  In the rest you are welcome to your own opinions but as you said you realize Mike was only referring to their collaboration so I'm not sure of your point in all of that.

But he's not just saying lyrics. why do you continue to refuse to acknowledge that part of his statement?   I've stood up for you in the past, but your stubbornness is just proving them right.

The 2nd part IS relevant.  I'm not sure how else I can put this but for some reading going to try anyway.  Mike (again, at the time) was only capable of writing in one style.  If Brian wanted that particular style, he wrote with him. If not, he got someone else. Had nothing to do with Mike being dominant. .. if anything, it proves the opposite.  Mike was completely reliant on Brian (again, at the time). You didn't see Mike write with anybody else pre-1968 did you ?

To put it bluntly...up until Brian's  retreat,  Brian didn't need Mike, but Mike certainly needed  Brian. Post 15 Big Ones, though, then yes, Mike was the dominant force in the band. But to say he had dominion over Brian before is just revisionist history, and if you could quit praying to Mike long enough to use the brain God gave you, you'd realize that.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Don't think so.  I believe he enjoys it.  And he does get to take a break when the 'sched.' allows for it.  Two great variations on a theme.  One for each concept.  Two for the rest of us.  I'll check them BOTH out and enjoy myself while doing it.  Nobody loses...at least not when they do it this way.

Exactly.  And hell, I give Mike his fair due, I dig his band ,  and I think he's unfairly maligned much of the time. For him to overly puff himself up, though, is proving his detractors right and quite frankly doing himself a great disservice.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

But that implies that the hits had run out before GV! So Sloop John B was a  bomb?  Seriously...you're not helping your argument.
Your statement basically says going with Asher was a mistake...you might be alone in that.  Even Mike would say you're incorrect.

Sloop was not a monster hit. And had no involvement from Asher. Brian's biggest hits in the 60s with the exception of Surf City are co-writes with Love. So, back to my initial point, Brian did not need Mike to score a hit, but he scored bigger hits with him.

Sloop had excellent airplay.  That is not coming from reading a rock history book and looking at record sales, but having heard it on the radio and was the first BB single I bought.  I'd say it got at least as much airplay, or more, on the "request line" because of its "crossover status" and Kingston Trio's continuing popularity in 1966. PBS was a huge marketer of folk music, activism, and there were about 5 TV stations on, at that time, and they were 20% of that TV dial.  It was #3 in the USA and #2 in the UK and 99 cents!  It was more cost effective to buy the LP, to get it all. 

But back to the discussion at hand.  The question was "Lastly, do you have any words of wisdom for young, aspiring musicians?"  Four sentences. 

Key words used for intent and context: collaborate, complement, collaboration. In the contexts of a "relationship" (sentence 3) - the tone in "giving advice to young, aspiring musicians..." - interesting, because this band had talent coming from many different directions.  That would include David and the emerging electric guitar.  The built-in lyricist was Mike.  The composer was Brian.

Now, I'm wondering if he was misquoted, because, in the first sentence, it says, "Find someone with which..." And it should be "with whom." (My teacher hat)  I've found Mike more articulate, in any interview or on stage, than to use that  pronoun, incorrectly.  That just jumped off the page.  He could have misused the word, but it seems inconsistent, with being pretty well-spoken, a native English speaker, and educated in the 1950's.

People have patterns of language, such that, when they "catch" themselves in a grammatical error, they go back and correct that error. I've found him to have a very good vocabulary, which indicates that he probably reads a lot. And he was educated during that time in the 50's when proper usage set people apart from those in school, now. 

Grammar and usage was essentially a separate subject. Warriner's English book, for those who remember. Yikes! 

Agreed on all points. ..could've been a misquote  or an embellishment. And yeah, you got my point regarding Sloop.

[Cam Mott]

Right, Cam,  he sure did, and it's still incorrect. Perhaps now is the time  to visit good old Websters and look up what 'conceptually ' means. I can wait.

While I await your return,  let me also say this...  the 'concept ' of the Beach Boys? You can say it was Dennis's idea, in that it was his idea to do a song about surfing (when said song had yet to be written ). You can credit Russ Regan  in naming the band.  Cant say it was Mike. Talking about specifically between Mike and Brian...if he was so dominant,  then why in the hell did it take him decades to get the songwriting credits? If he was so dominant,  then why in the hell did he have to even whine about Brian fucking with the formula? If he was so dominant. ...THEN WHY DID THEY NOT DO ANY FUN IN THE SUN SONGS (save Do it Again) for many, many years? Or maybe you think that was Mike's idea too. In that case. ..Mike f***ed with his own formula. Huh. Imagine that. And before you say again that we're just talking about Brian and Mike I'm am well aware of that...just kind of proves that Mike was a one trick pony (at the time). Brian wanted to do different sounds, so he did with others.  When he wanted a return to the old style, he got Mike involved again. I wouldn't call that 'Mike being conceptually dominant '. Some people (not me) would call that him being Brian's bitch (which would explain some of the resentment ).

It means he came up with ideas for lyrics more often than Brian when they wrote songs together.

