The Observer: It’s Time to Destroy ‘the Legend of Brian Wilson’

[HeyJude]

Whether they should have kept bugging him to be there is a separate question.

To be precise, they hired people to physically force him to be there.

And a thoughtful, well-informed, well-researched piece on that topic would have been welcomed.

This piece reads to me a bit like a few of the Beard pieces from last year. It has the appearance of working from the starting point of defending Mike against some straw man arguments, and then working backwards towards some sort of actual thesis. Weird.

The amount of pieces like this that we see in the lead-up to Mike's new book may tell us whether some sort of promotional/PR campaign has anything to do with it.

[Robbie Mac]

Whether they should have kept bugging him to be there is a separate question.

To be precise, they hired people to physically force him to be there.

Ahh yes. Stanley and Rushton.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

I am as much a defender of Mike Love as anyone, but there are some issues I have with this article. First off, Pink Floyd didn't have the commercial success with Syd Barrett that the Beach Boys had with Brian. Second, you can't just cut off a brother/cousin in the same way you might a friend. Third, I think the other guys did a fine job moving on while leaving the door open for Brian. It was the record company that demanded more from Brian. While I agree that Mike has been the most consistent to represent the Beach Boys on the road, and also agree that Brian looks like he doesn't want to be there most of the time, I still think that what Brian and his band has done over the past 15 to 20 years has done a greater job at reflecting the legacy of the Beach Boys music. Mike has done a fine job, don't get me wrong. I also agree that Mike is not as bad as many haters say. While there are some bad moments, he seems like a decent guy over all.

[Emily]

Is there an elephant in this thread? Or is it an ant, and I'm the only one who noticed it? Or is it a pink polka-dot elephant flying around in my imagination?
Given the reference to with whom ML poses, is this not aimed to some degree at this board?

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

Is there an elephant in this thread? Or is it an ant, and I'm the only one who noticed it? Or is it a pink polka-dot elephant flying around in my imagination?
Given the reference to with whom ML poses, is this not aimed to some degree at this board?

Bingo! Good eye, Emily. Caught that thought as well. Coincidence? I think not. 

[Bicyclerider]

Is there an elephant in this thread? Or is it an ant, and I'm the only one who noticed it? Or is it a pink polka-dot elephant flying around in my imagination?
Given the reference to with whom ML poses, is this not aimed to some degree at this board?

Bingo! Good eye, Emily. Caught that thought as well. Coincidence? I think not. 

WHo is this guy?  AGD under a pseudonym?

[Lonely Summer]

this article is not really even worth consideration, full of falsehoods and seemingly no research. more of an opinion piece really, and an awful one at that. but this line may be the most misguided thing I've ever read:

Foskett has been with the Beach Boys for 34 years, longer than Carl or Dennis Wilson were in the band

i mean, wow.

Yeah, he had me until that. I mean, how many great BB's tracks has Foskett helped create? Not dissing the man's talent, but there is a big difference between being one of the core founding members, and being a hired hand for Mike or Brian's bands.

[HeyJude]

And none of the "honorary" Beach Boys (or other associates for that matter) like Foskett or Billy Hinsche or Matt Jardine need their resume fudged. They all did great jobs in the touring band and contributed to some studio recordings over the years of mixed quality.

I don't think this author knows what he's trying to argue, which reinforces my perception that he decided to write a piece defending Mike (and as Emily mentioned perhaps in response to the acrimony surrounding "The Photo Op" that came up recently), and then went all over the place trying and failing to make some sort of point.

[MikestheGreatest!!]

It is interesting to consider the premise of the article though....what may have happened if Brian had retired or began his solo career after the cancellation of Smile and how the group may have evolved without him.  Or if Brian had begun his solo career and been a part-time member since frankly, the latter is what he really was after a certain point.  As it was, the group was dependent on Brian and he was dependent on them, perhaps not the healthiest of situations, especially since it seemed to cause a certain amount of resentment from both ends.  But one sadly concludes that probably neither Brian nor the group could have successfully made it without each other, in the immediate aftermath of the Smile debacle.

[CenturyDeprived]

It is interesting to consider the premise of the article though....what may have happened if Brian had retired or began his solo career after the cancellation of Smile and how the group may have evolved without him.  

I agree it is an interesting premise, and while I'm glad for the existence of most of the Brian material on the post-Brian is Back albums, and I love Love You and parts of 15BO, MIU, etc, I can certainly understand how the other band members felt stifled and unappreciated when they were pushed to the side (despite building years of cred for material with little to no Brian involvement) in favor of pushing Brian's "comeback" material.

