SMiLE was ready in 1967 - discuss

[Julia]

When Brian was asked who was his favorite collaborator - correct me if I'm wrong - wasn't his answer always or almost always Van Dyke Parks?

Trying to say or suggest Brian did not like Van Dyke's lyrics is revisionist history bordering on complete nonsense, in my opinion. If anyone didn't like Van Dyke's lyrics, it was other members of The Beach Boys. Brian did love Van's lyrics, and said so.

Well, it wasn't something I claimed as fact and in the previous page I agreed with Dan that Brian must've liked the lyrics. This was just a half-hearted conjecture to try to explain why Van needed to stay around so long AND try to answer the claims of semi-frequent disagreements (sometimes they're straight up referred to as "arguments") between the two. The whole Anderle quote "Brian would sometimes tell him 'no' just to assert that he could, and Van hated it" thing. Maybe their spats were more about arrangement? Van is in the studio and Brian asks his opinion here and there "right Van?" and sometimes the opposite "does this sound villainous enough, Brian?" There's that thing about Van suggesting the cellos in GV; maybe he felt free to suggest other arrangement/production notes and Brian told him to stay in his lane? I'm not sure, Im just spitballing possible theories and trying to get feedback on if Im on the right track or not.

I always felt Song Cycle was a tad overproduced, akin to Spector's Let It Be and BW88 (not to belabor my feelings on those albums, but they're examples we're all familiar with) while to my ears SMiLE and Pet Sounds are just right. If the tiffs were about production, I think Brian was right to hold his ground. Shame he could seemingly stand up to Van but not anyone else.

Thanks Dan, I appreciate what you said. And again for the record, I love Van's lyrics too.

[Julia]

Any time! Alright, I'll happily keep going.

The most obvious suggestion of what those Jan 23 sessions were for are the AFM contracts. The first from 3pm-6pm is titled 'SURF'S UP', and the second (a sweetening session following immediately) from 6.30pm-11.30pm was given the title 'PART ONE'. Considering Brian's working habits at the time of re-doing everything that didn't need to be re-done, and the December 15 piano/vocal recording probably supplanting the November 4 track, that just seems like the most believable thing he'd be doing.

There are some curious things about the personnel that'd support this, too. The first session would in theory be a pretty similar instrumental lineup to the November session - Hal on percussion, Carl and Bill Pitman on guitar/bass, Lyle Ritz on bass, Roy Caton on trumpet, presumably Brian on piano - but really intriguingly, there are three woodwind players. Now, Carl recorded a remake of the 1st Movement track in 1971, mostly mimicking Brian's arrangement from the November track down to the note... but for some reason, he's got three baritone saxes on there, all holding a droning bassline. Where else would he have gotten that musical idea while otherwise rote copying Brian's work on the other track? That, for me, is the strongest suggestion of what they recorded that day. It's only a little thing, but I really can't let go of it.

The sweetening session and missing status of the tape is all pretty fishy. Ten string players are compensated normally, while the AFM sheet indicates a whole horn section and harpist were paid for their services but sent home without being used, which is a total one-off. If Siegel's anecdote about a studio full of violinists being sent home because the vibrations weren't right has a ring of truth, this is the only session that'd remotely fit the bill.

This is really, really interesting, thanks for posting. I totally buy it, at least til better evidence emerges!

And if it is true, it really is just more evidence for what is, for me, an increasingly inescapable conclusion...which is that the Smile project fundamentally fell apart because Brian lost the thread of it. Yea, you can still argue about *why* he lost the thread, how much of it was external factors and how much internal, whatever. But, again, if this is true, for me, there's just no way around the fact that anyone who would re-record Part 1 of Surf's Up has lost the thread of what they're doing. That original recording is one of the greatest things recorded in the 20th century. If you can't tell it's fine as it is....

That’s always been my personal feeling. Again, for me realizing when the Fire incident actually  happened , well I can kind of understand more the rest of the band’s position , Mike included. I think the way Brian was acting kind of put the music in a poor light to them back in 1966. We look at the brilliance of what he was doing but put yourself in their shoes back then…and knowing how Brian changes his mind so much , and everything else that was starting to happen with him, I doubt he could explain his plans well, especially if they changed from day to day. All those brilliant parts being thrown out …that must’ve looked worrying, especially if they had no idea how it was going to sound all put together. And the fact that Brian himself didn’t know…during the album sessions… it’s one thing to have mostly finished songs and having trouble deciding which should make the cut. It’s another thing when sections of songs are being swapped in and out seemingly on a whim. Brian’s indecision didn’t kill Smile, because there was nothing to kill. Even from the beginning it seemed the concept kept changing. The fact that “Rock with me Henry” happened like that (I have the 2 cd set of TSS

Here’s my theory… Smiley Smile was a case of “we got the songs. Let’s do it as a band and structure them like regular songs, like we should have been doing in the first place “. That’s what was simplified . Not the production…the *structure*. I don’t think the “style” was as big of a sticking point as we all thought; I think that was more of a post Endless Summer thing. Brian was trying to capture lightning in a bottle ; it worked with Good Vibrations, but that was a once in a lifetime deal. Brian bit off more than he could chew trying to go that route for a whole album. If he’d had todays technology, it’d be easier to A/B comparison tracks without cutting tape, but that still misses the point of the issue. Brian could not finish Smile because he could not decide what it truly was, made worse because the same was true for many of the songs. The true tragedy of SMiLE is that some point during it, Brian realized it, and that’s what did him in.

