Why do you hate Mike Love?

[clack]

This thread did, accidentally, veer onto an interesting tangent about 15 pages ago : whether or not there was an alternative to Mike assuming the leadership role post-Kokomo. That tangent was soon drowned out by the usual noise.

I'd open a new thread on that topic, but maybe not quite yet. Can there ever be a calm, dispassionate discussion on Mike's evolving role in the band?

I'd like to know more about that, and why Carl gave up artistically. As far as I can tell it was by default tho. No one else wanted to take over after Brian was gone and Dennis died. I really do believe what another poster was saying about how if Dennis lived, Mike would have been more restrained. Dennis seemed to be the one most determined to keep him in check. And had Dennis kept up the songwriting, it's possible Carl would be more motivated to keep being artistic. The more I think about it, you could say the band more or less died with him.

It takes drive and discipline to continue to write songs year after year, especially when the world isn't exactly enthusiastic about your new stuff. I imagine there may have been a loss of self-confidence on Carl's part.

One thing Mike was not lacking at the time was self-confidence.

[Don Malcolm]

One man's opinion of Carl's songwriting contributions to BB albums:

Trader--I wonder if Carl and Jack were taken by the two-part approach taken in a very different but exceptionally memorable track--"Layla" (Derek and the Dominoes)? It was a big FM hit a year earlier and remains one of the great "long-form" rock songs (as opposed to more adventurous material in other genres, often of even greater length). The "imperialism for Dummies" lyrics in the first part notwithstanding, the historical sweep is both highly unusual and noteworthy, if only for it setting up the sublime second half of the song. You really only have to write one great song to be a great songwriter--and anyone who's tried to do so knows that this is true...Carl and Jack are on the side of greatness here.

This song alone debunks the claim that Carl inherited none of his brothers' songwriting talent (a statement a bit too characteristic of the sweeping pronouncements that so often get made here). He certainly was the least of the Wilsons in terms of songwriting, but anyone who would not be proud to be the author of "Trader" has his/her head in a place where sunlight is very scarce...

Feel Flows--Carl brings the BBs into that experimental moment where sound design met songwriting, and creates a unique twist in the BB's sound. The lyrics leave some cold, but it's a fine piece of work, showcasing what Stephen Desper has been telling us for some time now--that Carl became a fine producer in his own right.

What I would say to Billy is that this song innovates for the BBs even if it doesn't do so in the context of the times. More of this type of material would have been a welcome addition to the BB song population.

Long Promised Road--A bit too forced in its attempt to create a contemplative rock song, with instrument/arrangement choices made to shore up the fact that the song is too derivative of then-current styles. More than competent, but not particularly memorable.

All This Is That--Hard to determine the specific contributions in the co-writing here: someone else may have more info that would permit a more definitive assessment. If Carl thought up the tag for the song, he is again showing some significant talents beyond his universally-lauded singing skills.

All the co-writes from the post-Holland period are clearly at a level of inspiration that can be termed professionally competent, but no more than that.

Trader and Feel Flows would make my all-time "BB's best" single-CD, as they represent a side of the band that should be celebrated.

Why did Carl give up? A number of reasons are likely. First, he lost his best booster for songwriting when Jack Rieley departed. Second, the success of Endless Summer tilted the scales in Mike's favor--this was also the time that Steve Love took over as manager, and the "factions" hardened, making everyone less inclined to explore the more recent songwriting territory that was being marginalized by the band's resurgent but nostalgia-based popularity. With Dennis' songs pushed out as a possible way to go, Carl may have felt it was a losing battle to fight that battle given the circumstances. And then his marriage hit the skids, his health declined, his dalliance with drugs crested--all of these would tend to stop creativity in its tracks. He didn't reemerge as a songwriter until 1979, and when he did he went in a completely different direction, one more befitting someone who was contemplating a shot at a solo career.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Sweeping pronouncements? Dude...it's just my opinion. Relax

[Debbie KL]