Yet it seems that if this article is pushing a Mike-directed ideology, in anticipation of Mike's upcoming book... that perhaps Mike is resentful for the entire Brian is Back campaign in hindsight if the end result of the campaign was to help begin this supposedly "unjust" legend of Brian Wilson.  In hindsight, the campaign of bringing Brian back brought about as much respect for Mike's contributions as TWMGTR did: very little. Mike didn't get a chance to shine or get to feel like an essential part of a successful writing partnership with Brian anymore, and Brian started getting all the attention.

Wasn't the Brian is Back campaign the brainchild of Steve Love? If the campaign had an eventual result (years later) of giving Brian too much credit (at Mike's expense), perhaps that didn't exactly help his and Steve Love's relationship (which is non-existent now), and perhaps that's part of why Mike and Denny fell out.  In fact, I could imagine Mike falling out with anyone who would do actions that have an end result of elevating Brian's stature and legend (and just Brian's). I can't imagine that Mike agreed with Denny's comments about Brian being The BBs. I'm sure that Denny comment won't be addressed in Mike's book, and it's too bad that Denny isn't around to give his two cents about the content of the book, which I assume will run very contrary to Denny's own opinions on the matter.

[Cam Mott]

I don't know what that guy thought he was doing but I hope he stops it.

[Emily]

It is interesting to consider the premise of the article though....what may have happened if Brian had retired or began his solo career after the cancellation of Smile and how the group may have evolved without him.  Or if Brian had begun his solo career and been a part-time member since frankly, the latter is what he really was after a certain point.  As it was, the group was dependent on Brian and he was dependent on them, perhaps not the healthiest of situations, especially since it seemed to cause a certain amount of resentment from both ends.  But one sadly concludes that probably neither Brian nor the group could have successfully made it without each other, in the immediate aftermath of the Smile debacle.

I don't think I agree on the mutual dependency. I can't say with confidence that the Beach Boys would have not been successful without Brian Wilson post '67. They were later, why not then? (Of course people have different ideas of what success looks like but 1965 Beach Boys does not have to be the standard.)
And I can easily believe that Brian Wilson may have been better off working as a producer or just taking a break.

[Fire Wind]

Yeah, agreed that it's an interesting premise.  I think the Boys, depending on the focus and who was leading the band, could've stayed interesting and successful, but probably only moderately successful, both artistically and commercially.  I dislike Pink Floyd, but I can't really imagine the Boys coming anywhere near their achievements in the 70s.

[HeyJude]

An article about "What ifs" can be interesting (those types of premises don't often interest me personally, but they can provoke some interesting ideas).

Whatever this article was/is, it goes well beyond "Hrmmm, I wonder what it would have been like had Brian fallen off the radar in 1967?" And even that part of the premise is pretty odd, because as someone else mentioned, it arguably dismisses the trove of great post-1967 material Brian did come up with.

If the other BBs had ever had a huge burning desire to do more of their own stuff, we would have seen more solo albums. Again, I'm confused as to whether the writer is blaming the BBs or fans for the group not breaking away from Brian.

[petsoundsnola]

The author's main goal is simply to agitate and tear down a great and admirable figure. He thinks is is hip by going against "conventional wisdom."  Somehow he feels that by writing this diatribe, he can be "anti-establishment" and therefore cool.

However, his logic is flawed, and he clearly has an agenda to push. I ain't taking the bait, you two bit hack.

[Gerry]

Really, this doesn't even deserve a response. However, it reminds me of the National Enquirer; the sensational headline to grab some internet traffic and nothing really to back it up, just a contrary point of view.

[Don Malcolm]

It is an absolutely stupid premise. The rest of the BBs were not ready to take over for Brian in 1967. That is likely one of the hidden reasons that Brian shelved SMiLE in its original form (aside from the flak and the pressure and a few minor things like that). It's because he knew that there would have to be a transition period to bring Carl and Dennis up to a level where they could write and produce material that could viably restructure the division of labor in the band.

I'm convinced he knew this even as he slowly succumbed to his own sense of failure in not bringing SMiLE off after all of the hoopla, and the next LPs were designed to make that transition by bringing into play new genres of Beach Boys music that would allow all of the other guys in the band a framework for moving forward with or without him.