The first part of your 2nd paragraph doesn't apply because Mike is only talking about he and Brian in collaboration.  In the rest you are welcome to your own opinions but as you said you realize Mike was only referring to their collaboration so I'm not sure of your point in all of that.

But he's not just saying lyrics. why do you continue to refuse to acknowledge that part of his statement?   I've stood up for you in the past, but your stubbornness is just proving them right.

The 2nd part IS relevant.  I'm not sure how else I can put this but for some reading going to try anyway.  Mike (again, at the time) was only capable of writing in one style.  If Brian wanted that particular style, he wrote with him. If not, he got someone else. Had nothing to do with Mike being dominant. .. if anything, it proves the opposite.  Mike was completely reliant on Brian (again, at the time). You didn't see Mike write with anybody else pre-1968 did you ?

To put it bluntly...up until Brian's  retreat,  Brian didn't need Mike, but Mike certainly needed  Brian. Post 15 Big Ones, though, then yes, Mike was the dominant force in the band. But to say he had dominion over Brian before is just revisionist history, and if you could quit praying to Mike long enough to use the brain God gave you, you'd realize that.

I'm not being stubborn, I'm giving my opinion like everybody else. I'm not ignoring anything either, to me Mike plainly says when he and  Brian collaborated, Brian did the music and arrangements and he did most/more of the lyrics and concepts and they complemented each other. But he is only talking about in collaborations of Brian and Mike, whatever or whoever Brian chose to do other times or what the rest of the band did aren't part of his claim because he is only talking about when Brian did choose to write with him.

[Cyncie]

Okay, let's say that what Mike wanted to say is "When Brian and I wrote together, he was the composer and arranger, and I was primarily responsible for the lyrics and lyrical concepts."

I don't think we'd be having this argument if that's the way he actually put it. I think we'd, for the most part,  agree that this is the case. But, given Mike's recent inclination to paint Brian as a puppet controlled by others, the choice of words (dominant, creative force, relationship) is either unfortunate or carefully calculated to make a certain impression.

And, given his recent history, I'm guessing the latter.

He really needs to stop trying to elevate his own status at Brian's expense. It's actually working to further alienate people. It's also unfortunate, because Mike's very real contributions continue to get buried beneath that alienation.

[guitarfool2002]

A misquote? Based on grammatical use of one word out of how many in the piece? Nonsense.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I'm not being stubborn, I'm giving my opinion like everybody else.

In that case, well, Mike's statement is an opinion as well. Unless we were there, we have no knowledge of whether or not Brian *asked* Mike to write lyrics for a specific theme. Remember, before Brian stepped back before the collapse of Smile, Brian WAS the Beach Boys.

Okay, let's say that what Mike wanted to say is "When Brian and I wrote together, he was the composer and arranger, and I was primarily responsible for the lyrics and lyrical concepts."

I don't think we'd be having this argument if that's the way he actually put it. I think we'd, for the most part,  agree that this is the case. But, given Mike's recent inclination to paint Brian as a puppet controlled by others, the choice of words (dominant, creative force, relationship) is either unfortunate or carefully calculated to make a certain impression.

And, given his recent history, I'm guessing the latter.

He really needs to stop trying to elevate his own status at Brian's expense. It's actually working to further alienate people. It's also unfortunate, because Mike's very real contributions continue to get buried beneath that alienation.

Yep.

[guitarfool2002]

How many listeners bought or even got into these records (i.e. the 'classics' from the 60's) primarily on the strength of the lyrics? Did the kids/fans in the 60's hear whatever single was on the radio then go out and buy the 45 based primarily on lyrics?

[Cam Mott]

Okay, let's say that what Mike wanted to say is "When Brian and I wrote together, he was the composer and arranger, and I was primarily responsible for the lyrics and lyrical concepts."

I don't think we'd be having this argument if that's the way he actually put it. I think we'd, for the most part,  agree that this is the case. But, given Mike's recent inclination to paint Brian as a puppet controlled by others, the choice of words (dominant, creative force, relationship) is either unfortunate or carefully calculated to make a certain impression.

And, given his recent history, I'm guessing the latter.

He really needs to stop trying to elevate his own status at Brian's expense. It's actually working to further alienate people. It's also unfortunate, because Mike's very real contributions continue to get buried beneath that alienation.

I'm sure everybody could always say everything better but to me he is very clear and he very clearly confines it to only the songwriting relationship of he and Brian. Obviously people's mileage varies.

[Cam Mott]

I'm not being stubborn, I'm giving my opinion like everybody else.

In that case, well, Mike's statement is an opinion as well. Unless we were there, we have no knowledge of whether or not Brian *asked* Mike to write lyrics for a specific theme. 

I agree.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

How many listeners bought or even got into these records (i.e. the 'classics' from the 60's) primarily on the strength of the lyrics? Did the kids/fans in the 60's hear whatever single was on the radio then go out and buy the 45 based primarily on lyrics?

Can't say firsthand  as I wasn't born until 1978, but I think it was the combination of the two. Regardless of how everything turned out between the two, there's no disputing Brian and Mike  made magic together.