I sort of have to agree. To us it all sounds interesting and cool. We're far removed from the effects, so "sandbox in the house," "setting fire to a trashcan in the studio," and "smoking hash every night for two years straight" sounds like a lot of fun and your eccentric genius fare. Which it is, but for family members dealing with the daily fallout, it must've been nerve wracking and depressing.

I just read through the relevant portions of The Dark Stuff: Selected Writings On Rock Music Updated Edition by Nick Kent, which is a great summary of the sessions though not particularly revelatory for us uberfans that've read the primary sources he quotes. One thing emphasized here though is how Brian's bipolar mood shifts were common even in the Pet Sounds sessions, where he'd go from storming mad to crying hysterically to elated to depressed sometimes just in the span of one day. Asher says words to the effect of "it was only a matter of time before he self-desctructed" and he knew he shouldn't hitch his ride to this gig, to stick with steady advertising work.

While part of me used to look up to SMiLE-Era Brian as this enlightened guru of New Age Spirituality, well-read on these other hip books, Asher and Taylor in the book describe his interests as purely surface level, where he'd be wowed by the "wiki summary" of the concept for awhile but never actually delve into it, think on it deeply, practice it in his daily life. It was like a kid wowed by a new thing and then quickly setting it aside when he gets a new toy. Asher describes him as straight-up "dopey" and unsophistocated about this stuff.

Point is, I could see the others perceiving Brian as very impressionable and innocent, where he needed to be saved from himself--to be fair he kinda did. Not letting them off the hook totally either, but in this human tragedy where no one is perfect, their position at least makes sense.

[mike s]

Dan here's what I think Elements may have been at one point:

MOLC - verified and possibly dumped forever (although came back as Woody Woodpecker)
Vegetables - verifeid in booklet (possibly a skit rather than the tune but more likely the tune I think)
piano cut - verified quote from Brian - unfinished - 'cut' means they had done some recording
water chant - not verified but extremely likely and a version ofc resurfaced in CCW

During the 'Smog' skit - obviously all about air - Brian actually says 'The Elements' at one point and I think maybe a couple of snippets of this might have been intended to go somehere like 'you're under arrest' etc

[Julia]

Dan here's what I think Elements may have been at one point:

MOLC - verified and possibly dumped forever (although came back as Woody Woodpecker)
Vegetables - verifeid in booklet (possibly a skit rather than the tune but more likely the tune I think)
piano cut - verified quote from Brian - unfinished - 'cut' means they had done some recording
water chant - not verified but extremely likely and a version ofc resurfaced in CCW

During the 'Smog' skit - obviously all about air - Brian actually says 'The Elements' at one point and I think maybe a couple of snippets of this might have been intended to go somehere like 'you're under arrest' etc

I think the original 4-part "instrumental" track would've been like: Fire (w/ "oooo" vocals), Veggie chewing (w/ chants like the "big bag of vegetables" and "where's my beets and carrots?"), Vosse water sounds (w/ Water Chant or Undersea Chant-like vocalizations), some kinda air like maybe this fabled piano piece (w/ Breathing vocalizations).
^Should be noted, there's no way to know what order they'd come in except Fire presumably would be first since it was labelled that way. If they follow the order they're meant to go in according to classical thought, it'd be fire, earth, water, air. (Earth often comes first and fire last with this order, then the next most common ordering is Fire, Earth, Air, Water but different Hellenistic literature has grouped them in nearly every permutation.)

That said, I think the "air was a piano piece" thing is a red herring. I never really understood why everyone takes this particular Brian quote as gospel when it was said over 10 years later and he's known to just say BS especially where SMiLE is concerned. I never see the original quote either, just people referencing the quote, but I guess it's all we have to go on. Anyway, I like what one poster has said (cant find the quote offhand) where Brian was being intentionally facetious because practically all his songs began with him at the piano. What bugs me is the way people latch onto this one vague quote to insist that Wind Chimes must've been air, even though the fade is the only explicit piano part (so what, half a song is an element?) but I digress. Again, not trying to ruin the fun of speculating or act like I alone know the truth, Im just guessing like everyone else, but that's my opinion on "Air."

Then as it broke apart, Mrs O'Leary's Cow became its own thing, maybe with Workshop as rebuilding after the fire (moved from "building the barnyard" in that suite, or perhaps that segment would transition the fire into the farm?). Veggies became a full-fledged song. Dada became either something watery or airy or both, the "new" title Second Day implies both, it's the Biblical separation of the oceanic and atmospheric waters, the "wah wah" chants and woodwinds evoke the feeling of both, then the melody became CCW which was even more explicitly water-related and apparently the Water Chant was always part of that song as some kind of fade, either a fade-in or more likely a fade-out?

To me, that's it. That's the evolution of the explicitly element related SMiLE material. Smog was also a spoken word track possibly meant to serve as the "talking between tracks/verses" that'd be tied into it somehow.

[mike s]

The Brian quote about Air was from an interview in a book - Byron Preiss..?

There's no reason to not take it at face value.  It wasn't all that long later and its not like it was a tiny obscure part of something..

[Julia]

The Brian quote about Air was from an interview in a book - Byron Preiss..?

There's no reason to not take it at face value.  It wasn't all that long later and its not like it was a tiny obscure part of something..