So this has veered in every direction seemingly possible.  I wasn't looking to derail the thread by any means when I asked why the people consistently doing critical posts of Brian weren't "Brian haters," yet those who are critical of Mike are "Mike haters."  I was looking for some definition and trying to go back to the actual question.  But of course got the responses I should have expected knowing how it goes here, and was accused of trying to be provocative.  I'm not certain what hate or love really are, and I'm old - so no wonder no one else seems to grasp it either.  The people who don't agree with us are "haters" and "idolize" Brian or Mike - and sometimes their posts become attacks and go way beyond personal.  As a female, it seems that there are often the accusations that my little feelings are hurt if someone doesn't agree with me.  Actually, that's the assertion that manages to piss me off.  I certainly don't care if someone has different musical taste.  Of course I think you're tone deaf if you don't agree, but who cares?

Equally dependable is the feeling that those who agree with us are brilliant.

It does get rather boring in that respect here, doesn't it?  But it's fun to come here and find agreement.  And the arguments seem to go on page after page after page...

[Cam Mott]

 Indeed. We had a good thread going for awhile. The whole thing with Al in the 90s - it merits further discussion and research.

Hasn't Al claimed that in the late 90s he left the touring Beach Boys to do a Jardine family album or something?

[Alan Smith]

 Indeed. We had a good thread going for awhile. The whole thing with Al in the 90s - it merits further discussion and research.

Hasn't Al claimed that in the late 90s he left the touring Beach Boys to do a Jardine family album or something?

From Goldmine, July 2000 Interview with Al

After Carl passed away, you were still in the band and then decided to leave the Love touring lineup sometime after that.

Right. It became one of those moments. Love continued to tour. He didn't stop touring. He just didn't want to tour in that modality. That wasn't his idea of "fun, fun, fun." [laughs] So he continued to work with his band, The California Beach Band, and he would go out and do dates and have surrogate singers do Carl's parts. I thought that was tasteless. While at the same time not going out with the Beach Boys because of Carl's passing so there's some kind of contradiction in that, in my opinion. In fact, my son Matthew at the time was still in that employ, which I did not disagree with because I don't want him to not be able to earn a living. But at some point it got uncomfortable.

So at what point did you pack it in with that lineup?

When Mike refused to tour with the Beach Boys. He just refused to tour with us in any fashion. I can't go into detail with you right now, [but] it got reorganized where Love took the band with an exclusive license and I didn't. And Bruce decided to go with the guy who sang all the hits. Matthew had to make some decisions of his own. We decided to form this entity - Beach Boys, Family And Friends, which I felt would more accurately define the harmonies and the vitality of what was missing in the waning years of the band.

[Moon Dawg]

 "Feel Flows" is Carl Wilson's masterpiece - his "Good Vibrations", IMO. "Long Promised Road" and "Trader" - superb. What happened after that? ENDLESS SUMMER, more oldies, drug problems, martial problems, Brian's issues, Dennis's decline and death, Mike's relentless domination, constant touring, etc.

 Late 70s-onward: "Angel Come Home", "Full Sail", "Keepin' the Summer Alive", "Heaven", "Hold Me", "It's Gettin' Late", "Where I Belong"...these and others are all competent efforts; it's wrong to say Carl "gave up." But nothing came close to his signature efforts from SURF'S UP and HOLLAND.  I guess one might say he "gave up" by the early 90s. It was all with the flow after that. Participating in SUMMER IN PARADISE marks Carl's low ebb with the band IMO. (Yes more so than the debacle of early to mid 1978.)


 Fact: Jack Rieley brought out the best in Carl as a composer and was easily his best collaborator. Carl didn't really have a co-writer or lyricist after Jack's departure, did he? Perhaps more Carl classics would have followed if Rieley had stayed. I can't speak to Jack Rieley's business acumen but creatively he was a great spark for The Beach Boys.

 Al's falling out with Mike seemed to be a gradual thing...they went from allies to near-enemies over a period of maybe 15 years, give or take.