[Wirestone]

I think there were many folks who bought the music and enjoyed it despite the lyrics, not because of them. But I can't imagine there was anyone who bought BB records solely for the lyrical insights of Mike.

[filledeplage]

How many listeners bought or even got into these records (i.e. the 'classics' from the 60's) primarily on the strength of the lyrics? Did the kids/fans in the 60's hear whatever single was on the radio then go out and buy the 45 based primarily on lyrics?

GF - it was an absolutely dynamite song on the radio.  Great vocals, but lyrics were from that traditional Carl Sandburg's "The John B. Sails." From "The American Songbag." 1927.  An old Bahamian folk song, recorded at Mr. Jardine's behest. Score!  

Also recorded by Johnny Cash, Dick Dale, Brothers Four...

On the charts for 11 weeks, the summer of '66, alongside WIBN and GOK.  A BB hatrick!  

[Debbie Keil-Leavitt]

In the early mid-60's, I really didn't care about the lyrics at all, even with my love of California.  As long as I heard those gorgeous harmonies on the rockers and Brian's leads on those ballads, I would have listened to any lyrics.  Nothing has changed all these years later.  Aside from hearing great lyrics from Van Dyke Parks, or some of the more insightful personal lyrics which I enjoyed over the years.  I'll applaud Warmth of the Sun here, too - both musically and lyrically.  No trashing Mike's lyrics - I just didn't care. His lyrics aren't the issue, the other claims are, and I read them as Wirestone and Billy and Guitar Fool read them.

[clack]

Again, my interpretation is that Mike is not saying that he was the dominant one in the writing partnership -- I don't think that Mike, even at his most egotistical, could believe that for a second.

Mike is not even saying that he wrote the lyrics, or came up with the subject matter, on his own. He's just saying in that one area, he contributed more than did Brian.

Mike is still correcting the public perception that Brian was the sole author on the bulk of the hits. Maybe he shouldn't emphasize that anymore in interviews. Anyone who cares already knows.

But perhaps that's what looking at 'I Get Around' (B. Wilson) and 'California Girls' (B. Wilson) on record sleeves for 30 years will do to you.

[guitarfool2002]

Again, my interpretation is that Mike is not saying that he was the dominant one in the writing partnership

But that's what he said:

"He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship."

[clack]

Again, my interpretation is that Mike is not saying that he was the dominant one in the writing partnership

But that's what he said:

"He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship."

You read it as saying that Mike is claiming he was dominant in the songwriting partnership overall, while I read his claim as referring back only to the "lyrically and conceptually" phrase.

With such an ambiguous sentence, can we not give Mike the benefit of the doubt? Do we really believe that ego and envy have driven Mike so out of his mind that he now believes he was a greater creative force than was Brian?

[Mike's Beard]

Again, my interpretation is that Mike is not saying that he was the dominant one in the writing partnership

But that's what he said:

"He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship."

You read it as saying that Mike is claiming he was dominant in the songwriting partnership overall, while I read his claim as referring back only to the "lyrically and conceptually" phrase.

With such an ambiguous sentence, can we not give Mike the benefit of the doubt? Do we really believe that ego and envy have driven Mike so out of his mind that he now believes he was a greater creative force than was Brian?

This. It's obvious to anyone without a Mike dislike bias.

[Wirestone]

With such an ambiguous sentence, can we not give Mike the benefit of the doubt? Do we really believe that ego and envy have driven Mike so out of his mind that he now believes he was a greater creative force than was Brian?

Yes.

But it's not a new thing. He's believed this for some time. Remember those quotes from the Endless Harmony documentary.

[the captain]

I don't care about the substance of this argument at all (as if any arguments here were of any substance). But that sentence has to mean that the dominance in the partnership that Mike states is only related to "lyrically and conceptually." Otherwise there is nothing to which those adverbs refer. It is not an ambiguous sentence. Incorrect, maybe. But he is not saying he was the dominant member of the partnership other than lyrically and conceptually.

[Cam Mott]

Again, my interpretation is that Mike is not saying that he was the dominant one in the writing partnership

But that's what he said:

"He was a gifted arranger and composer of music, but lyrically and conceptually, I was always the dominant creative force in that relationship."

You read it as saying that Mike is claiming he was dominant in the songwriting partnership overall, while I read his claim as referring back only to the "lyrically and conceptually" phrase.

With such an ambiguous sentence, can we not give Mike the benefit of the doubt? Do we really believe that ego and envy have driven Mike so out of his mind that he now believes he was a greater creative force than was Brian?

It is especially hard to read it that way for me when he first gives half or more of the credit to Brian for the composition and arrangements which automatically denies he is claiming he was dominant of the whole songwriting collaborations and then he takes only somewhere between more to most of the lyrical/conceptual credit. That leaves Brian ahead in the credit even in Mike's own claim it seems to me.  And that claim is for only the songs the two wrote together which leaves all of Brian's and the other Boys' credit for their other accomplishments to them.