The article criminally overstates the band's readiness to take over for Brian at this time, and completely misses the idea that Brian was himself looking for ways to make this happen even in the midst of a delayed breakdown as a result of SMiLE's demise. By 1969 the band was able to do just that, but the notion that the band would have been greater without Brian in the ensuing years clearly has forgotten the tracks that Brian was involved in and how he continued to "lead the way" even in his so-called bedroom phase. While Carl may have finished a number of Brian tracks in this time frame, he didn't originate them.

This is article is bombastic, malevolent revisionism at its most egregious and should be forcibly crammed down the author's throat.

[clack]

The basic premise is way off-base. Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, and Bruce were not creatively stifled -- post-1967, they were given every opportunity to write, produce, and arrange.

The notion that including 2 or 3 songs from Brian per lp meant that the rest of the band were unable to flourish as songwriters is nonsense.

[rn57]

Tim Sommer doesn't get around in this article to disclosing that when he was an A&R guy at Atlantic he actually sent a message to old Syd (via the latter's sister Rosemary) asking if he wanted to sign a deal with the label and record something. There was no reply from the Madcap. It's discussed in several of the Barrett biographies.

[guitarfool2002]

Compare the timing of this articles release with the timing of his article last year and you'll see what you need to see in the timeline. Coincidence? Nah.

[CenturyDeprived]

Compare the timing of this articles release with the timing of his article last year and you'll see what you need to see in the timeline. Coincidence? Nah.

I'm starting to doubt the timing is any kind of coincidence either...

[Peter Reum]

To ignore Brian's work on Wild Honey, Friends, 20/20, Sunflower, Surf's Up, Holland, 15 Big Ones, Love You, MIU, and That's Why God  Made Radio, plus his best solo work  such as BW 88. Orange Crate Art. Imagination, BWPS, Lucky Old Sun, The Gershwin project , and  his  last estate solo album is to say that a white horse is a brown cow. In spite of the obvious fact that the animal in question has a mane, can run at full speed, and neighs instead of  mooing does not impressed this most obtuse of writers. Oh well, the guy probably puts acid in his Koolaid.

[Debbie KL]

To ignore Brian's work on Wild Honey, Friends, 20/20, Sunflower, Surf's Up, Holland, 15 Big Ones, Love You, MIU, and That's Why God  Made Radio, plus his best solo work  such as BW 88. Orange Crate Art. Imagination, BWPS, Lucky Old Sun, The Gershwin project , and  his  last estate solo album is to say that a white horse is a brown cow. In spite of the obvious fact that the animal in question has a mane, can run at full speed, and neighs instead of  mooing does not impressed this most obtuse of writers. Oh well, the guy probably puts acid in his Koolaid.

Peter - the whole article is just a laughable crock of utter nonsense.  Even an alternate universe wouldn't accept this fantasy.

[Robbie Mac]

The guy ignores the fact that the labels that signed the BB were begging for Brian.

[Ang Jones]

It is an absolutely stupid premise. The rest of the BBs were not ready to take over for Brian in 1967. That is likely one of the hidden reasons that Brian shelved SMiLE in its original form (aside from the flak and the pressure and a few minor things like that). It's because he knew that there would have to be a transition period to bring Carl and Dennis up to a level where they could write and produce material that could viably restructure the division of labor in the band.

I'm convinced he knew this even as he slowly succumbed to his own sense of failure in not bringing SMiLE off after all of the hoopla, and the next LPs were designed to make that transition by bringing into play new genres of Beach Boys music that would allow all of the other guys in the band a framework for moving forward with or without him.

The article criminally overstates the band's readiness to take over for Brian at this time, and completely misses the idea that Brian was himself looking for ways to make this happen even in the midst of a delayed breakdown as a result of SMiLE's demise. By 1969 the band was able to do just that, but the notion that the band would have been greater without Brian in the ensuing years clearly has forgotten the tracks that Brian was involved in and how he continued to "lead the way" even in his so-called bedroom phase. While Carl may have finished a number of Brian tracks in this time frame, he didn't originate them.

This is article is bombastic, malevolent revisionism at its most egregious and should be forcibly crammed down the author's throat.

Excellently put. The title was enough for me to know it was going to annoy me but I read it anyway, finding that the arguments presented by the author were laughably unconvincing to anyone who had the slightest knowledge of the history. As for Mike being 'gentle' and 'kind' and giving money to charity, what the hell does that have to do with whether he is talented or capable of competing musically with Brian Wilson? (There are also numerous incidents of Mike being less than 'kind' which the author conveniently chose to overlook.) The timing is indeed suspicious too.