[drbeachboy]

So this has veered in every direction seemingly possible.  I wasn't looking to derail the thread by any means when I asked why the people consistently doing critical posts of Brian weren't "Brian haters," yet those who are critical of Mike are "Mike haters."  I was looking for some definition and trying to go back to the actual question.  But of course got the responses I should have expected knowing how it goes here, and was accused of trying to be provocative.  I'm not certain what hate or love really are, and I'm old - so no wonder no one else seems to grasp it either.  The people who don't agree with us are "haters" and "idolize" Brian or Mike - and sometimes their posts become attacks and go way beyond personal.  As a female, it seems that there are often the accusations that my little feelings are hurt if someone doesn't agree with me.  Actually, that's the assertion that manages to piss me off.  I certainly don't care if someone has different musical taste.  Of course I think you're tone deaf if you don't agree, but who cares?

Equally dependable is the feeling that those who agree with us are brilliant.

It does get rather boring in that respect here, doesn't it?  But it's fun to come here and find agreement.  And the arguments seem to go on page after page after page...

Debbie, when people post here for years and never have one nice thing to say about Mike, then I feel reasonably sure that they don't like Mike. When they get involved in threads that start off as reasonable critiques of Mike, they get derailed and everyone starts spazzing out with each other.

As for Brian, I can't honestly think of anyone here who hates him, nor even dislikes him. I don't agree with certain things that he says or does, but never would I trash him like Mike is in here. All I ask is that all members of the band be critiqued respectfully.

[Cam Mott]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

[CenturyDeprived]

"Feel Flows" is Carl Wilson's masterpiece - his "Good Vibrations", IMO. "Long Promised Road" and "Trader" - superb. What happened after that? ENDLESS SUMMER, more oldies, drug problems, martial problems, Brian's issues, Dennis's decline and death, Mike's relentless domination, constant touring, etc.

 Late 70s-onward: "Angel Come Home", "Full Sail", "Keepin' the Summer Alive", "Heaven", "Hold Me", "It's Gettin' Late", "Where I Belong"...these and others are all competent efforts; it's wrong to say Carl "gave up." But nothing came close to his signature efforts from SURF'S UP and HOLLAND.  I guess one might say he "gave up" by the early 90s. It was all with the flow after that. Participating in SUMMER IN PARADISE marks Carl's low ebb with the band IMO. (Yes more so than the debacle of early to mid 1978.

Agreed. While there are a few ok songs on SIP that Carl elevates to pretty good/solid status, the real stinkers of SIP it's just super baffling to hear Carl on (Under the Boardwalk, Remember, etc). It's like arguably the greatest singer in rock history featured on material that was so, so beneath his talents... It's the oddest combination, truly.

[The Shift]

I agree (with most) that Carl's early 70s works are stellar but reckon his major contribution was the way he finished off many of Brian's unfinished masterpieces: Cabinessence, Prayer, Surf's Up, Time to Get Alone… come to mind. Seamlessly and tastefully. He and Desper were the latter day Wilson and Britz combo.

[Alan Smith]

I agree (with most) that Carl's early 70s works are stellar but reckon his major contribution was the way he finished off many of Brian's unfinished masterpieces: Cabinessence, Prayer, Surf's Up, Time to Get Alone… come to mind. Seamlessly and tastefully. He and Desper were the latter day Wilson and Britz combo.

John Manning, FTW!

[The Shift]

Cheers Alan (I had to look up FTW though!). Carl and Steve have never had the due recognition for that role in perpetuating the genius of Brian and the Smile myth in that way. Imagine a biopic on that aspect of the band's heritage… it'd never get the green light. Hey ho…

[Autotune]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

Oh the whining we'd have to endure had it been Mike who opposed Brian's participation.

[elnombre]

Point ons. A known and published author who starts a thread with such a title , instead of, say, "Do you feel Mike Love's reputation is justified", is not asking for impartial comments but rather setting the agenda (which, having read the very poorly-written J&D blog, became entirely understandable), the outcome of which was utterly predictable. Or simply trolling.

Indeed, I'm not sure what about being a published author precludes Iain from trolling or posting deliberately antagonistic sh*t. We wouldn't be the first fan community he has baited.

[Cam Mott]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

Oh the whining we'd have to endure had it been Mike who opposed Brian's participation.