Fair enough. I just think it's sort of inconsistent how much weight it gets compared to other quotes like "there will be some talking between the tracks/someone might say something between verses" and back in the day there was a cabal of posters who used that one quote as definitive proof WC was air while discounting other, clearly "airy" material that's actually on tape, vintage '66, like Breathing--even accusing me of trolling because I said that could be a clue as to what air might've been. (I have to admit that really got under my skin, just the arrogance and accusing me of posting in bad faith for a valid disagreement that's backed up by evidence.) Ultimately Brian says a lot of stuff that isn't true ("I burned the fire tapes"/"I recorded SMiLE in 1965"/"I never saw [the Dec tracklist] before" as just a few) especially with regard to this period in his life. Im not gonna say Air definitely wasn't a piano piece but certainly we don't know and I just think it's interesting this one quote is almost always taken as a given.

At the end of the day, of course it's just up to the fans to use what we want when including an air segment. I personally go back and forth between Breathing and Second Day--the latter could be this supposed "piano piece." But really, I think it's worth noting also that Brian wanted to paint a picture with his arrangements. With the Surf's Up session's percussion he says "ok now it sounds like jewelry" to mirror the diamond necklace line and its theme of rich bejeweled spectators at the opera house. Fire sounds like engine sirens careening towards an inferno without any outside explanation necessary. He often used a harpsichord or plucked piano strings to evoke innocence in his compositions, like Wonderful and You Still Believe In Me (originally "In My Childhood"). Water was originally going to be water recordings. Vegetables used celery chomping as percussion. The horn in CIFOTM was meant to sound like a baby crying ("that sounds more like a baby--that's our baby!") I could go on. Maybe I'm being overly pedantic but to me, a piano is just about the least "airy" instrument you could use. I'd think horns or especially woodwinds are more appropriate to make the listener think "air!" and even without them it's the rising-falling vocals of the Cabin Essence fade that make me think of a tornado more than Wind Chimes' fade evokes "air" in my mind's eye. (Vosse even mentions the original WC fade in Teen Set but he doesn't describe it in terms of wind at all, rather saying it "sounded like a music box.") Of course, the woodwinds in Second Day then fit that bill nicely, but again it's that part of the arrangement that makes it work more than the piano. Just my two cents though.

[mike s]

People use the fact that nothing else was slated or noted as Elements pieces - other than Cow - as proof that nothing else was intended for it.

However thats a logical fallacy - although very likely correct its not concrete proof.

Its the fact that Brian said 'unfinished cut' that makes me think we might have heard it - pure speculation though.

H&V intro uncannily fits the bill but is H&V.

[Julia]

People use the fact that nothing else was slated or noted as Elements pieces - other than Cow - as proof that nothing else was intended for it.

However thats a logical fallacy - although very likely correct its not concrete proof.

Its the fact that Brian said 'unfinished cut' that makes me think we might have heard it - pure speculation though.

H&V intro uncannily fits the bill but is H&V.

That's not a logical fallacy though, it's just acknowledging the truth--that we don't ultimately know for sure. It's admitting that we can't prove anything else was definitely an element because nothing else (to my knowledge) says so on the hard evidence, IE the tape boxes, the session logs, the studio chatter. Of course those pieces of evidence can be flawed or misleading too but that's what we have to go on. Beyond that we can only make educated guesses but most people, or most academic researchers, usually give those somewhat less weight than a concrete labeling as "The Elements" like we have for Fire. Does that make sense? To assume that no other element section was labeled the same way Fire was, as clearly unambiguously part of the suite, requires a certain leap in logic--why wouldn't they be consistent? That's not to say it isn't possible, just that it's less likely and therefore the one making the claim "this was part of the same 4-part Elements track even though it isn't labeled as such" has to present a very compelling case. The burden of proof is on the one trying to demonstrate a positive, that something is, because more often than not you can't prove a negative nor should one be asked to. This isn't just a SMiLE thing, it's how legal arguments work, why the prosecution must make their case, etc.

Like, if I said "CIFOTM is water because people are 75% water and the baby's crying tears" you can't exactly pull up a quote of Brian saying "CIFOTM was DEFINITELY NOT WATER" but the absence of that quote doesn't mean my ridiculous claim is correct. You even said yourself, by these parameters there's nothing stopping one from saying "Heroes is an element" or even "the bridge of CIFOTM is air" because, hey, unfinished piano piece. I'm not trying to be snarky or "fun policing" but there's a certain standard of evidence we have to follow if we're gonna say any other piece was definitively intended for "The Elements" circa 1966. I would argue it's more fallacious to claim "there were more elements intended therefore they must exist among the recorded material" because it assumes 1) that Brian even wrote material for the other elements at all, which is perhaps likely but uncertain and 2) that he got around to recording them when we know lots of other conceptualized work was left undone (ex: we have lyrics written with no vocals on tape) and 3) that, accepting for the sake of argument that points 1 & 2 are true, these 3 elements pieces weren't among the many SMiLE tapes that have gone missing from the vaults. Vosse's water recordings are seemingly long gone for example, and it's at least as likely as not that if air were recorded it too may be on a reel we can't find. Who knows? (No one, and that's my point.)

I used to be against the idea of veggies as Earth because it wasn't an instrumental but I admit the Frank Holmes illustration and some other primary source quotes won me over on that front. I also admit that Dada may well have always been water/air but we just can't prove it; the fact that it certainly ended up as a song unambiguously about water cannot be used to prove that was always the intention, especially considering how frequently pieces of music switched places on the album and how Brian recycled melodies he didn't think would ever be released. (Look at CWTL from WC and Good Time from American Spring to Love You.)

