This question has to be asked

[Andrew G. Doe]

I'm reliably informed that, early in his solo touring career, Brian was told to do something with his hands, as opposed to just sitting there and reading the autocues (check out the 1998 Lake Charles show - cigar store Indian, anyone ?). Don't think them as told him expected him to do what he's been doing ever since. I cherish an NME review from 2002 that said (I paraphrase slightly) "Brian didn't so much sing "Surf's Up" as semaphore it". I guess we're all used (inured ?) to it, but for newcomers it can be hilarious, or disturbing. Sometimes both.

[Smilin Ed H]

I notice Paul Simon does something similar!

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I'm reliably informed that, early in his solo touring career, Brian was told to do something with his hands, as opposed to just sitting there and reading the autocues (check out the 1998 Lake Charles show - cigar store Indian, anyone ?). Don't think them as told him expected him to do what he's been doing ever since. I cherish an NME review from 2002 that said (I paraphrase slightly) "Brian didn't so much sing "Surf's Up" as semaphore it". I guess we're all used (inured ?) to it, but for newcomers it can be hilarious, or disturbing. Sometimes both.

Glad you posted that, as I remember that Lake Charles show and he looked stiff. Same as the Farm Aid performace.

Just be thankful that he hasn't tried dancing like he did when he performed with Deana Carter that same year!

[Dancing Bear]

Sometimes it looks like he's waving his hands at imaginary mosquitos.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

Most rock musicians looked in 1964 pretty square looking at it today. Even the Beatles. All the BBs except Dennis, looked pretty sqare. Even Brian.

[SG7]

It could be worse. Its at least fun to watch and laugh 

[buddhahat]

Most rock musicians looked in 1964 pretty square looking at it today. Even the Beatles. All the BBs except Dennis, looked pretty sqare. Even Brian.

I don't think the Beatles looked square. Have you watched that early footage of them on the Ed Sullivan shows? They look energetic and incredibly charismatic and not self conscious at all. Just my opinion and I guess it's not an entirley fair comparison but I would never say the Beatles looked square. Or the Rolling Stones from the same time, or Dylan. There's something about those performers which just doesn't date for me. I love the Beach Boys just the way they were, Mike Love and all, but image wise they just weren't in the same league and it was no wonder they didn't naturally translate to a hipper audience in the late 60s, however progressive Brian's music was.

Just my opinion and I guess it all depends on your definition of square though.

[bossaroo]

The most uncool?  perhaps not.

The most latently homosexual?  DEFINITELY.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

I firmly believe that Brian is at his best as a performer with a bass.  Even if he's not playing it a whole lot, he just seems to have more to do and get more into it.  If you watch some mid 70s concerts, sometimes he would get too into it.  But inasmuchaswhich, he just has more energy as an onstage bassist than when you sit him behind a piano.  Plus, it's fun to hear him play ultra-simplified versions of the original, great basslines he wrote.

There's my two cents.  No more keyboard Brian, you and Lizik are holding down the low end.

[Emdeeh]

I agree with you, Josh. When Brian straps on the bass to perform, the years just fall off his shoulders -- it's really amazing.

[mikee]

I agree with you, Josh. When Brian straps on the bass to perform, the years just fall off his shoulders -- it's really amazing.

I firmly believe that Brian is at his best as a performer with a bass.  Even if he's not playing it a whole lot, he just seems to have more to do and get more into it.

And I agree with both of you.  When he straps that Fender bass he is transformed and starts moving around with uncommon grace and spring in his step.  Like Tiger Woods with his 58-bent- to-56 degree wedge in his hands.  He is in control of the situation.  It's remarkable.     

Most rock musicians looked in 1964 pretty square looking at it today.

I don't know about that.  I  feel that actually most musicians back then looked relatively natural and focused on the music.  Can you can say the same in 2007?  I'll grant you that such things as those striped shirts and the Beatle's collarless jackets look pretty dated.  They were seriously ancient in 1965!  But at least you can take them off unlike some of severe tattoos and piercings of today. 