Now imagine it  reportedly was supposed to happen the week of Carl's death and Mike was planning to replace the reluctant Al with Peter Cetera.

[Alan Smith]

Cheers Alan (I had to look up FTW though!)...

Me too!

[Empire Of Love]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

Oh the whining we'd have to endure had it been Mike who opposed Brian's participation.

As opposed to whom?  The comments from Al above don't seem to amount to opposition and don't have the same bitter/ jealous tone that so many of Mike's comments have had for years, nor the insincere/backhanded compliments.  You are really reaching here my friend.

EoL

[Autotune]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

Oh the whining we'd have to endure had it been Mike who opposed Brian's participation.

As opposed to whom?  The comments from Al above don't seem to amount to opposition and don't have the same bitter/ jealous tone that so many of Mike's comments have had for years, nor the insincere/backhanded compliments.  You are really reaching here my friend.

EoL

I was just saying that if Mike had opposed Brian's entering into the group, like Alan did, it would have been added to the catalogue of sh*t Mike haters unroll everytime a thread on ML takes place here.

[CenturyDeprived]

Alan, this was just ahead of that too.

"So what prompted your decision to stop touring with Love's version of the Beach Boys?

We had a symphony tour lined up for the United States. Lots of interested symphonies that could give our music a breadth and depth that we didn't have before and give them a little extra business they needed. A lot of symphonies were going bankrupt. For instance the San Diego Symphony was in a desperate state, and we were going to do our rehearsal concert there in San Diego. They would get one and we would get one. That kind of deal where they get one for their coffers and we'd get a chance to rehearse and get it underway. And then go to the Hollywood Bowl, get that wonderful place sold out and take it from there all over the country. Carry our charts with us and give them to all the different symphonies.

What happened?

Love steadfastly refused to do it. He insisted that Brian be there, I remember that remark which is not all wrong. I don't disagree with that. It would be great if Brian could be everywhere, but we all have to be realistic. He's not going to be predictable that way. He's got only so much energy for that kind of work. He's not built for it.

Brian never liked to tour.

I think Brian was designing our songs back in the day so we wouldn't have to be dependent on him. Anyway, I suggested that he conduct the concert at the Hollywood Bowl. I thought it would be neat if he could come out and take some credit for all that great work. Anyway, that wasn't to be. Mike refused to do it. I think it would've been a great tribute to Carl. It would have been built around the music, not the messenger. It wouldn't have been built around any one of us."

There is more to that story too according to Mike, but I seem to remember another interview with something like the Jardine album claim.

Oh the whining we'd have to endure had it been Mike who opposed Brian's participation.

As opposed to whom?  The comments from Al above don't seem to amount to opposition and don't have the same bitter/ jealous tone that so many of Mike's comments have had for years, nor the insincere/backhanded compliments.  You are really reaching here my friend.

EoL

I was just saying that if Mike had opposed Brian's entering into the group, like Alan did, it would have been added to the catalogue of sh*t Mike haters unroll everytime a thread on ML takes place here.

We get what you are saying, but what about EoL's previous comment, the main point of which has been overlooked?

[Gerry]

Now what is Mike Love going to think when he visits this site and sees the title of this thread?

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Now what is Mike Love going to think when he visits this site and sees the title of this thread?

Who...cares..?

Basically either "doesn't matter; I'm rich" or "I'm a public figure and bound to be hated by some people"

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

Now what is Mike Love going to think when he visits this site and sees the title of this thread?

Who...cares..?

Basically either "doesn't matter; I'm rich" or "I'm a public figure and bound to be hated by some people"

  Exactly.

[The Shift]

He's gonna wonder how purile his band's fanbase is, and congratulate himself in the fact that even after 54 years in the business he's still playing for kids whose balls haven't dropped yet*




* ladies excluded

[rab2591]

One guy who posted a loaded question shouldn't at all tarnish the image of the fanbase. And nearly everyone that has replied has straight up said they don't hate Mike Love. Those with legitimate gripes didn't fly off the handle and harshly berate the guy. And a lot of people in this thread have even written thanks for the contributions Mike has made over the years.