Beyond that, we have him on tape Nov 4 1966 recording vegetable themed chants, swimming themed chants, vocalizations of fish darting around the ocean floor and rhythmic breathing. I've always maintained that these are either rough drafts of the other elements or attempts to get in that headspace for inspiration AT LEAST. Keep in mind Vosse, Anderle and other primary sources explicitly say "The Elements" would have a fitness component and these segments embody that clearly--healthy eating, water-based exercise, catching one's breath after physical exertion. Also note that Keith Badman explicitly calls "Undersea Chant" a precursor to the Water Chant, and Vosse describes UC as Brian's take on water, that it was "a musical Atlantis." If there's anything we have that represents the last three elements as they existed in '66, it's these, and the fact they were unofficial recordings also explains why they're not labelled "Elements: Part X" as well. Everything fits, and frankly I say to pretend otherwise is to be willfully obtuse. Not that you were doing this yourself but I think others I've sparred with in the past deliberately downplay these tapes out of some misguided prejudice against anything "stoner-related" or at least anything sans-Beach Boys which is a very puzzling mindset to me, but whatever. Like it or not, that's all we have on tape that predates "The Elements" the track getting scrapped, so that's all we have to go on unless a lost reel, acetate or piece of verified sheet music shows up.

I hope I've made my case on this; either way I'll just leave it there because (again) I think arguing over what the other three elements are has always been a red herring--someone on this very thread even proved with the Siegal article that Brian abandoned the concept the same day Fire was recorded for God's sake. But at least we have 3 suitable standins for the missing pieces, with Veggies, CCW and Dada for air, or perhaps even Wind Chimes like Brian did in '03. (I only push back at the suggestion that WC was always intended for air because there's absolutely no proof of it whatsoever except the flimsy "it has wind in the title" and this questionable-at-best "piano piece" quote that only applies to the fade anyway.) Decades of speculative bootleg listings and subsequent feedback loops in these online discussions have left everyone too emotionally invested in their fan-theories to accept the disappointing truth; not all mysteries have satisfying conclusions. Sometimes Brian just didn't finish things--like the album itself!--and that's all there is to it. Peace.  

[mike s]

No its literally a logical fallacy to state what I mentioned above - that there were no other Elements because they weren't noted as such.

When I say that I'm not arguing one way or the other or what might have been included - its just an example of people making assumptions and mistaking them for facts..

[Julia]

No its literally a logical fallacy to state what I mentioned above - that there were no other Elements because they weren't noted as such.

When I say that I'm not arguing one way or the other or what might have been included - its just an example of people making assumptions and mistaking them for facts..

Well...I'm disappointed that's all you got out of my post, but I don't know how I can make my point any clearer, so we'll just agree to disagree.

[Dan Lega]

"...Siegal article that Brian abandoned the concept the same day Fire was recorded."

I don't recall that quote, (not surprising,) but that's very interesting to me.  The "Fire" session is the only thing I recall Van Dyke saying multiple times was a wedge, or a sore spot, or something worse(?), between him and Brian.  He has said he didn't like it because it was clearly an instrumental and was not meant to have any words.  It literally blows my mind that Van Dyke was so against it!  Why, is what I can't figure out.  Did he think an orchestral Elements Suite went against the grain of the American History Lesson in pop music that they were originally writing?  Or was he okay with an Elements Suite that included at least "Vegetables," according to Frank Holmes drawing in the booklet that was labeled as such, and wanted the other elements songs to have lyrics, also?  Which makes a stronger case for "Wind Chimes" as part of The Elements.  But then Brian said that Air was going to be a piano piece.  Which makes a stronger case for The Elements being four short lyric-less tunes that would form a suite.  Too many questions!

If Brian abandoned the concept of a short instrumental Elemental Suite the day he recorded "Fire" it must have been because he and Van Dyke didn't see eye-to-eye on it. As Julia said, there's no super-hard proof for an Elemental Suite in either an orchestral form or a more traditional song form.  All we have are conflicting yet tantalizing pieces to a puzzle.  

Oh, and if Brian abandoned an orchestral Elements Suite on the day of the "Fire" session, and the building fire in the area didn't happen until later, and the idea that the buidling fire was caused by the song wasn't suggested until even later, then why was there so much consternation?  I guess even if Brian wasn't planning on releasing "Fire" because he had abandoned it on the same day of the recording session according to Seigel, then just the idea that music could be that powerful as to burn down a building would still be disturbing to someone who bought into the cause-and-effect idea?

It's all so confusing.  There's just so many unanswered questions.  However, Van Dyke may have some answers.  And maybe we'll get lucky and he'll give us some answers in the autobiography he's writing?  (I hope he's busy writing!  I really want to read it!)

But now I wonder if, over the years, Van Dyke has changed his mind about the artistic value of "Fire?"  And if he did, when did he change his mind?  He's clearly an extremely intelligent person, and is very knowledgeable about all types of music, including classical, I presume.  So... he did put lyrics on top of the Water Chant in 2004. I wonder if he thought seriously about lyrics for "Fire," both in '66/'67 and 2003 -- but just couldn't come up with any, or Brian told him that he likes "Fire" the way that it is? "Fire" stayed the same in 2004 except for the addition of the wordless vocals.  (And I wonder whose idea it was to add the wordless vocals to "Fire" in 2003/2004?   Was it Brian, Van Dyke, or Darian who first suggested it?  Darian needs to write a book about SMiLE, too, just like David Leaf did!)