 

[Rocker]

I firmly believe that Brian is at his best as a performer with a bass.  Even if he's not playing it a whole lot, he just seems to have more to do and get more into it.  If you watch some mid 70s concerts, sometimes he would get too into it.  But inasmuchaswhich, he just has more energy as an onstage bassist than when you sit him behind a piano.  Plus, it's fun to hear him play ultra-simplified versions of the original, great basslines he wrote.

There's my two cents.  No more keyboard Brian, you and Lizik are holding down the low end.

I agree to a part. Brian also wanted to play bass when he had his comeback in the 70s, but Carl thought it would be better to sit him down at the piano.
But I also like to see Brian at the keys as long as his handmovings are not to embarrassing

[Andrew G. Doe]

I agree with you, Josh. When Brian straps on the bass to perform, the years just fall off his shoulders -- it's really amazing.

Yeah... I just wish with every fiber of my being that it was on any other song than "Barbara fucking Ann".

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

at the 10/23/04 show in Houston, he strapped on the bass for Surfin Usa and Fun Fun Fun also.. Funny moment...he actually took the bass up like it was a rifle and pretended to shoot various bandmates.

[Magic Transistor Radio]

Most rock musicians looked in 1964 pretty square looking at it today. Even the Beatles. All the BBs except Dennis, looked pretty sqare. Even Brian.

I don't think the Beatles looked square. Have you watched that early footage of them on the Ed Sullivan shows? They look energetic and incredibly charismatic and not self conscious at all. Just my opinion and I guess it's not an entirley fair comparison but I would never say the Beatles looked square. Or the Rolling Stones from the same time, or Dylan. There's something about those performers which just doesn't date for me. I love the Beach Boys just the way they were, Mike Love and all, but image wise they just weren't in the same league and it was no wonder they didn't naturally translate to a hipper audience in the late 60s, however progressive Brian's music was.

Just my opinion and I guess it all depends on your definition of square though.

I agree that the Beatles had a much better stage presence then the BBs.  However, I believe that the Beatles pre-Rubber Soul doesn't seem to stand as well as the BBs pre Pet Sounds. But that's an intirely different argument.

[CosmicDancer]

I firmly believe that Brian is at his best as a performer with a bass.  Even if he's not playing it a whole lot, he just seems to have more to do and get more into it.  If you watch some mid 70s concerts, sometimes he would get too into it.  But inasmuchaswhich, he just has more energy as an onstage bassist than when you sit him behind a piano.  Plus, it's fun to hear him play ultra-simplified versions of the original, great basslines he wrote.

There's my two cents.  No more keyboard Brian, you and Lizik are holding down the low end.

I think the "too into it" of the 70's concerts may have more to do with mass amounts of cocaine than sheer enjoyment!

[Daniel S.]

That clip really isn't Mike's worst.

[MBE]

I think the Mick and Mike thing IS valid though Mick obviously is a better businessman. Both weren't half as cool as the Brian's in their group or half as talented. They would like to think they were the brains but at least at the start it was the Brian's. Mick and Mike both added a LOT to their group's but weren't as important as other bandmates in some musical respects. Both were the mouthpiece and both wrote good lyrics. I like both, but I always laugh at their dancing. Affectionately really though. But they ARE dorks and I mean that in a fond way. That's why I like them really.

Let's just say if Brian Jones had not died I think Mike and Mick would be at about the same level of renown. Mick and Keith did great work in the 60s but Brian Jones defined the band as much as Brian Wilson did for the Beach Boys. They came into their own (Keith especially) only after Brian Jones began to decline. There were differences B. Wilson was a unique songwriter B. Jones a unique musician. Who knows what he would have done once he and the Stones parted. Had Brian Wilson died in 1969 would he be remembered as well today? Would Mike have as effectively written him out of history? Thank god we don't know but I think Mike and Brian were always a bit closer then Mick and Brian. Again things worked out the way they did, for better (in the Beach Boys case) or worse (in the Stones), for a reason.

[Daniel S.]

How did things work out for the better in the Beach Boys?