I believe Brian had in mind four short orchestral pieces of music for an Elements Suite.  I also believe he may have had an idea for a suite of songs with lyrics that represented the elements.  He also may have wanted both orchestral and songs with lyrics to be a part of it.  But the idea of a short orchestral suite is the most satisfying to me, artistically.  And "Fall Breaks, Our Prayer, Fire, Water Chant" is extremely satisfying to me as an Elements Suite.  But that's only an opinion I have.  I have no hard proof, as Julia explained.

[Angela Jones]

It is interesting to me that in Til I Die, Brian had verses for water, earth and air. None for fire.

Ironic that he got a Grammy for the Fire Music.

[Julia]

"...Siegal article that Brian abandoned the concept the same day Fire was recorded."

I don't recall that quote, (not surprising,) but that's very interesting to me.  The "Fire" session is the only thing I recall Van Dyke saying multiple times was a wedge, or a sore spot, or something worse(?), between him and Brian.  He has said he didn't like it because it was clearly an instrumental and was not meant to have any words.  It literally blows my mind that Van Dyke was so against it!  Why, is what I can't figure out.  Did he think an orchestral Elements Suite went against the grain of the American History Lesson in pop music that they were originally writing?  Or was he okay with an Elements Suite that included at least "Vegetables," according to Frank Holmes drawing in the booklet that was labeled as such, and wanted the other elements songs to have lyrics, also?  Which makes a stronger case for "Wind Chimes" as part of The Elements.  But then Brian said that Air was going to be a piano piece.  Which makes a stronger case for The Elements being four short lyric-less tunes that would form a suite.  Too many questions!

I could swear it was a few pages back on this thread but Ive been browsing a few on this forum simultaneously so forgive me if I was mistaken. Either way, somebody somewhere quoted the famous Jules Siegal article where Brian is quoted on the way back from the Fire sessions "I'm gonna call this 'Mrs OLeary's Fire' [not Cow, I was mistaken there]" and that was used as proof the plan for one track called "the elements" changed that very day. It's possible he even changed it back since "Elements" is on the December tracklist--Im not sure when Capitol would've consorted with him to get the info for that, someone can come in and drop that date if they know it.

VDP also disagreed with using Veggies as a single, considering it one of the weaker tracks (I got this from wikipedia, they cite Priore's 2005 book page 113 which I dont have access to). According to Anderle he also didn't think the arrangements were sophisticated enough while Brian opted to simplify. There's mentions to Brian and VDP butting heads a few times as I've alluded to before--I speculated maybe it was lyrics but if not that, maybe we're discovering the real reasons right now: arrangements, choice of single, use of instrumentals? But I think it's worth noting that VDP had no authority and he even says as much everytime I've seen him quoted--words to the effect of "this was Brian's project, Im just a hired hand."

I would like to know your source for VDP not wanting the elements suite as originally conceived on the album if you don't mind, both to satiate my personal curiosity and also because it's not a widely circulated, popularly accepted factoid and slightly upsets the established narrative so I think we all deserve to know where that comes from and if it's a reliable source of info. (Not trying to sound mean, but Im looking for the truth.) Ive seen him talk about not wanting to go to the sessions because he was uncomfortable with the vibe there--the fire hats, burning trash. VDP seems like he was more serious, less into the Psychedelic Sounds and what he later referred to as Brian's "buffoonery." I wonder if that's what you're referring to, that he disapproved of the way those sessions were conducted? In any case, I don't think he had the kind of authority to really effect anything: when Mike didn't like his lyrics that song wasn't used, when he supposedly didn't like fire it was still recorded and sent to Captiol as a possible track, when he disagreed with focusing on Veggies it was still worked on as a single.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think "VDP didn't like fire, ergo he must've wanted lyrics on the elements, ergo Wind Chimes is air" is a strong case, but people seem determined to make this connection at all costs so what can I do?  

[As an aside, the idea they butted heads late in the game on the inclusion of an elements suite on the album at all also strengthens another pet theory of mine, that the two sides/suites were really Americana and Cycle of Life all along, rather than the Priore/bootlegs America/Elements framework, but unfortunately that is another aspect of the SMiLE myth already etched in stone and deemed beyond question ]

If Brian abandoned the concept of a short instrumental Elemental Suite the day he recorded "Fire" it must have been because he and Van Dyke didn't see eye-to-eye on it. As Julia said, there's no super-hard proof for an Elemental Suite in either an orchestral form or a more traditional song form.  All we have are conflicting yet tantalizing pieces to a puzzle.  

Oh, and if Brian abandoned an orchestral Elements Suite on the day of the "Fire" session, and the building fire in the area didn't happen until later, and the idea that the buidling fire was caused by the song wasn't sugeested until even later, then why was there so much consternation?  I guess even if Brian wasn't planning on releasing "Fire" because he had abandoned it on the same day of the recording session according to Seigel, then just the idea that music could be that powerful as to burn down a building would still be disturbing to someone who bought into the cause-and-effect idea?

It's all so confusing.  There's just so many unanswered questions.  However, Van Dyke may have some answers.  And maybe we'll get lucky and he'll give us some answers in the autobiography he's writing?  (I hope he's busy writing!  I really want to read it!)