Also, the Rolling Stones music got a lot better in the late 60's and early 70's AFTER Brian Jones left the group. Enough with all the phony Beatles/pop music posturing and back to real R&B.  When Brian Jones was with the group it seemed the Stones were trying too hard to copy the Beatles and the Kinks. Their two best albums are Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street which came out a few years after Brian Jones died.

[John]

Funnily enough, I had this argument on my own site after I wrote an article about Between The Buttons. I'm afraid I'm a defender of Jones, but I'd like to think a realistic one, rather than copy-and-paste, I'll just present the argument, which has points similar to yours about STICKY and EXILE and my "rebuttal": http://apokolips.x47.net/topic/974.0.html
You'll need to scroll down a little.

I'm a Sixties Stones nut. I spent ages trying to compile track-by-track personnel listings, too.

[Pretty Funky]

Put me down as a bit of a fan for Mike on stage over the years. Keep in mind he doesn't play a instrument, and is quite tall so have a think about what kind of profile he could have used. I think he used a combination of Chuck Berry plus a host of other black singers when settling on his stage movements.
Also the style of music. The Stones have the dark image so its black and leather for Mick. The Beach Boys it was summer so what to do? Sure Mike looked odd in that Turban at the time, Wembly 74, the UK was going through a glam rock phase ie Bowie. The Hobo look think The Band. The Beanie from the 70s, Marvin Gaye.
Another tall muso is Mick Fleetword. Some of his movements and looks are downright spooky.
Of course the last 10 years I'm surprised Mike doesn't take to the stage in a golf-cart. My posts about him looking like Bob Hope are on this board somewhere.

[Amy B.]

Re Brian's bass playing-- There's a great moment from the Radio City tribute where Brian is playing bass on that last song (either Fun, Fun, Fun or Barbara Ann). All the stars of the show are singing and dancing on stage, and Brian gets this shy grin on his face as he looks down at his left hand that looks almost exactly as he looked on stage in 1964.  He looks very relaxed and in control (regardless of whether he's actually playing or not).

[Rocker]

I think he used a combination of Chuck Berry plus a host of other black singers when settling on his stage movements.

I couldn't agree less with you on that one. To me it seems more like what white middle-class people used to do when they heard said black R'n'B-groups and Rock'n'Roll

I don't know what everybody hates about the turban. I think around that time Mike looked really cool.

[MBE]

How did things work out for the better in the Beach Boys?

Also, the Rolling Stones music got a lot better in the late 60's and early 70's AFTER Brian Jones left the group. Enough with all the phony Beatles/pop music posturing and back to real R&B.  When Brian Jones was with the group it seemed the Stones were trying too hard to copy the Beatles and the Kinks. Their two best albums are Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street which came out a few years after Brian Jones died.

 
Brian Wilson didn't die is what I meant
Hey I like their 70s music a lot but think of it almost as a different group.You can like it better, it's all taste. However The Kinks came along after them and have cited Brian and the Stones as a great influence. I think cuturely the Stones meant a lot more to sixties fashion (look at the Byrds and Yardbirds for Brian lookalikes) and to the mores of the era. The Stones were part of the 70s scene but it wasn't defined by them. Brian was one of the first white Blues players and one of the best. Mick and Keith without Brian's direction may have ended up (Mick especally) with different fates. Mick was a serious student whom Brian had to convince into leaving school. Keith who knows... but the fact remains that most of their hits were with Brian and he formed the group with Ian Stewart.

[MBE]

Funnily enough, I had this argument on my own site after I wrote an article about Between The Buttons. I'm afraid I'm a defender of Jones, but I'd like to think a realistic one, rather than copy-and-paste, I'll just present the argument, which has points similar to yours about STICKY and EXILE and my "rebuttal": http://apokolips.x47.net/topic/974.0.html
You'll need to scroll down a little.

I'm a Sixties Stones nut. I spent ages trying to compile track-by-track personnel listings, too.

Read your defence and liked it. I think it plus what I added about Brian's role in forming the group are a good defense. One thing though Brian does have his defenders personality wise. Keith and Ian Stewart obviously aren't impartial when it comes to facts on him. Yet even they sometimes said great things about him. Mick too.