I think VDP's just too much of a gentleman to spill the beans on the day to day disagreements and tomfoolery he witnessed that turned him off. Especially once Brian's condition became known and better understood. It's like picking on a person with mental issues (I mean, it is) and revealing intimate vulnerabilities he probably feels are not his place to spill to the fans (which is objectively true despite our insatiable curiosity!). Also I think we may do well to accept that Brian's ideas in this time were more often fleeting impulses that didn't last too long. So we build up concepts like "the elements suite" in our heads as this grandiose vision but really it may've just been Brian stoned out of his mind on the couch one night "dude...what if like...we did an instrumental...of like, the four elements man? That'd be so groovy!" and it never got much further than that. May sound insulting but I'm reading The Beach Boys and the California Myth's sections on SMiLE and it seems to track; it's not just that book either, nearly all the primary sources agree Brian's thought processes were like that at the time.

But now I wonder if over the years Van Dyke has changed his mind about the artistic value of "Fire?"  And if he did, when did he change his mind?  He's clearly an extremely intelligent person, and is very knowledgeable about all types of music, including classical, I presume.  So... he did put lyrics on top of the Water Chant in 2004. I wonder if he thought seriously about lyrics for "Fire," both in '66/'67 and 2003 -- but just couldn't come up with any, or Brian told him that he likes "Fire" the way that it is? "Fire" stayed the same in 2004 except for the addition of the wordless vocals.  (And I wonder whose idea it was to add the wordless vocals to "Fire" in 2003/2004?   Was it Brian, Van Dyke, or Darian who first suggested it?  Darian needs to write a book about SMiLE, too, just like David Leaf did!)

I believe Brian had in mind four short orchestral pieces of music for an Elements Suite.  I also believe he may have had an idea for a suite of songs with lyrics that represented the elements.  He also may have wanted both orchestral and songs with lyrics to be a part of it.  But the idea of a short orchestral suite is the most satisfying to me, artistically.  And "Fall Breaks, Our Prayer, Fire, Water Chant" is extremely satisfying to me as an Elements Suite.  But that's only an opinion I have.  I have no hard proof, as Julia explained.

I think you had it earlier, that VDP probably thought it was a distraction from the "real" themes of the album, a journey across America. It speaks to what I've said elsewhere that the Americana suite was more Van's idea and Brian was into the "hodgepodge of random spirituality/occult topics including the classic elements and humor" thing. Simplifying a bit, Brian was the goofy guy who wanted a humor album, Van was the self-serious artiste who wanted a US national epic that'd chase the Beatles back to England. You look at what they produced separately, Van with Discover America and Tokyo Rose he really is that guy. All his music is Americana and grand in scope, an almost geopolitical statement in musical form. Brian with Smiley, Mt Vernon and Love You, shows he's the much more wacky humorist, who just wants to put you in a good mood and share his offbeat irreverent interests with you without any pretentiousness. I maintain they had different ideas of what the album was. I know Heroes was a concept Brian was working on before, but without VDP I think it remains "a fun cowboy song" not part A of a sweeping journey across America.

Again, I don't necessarily think Brian didn't have 4 short orchestral pieces for the elements but I maintain that either we don't have them or they grew into their own tracks after the concept was scrapped. What I painstakingly tried to explain to mike s is, we just can't prove that anything else still in the vaults is an element, no matter how enticing it would be to wrap things up in a neat bow and say "yep, here they are, case closed." It's not about what's "artistically satisfying" it's about looking at the available evidence with neutrality and maintaining academic standards.

The only material we have that fits the criteria (unambiguously earthy, watery, airy / unquestionably recorded or written in '66 / fitness component / exists among hard evidence like recording tape / plausible reason not to be explicitly labelled "Elements: Part #" like Fire was) are those segments of the Psychedelic Sounds. I know it's not an exciting answer but if we go by objective, logical standards for research, that's what's there that doesn't require huge leaps of faith to fit the mold. Unfortunately, it's such an unsatisfying conclusion to SMiLE's most famous mystery that everyone refuses to believe it out of hand. And when I've tried to argue this is just where the evidence takes us like it or not, I've been accused of "hobby horsing," ruining the fun or pushing an agenda. It's not that I even like those PS segments (except Undersea Chant, that's awesome) but I think other people are letting their emotions and deeply personal theories/mixes cloud their judgement on this issue. (No offense to anyone personally.)

This is why I emphathized with what Joshilyn and Sloopjohnb72 were saying earlier in the thread, and why I disagreed with the characterization of their posts as "bullying" and "overbearing." I've been accused of the same thing too, for just trying to come at this subject removed from the oral tradition and zeroing in on what we can prove in a court of law (so to speak). I think a lot of people just enjoy the endless speculation, the excuse to fit WC in more cleanly with the album proper (because without an elements connection it's just sort of...there) as well as the cover to fill in the gaps as they want, which isn't a bad thing but it's not my MO when analyzing the SMiLE sessions.  

[rab2591]

It is interesting to me that in Til I Die, Brian had verses for water, earth and air. None for fire.

Ironic that he got a Grammy for the Fire Music.

Whoa! I never made this connection before.

[mike s]

I agree that other Elements may have been the skit reels etc - those may have been try outs.

I think people wrap themsekves in knots over the track but its not all that mysterious.

Fire - Cow or redo of Cow
Air - unfinished piano cut
Water - variation of 'Atlantis' (Brian referred to the middle 8 of CCW as a Smile section even though it was recorded much later)
Earth - Vegetables but that was later turned into its own song

So even though all that may have been binned it gives a rough idea of what he was doing at one point even though NONE of that may have eventually ended up being used if he'd finished the album.

Four part suite with vocals here and there.

[Zenobi]

Whispering Winds?

[mike s]

Whispering Winds?

No thats Wind Chimes.  The Holidays coda does work though if people are doing a fan mix.

[Dan Lega]

Julia asked...  "I would like to know your source for VDP not wanting the elements suite as originally conceived on the album if you don't mind."


Sorry, can't give any specifics, but it seems like I've read or heard in interviews in at least three different places that Van had a problem with "Fire," and/or its session.  I think one was the "buffoonery" quote, and that same instance or another where he says he thought the fire session was nonsense and not professional?  And it seems like there's an instance where he says something like "the Fire track was another 'bag,' that had no place for lyrics, and that's what I was hired to do."  And perhaps in David Leaf's new book there is a quote with the same sentiments? 

I really wish I could be more specific!  It may even been as recently as David Leaf's new book where I first heard Van Dyke say he was not into the "Fire" track because it had no place for lyrics.

And though I essentially said it in my post above, I personally do not think of "Wind Chimes" as the Air Element track.  I was just trying to say that Van Dyke's dislike of instrumentals as Elements tracks helps bolster an argument that perhaps "Wind Chimes" is an Elements Track.

I was essentially trying to agree with you that there is no real proof for an Elements Suite that is any more than half finished, if that.  All we have are "Fire," for sure, and "Vege-tables," ...I guess.   One an instrumental, one with lyrics.  Not satisfying musically to me.  But anything else is pure speculation.

[mike s]

I was essentially trying to agree with you that there is no real proof for an Elements Suite that is any more than half finished, if that.  All we have are "Fire," for sure, and "Vege-tables," ...I guess.   One an instrumental, one with lyrics.  Not satisfying musically to me.  But anything else is pure speculation.

Don't forget Brian mentioning the unfinished piano cut for Air.  Also the '66 article that mentions 'Atlantis' by name - a version of which ended up in CCW.

[Julia]

Julia asked...  "I would like to know your source for VDP not wanting the elements suite as originally conceived on the album if you don't mind."


Sorry, can't give any specifics, but it seems like I've read or heard in interviews in at least three different places that Van had a problem with "Fire," and/or its session.  I think one was the "buffoonery" quote, and that same instance or another where he says he thought the fire session was nonsense and not professional?  And it seems like there's an instance where he says something like "the Fire track was another 'bag,' that had no place for lyrics, and that's what I was hired to do."  And perhaps in David Leaf's new book there is a quote with the same sentiments?  

I really wish I could be more specific!  It may even been as recently as David Leaf's new book where I first heard Van Dyke say he was not into the "Fire" track because it had no place for lyrics.

And though I essentially said it in my post above, I personally do not think of "Wind Chimes" as the Air Element track.  I was just trying to say that Van Dyke's dislike of instrumentals as Elements tracks helps bolster an argument that perhaps "Wind Chimes" is an Elements Track.

I was essentially trying to agree with you that there is no real proof for an Elements Suite that is any more than half finished, if that.  All we have are "Fire," for sure, and "Vege-tables," ...I guess.   One an instrumental, one with lyrics.  Not satisfying musically to me.  But anything else is pure speculation.

Its all good, I was just curious because Id seen VDP criticize the way Brian handled the session before but never the track itself so I was wondering if Id missed something.

Man, I wish I had access to Leaf's book but I can only preorder it on Amazon. Is it only out in Europe or something?

Sorry if I misunderstood or came on too strongly with my own point. I guess Ive just had a lot of people vehemently push back on me for my own in the past so Ive developed a defensive posture about it, i dont know. Ive been told Im a passionate debater but ultimately not trying to antagonize anyone personally. In any case, Ive spoken my piece at length on that subtopic and people can make up their own mind.

To maybe offer an alternate subject, I've seen here and in that other place that there's both a Love You boxset, SMiLE rerelease and possible debut of the Paley material coming out soon. Ive also heard they've since discovered new acetates for SMiLE stuff to make it worth the time of people that bought TSS. Anyone have any info or are we still gonna have to wait a year to know?

Also, one oft-cited factoid is that Michael Vosse's dad wrote "one of the first books about LSD" but I can't find it anywhere. I google "Vosse LSD book" or combos similar and it only ever brings up that same little tidbit. Can anyone find this supposed book, was it even published, was it just something Vosse told everyone for clout and it got accepted as true with no proof?

[Don Malcolm]

David's SMiLE book does a big curlicue around "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" and VDP's assessment of how the project took a sudden, strange dark turn with it--starting on p. 64 and continuing into the subsequent chapter entitled "Don't F*** with the Formula."

It seems that VDP felt somewhat ambushed by that session; apparently he was not informed about it beforehand. I'm paraphrasing here, but it seems that Brian took whatever conception of "the Elements" that had been discussed or "pre-prepared" and went to a place with "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" that no one could have possibly anticipated. It sprang into existence outside the context of what he and VDP had been envisioning, and the nature of the music seemed to obviate the need for lyrics. That seems to have shaken up VDP and seems to have made it even harder for him to defend his lyrics to Mike Love (and possibly some others) when that collision occurred a few weeks later.

(Remember, the "Fire" session was late November '66, and the altercation about lyrics was early-mid December when "Cabinessence" was revisited.)

It's clear that there was some interaction between Brian and VDP about an "Elements" suite but it appears that Brian abruptly and unexpectedly took the idea into unknown territory, which threw several wrenches into the process. VDP suggests that the subsequent tinkering Brian undertook in early '67 made it difficult to maintain a through-line for the project: it's possible that some of the arguments between them in VDP's several short-lived returns centered around that escalating problem.

David Leaf suggests that Brian might have been spooked by "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" because it encapsulated a growing set of anxieties that were at work within him. He may have been simultaneously enthralled and repulsed by what he created, which would have made him more vulnerable to superstition-oriented phenomena (the purported "rash of fires" that ensued after the session). All of that, however, just magnified the rifts that eventually caused the project to be aborted.

I don't think there's a definitive answer as to what "the Elements" would have been, which leaves the question of what "snapshot" of SMiLE seems to give it the best possible flow as a "symphony" or "oratory" (as some music scholars refer to it). What Brian and VDP (with help from Darian) devised/revised in 2003 is their take--and deserves its place as the official version--but other scenarios and other sequences are clearly possible (and possibly preferable).

[Julia]

David's SMiLE book does a big curlicue around "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" and VDP's assessment of how the project took a sudden, strange dark turn with it--starting on p. 64 and continuing into the subsequent chapter entitled "Don't F*** with the Formula."

It seems that VDP felt somewhat ambushed by that session; apparently he was not informed about it beforehand. I'm paraphrasing here, but it seems that Brian took whatever conception of "the Elements" that had been discussed or "pre-prepared" and went to a place with "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" that no one could have possibly anticipated. It sprang into existence outside the context of what he and VDP had been envisioning, and the nature of the music seemed to obviate the need for lyrics. That seems to have shaken up VDP and seems to have made it even harder for him to defend his lyrics to Mike Love (and possibly some others) when that collision occurred a few weeks later.

(Remember, the "Fire" session was late November '66, and the altercation about lyrics was early-mid December when "Cabinessence" was revisited.)

It's clear that there was some interaction between Brian and VDP about an "Elements" suite but it appears that Brian abruptly and unexpectedly took the idea into unknown territory, which threw several wrenches into the process. VDP suggests that the subsequent tinkering Brian undertook in early '67 made it difficult to maintain a through-line for the project: it's possible that some of the arguments between them in VDP's several short-lived returns centered around that escalating problem.

David Leaf suggests that Brian might have been spooked by "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" because it encapsulated a growing set of anxieties that were at work within him. He may have been simultaneously enthralled and repulsed by what he created, which would have made him more vulnerable to superstition-oriented phenomena (the purported "rash of fires" that ensued after the session). All of that, however, just magnified the rifts that eventually caused the project to be aborted.

I don't think there's a definitive answer as to what "the Elements" would have been, which leaves the question of what "snapshot" of SMiLE seems to give it the best possible flow as a "symphony" or "oratory" (as some music scholars refer to it). What Brian and VDP (with help from Darian) devised/revised in 2003 is their take--and deserves its place as the official version--but other scenarios and other sequences are clearly possible (and possibly preferable).

That's really interesting. I always thought VDP was sincere and defending the music with the sometimes quotes "you can throw the lyrics out if you don't like them, the words aren't important" as if to say "what's important is the music, Im just trying to help set a scene with my words but ultimately the specifics don't matter." This now makes me wonder if he wasn't being passive aggressive, like "well, as Brian has shown, the lyrics don't even matter anyway." That's a real shame.

Everything lines up perfectly for once though, for this new emergent narrative to make sense. Psychedelic Sounds Nov 4, where the element sections have lyrics albeit not particularly great ones. (And now this opens a new hole, where Id always assumed there was no fire-related chants because Fire was already a blueprint in their mind, if "Cow" was a surprise, why not working fire concept tonight?) Then Fire is recorded on 11/28 and the CE altercation about a week later, 12/6 (feel free to double check me). Now the call from Brian, another surprise, to defend the lyrics is feeling like a pattern of behavior of being sidelined, surprised and belittled from Van's perspective.

[Angela Jones]

Regarding Nick Kent, not sure his account of events can be trusted. One of those he mentioned told me personally that her only experience of Kent was stepping over him when he was llying on the floor!

[Julia]

Regarding Nick Kent, not sure his account of events can be trusted. One of those he mentioned told me personally that her only experience of Kent was stepping over him when he was llying on the floor!

Fair but at least with regard to his Brian chapter, I didnt really see any original research or new anecdotes. He just kinda reiterates the SMiLE legend highlights from the primary sources. I think hes guilty of just repeating what we already know than making up wild claims.

Also genuine question but what books are there that are considered trustworthy?

[JK]

Also genuine question but what books are there that are considered trustworthy?

Hi Julia. Well, seeing that no one else has answered yet, the books I myself trust implicitly are Peter Ames Carlin's Catch a Wave, Jim Murphy's Becoming the Beach Boys, 1961–1963, Ian Rusten and Jon Stebbins' The Beach Boys in Concert and AGD’s Complete Guide. Add two websites -- AGD's Bellagio 10452 and Ian's BeachBoysGigs, both unmissable -- and Jon's books on David and Dennis and you're definitely among writers you can trust.

The forthcoming definitive sessionography project will fall into this category too. Like those named above, none of its authors is given to speculation or flights of fancy.