50th Anniversary, The SMiLE box, the reunion, new material and things to come

[Cam Mott]

But by this point in time, Brian was getting worn down - by drugs, encroaching mental illness, negative reactions, craziness, whatever - and no longer just rolling over whoever and whatever.

You know, I just don't see it. This is a guy who just would say "no, we don't want to do that" ["we" being Brian], "get on the floor and bark like a dog", "sing these lyrics whether you get 'em or not"*, he argued with and domineered his main lyricist, if he was set any deadlines he apparently chose to ignore them, he commanded studios full of musicians, he mocked Capitol execs face to face with his tape recorded voice, he remodeled his house in many whimsical and impractical ways, he hired the dudes to break their contract with Capitol, he refused to not junk SMiLE to the point of breaking up the band [whatever that meant], he moved them out of professional studios in to a jerry-rigged home studio because he wouldn't be told when he would record or how he would record, and then he produced Smiley. Brian was an unstoppable steam roller. I think we just don't want to believe that he was at the top of his form, in full command of his domain, his faculties, and the material and still didn't feel that SMiLE hit the mark.

*OK, I am paraphrasing just a tad

[Pretty Funky]

quote
What causes the mind to reel are the endless careers that the Lovester would have had to pursue had it not been for his famous cousin. Where does one start? Shoe salesman, in charge of bananas at a supermarket, pest control tech, french fry tech, hat salesman, used car salesman, clown, prison guard, hot dog vendor, street sweeper, security guard in a dry cleaners.  
[/quote]

The stars lined up in 1961 so this is a cheap shot. Sure, Mike could have been doing any one of those jobs...just as Brian, Al, Carl and Dennis could have been. Who knows where they could have gone as indivduals if the group had not taken shape?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Mike Love was at his "height" in the early formative years. Say from 61 to about 65. As Brian moved on musically, Mike became a sort of an anachronism whos lead singing was equated with surf based music. He did not play an instrument and honestly was a failure at being a "frontman" that the Beach Boys never really needed in the first place. Brian sought out more sophisticated lyrics (thank God) and thankfully started to utilize Carl over Mike. Its quite eveident that as styles changed, Mike did not and therefore became associated with the surf hits. Beyond that, with a couple of exceptions, Mike was mostly a dinosaur destined to be in an oldies band."

Well, feeling this way, you're obviously not a Beach Boys fan!

Hermin's Hermits were pretty good 60's pop! No Mike Love in sight there! I'm sure they have a board too!

[BJL]

It seems to me that the overwhelming evidence is that Brian scrapped smile due to his own insecurities, and that the insecurities of Mike Love were only a minor factor.  In the last three months of 1966 Brian Wilson created the outline of a spectacular record, working furiously on brilliant track after brilliant track.  In the first three months of 1967 Brian recorded heroes and villians over and over and over and over...and his music wasn't getting any less weird or any more mainstream (if anything, it was getting more weird!).  To blame this obsessive tinkering on Mike Love seems almost like wishful thinking to me, as if we just don't want to face that what brought down smile wasn't external, it was internal.  And that because of that, perhaps Smile was doomed to failure from the start.  Perhaps the same thing that made it so incredible and groundbreaking also made it impossible for Brian to finish. 

[Sheriff John Stone]

It seems to me that the overwhelming evidence is that Brian scrapped smile due to his own insecurities, and that the insecurities of Mike Love were only a minor factor.  In the last three months of 1966 Brian Wilson created the outline of a spectacular record, working furiously on brilliant track after brilliant track.  In the first three months of 1967 Brian recorded heroes and villians over and over and over and over...and his music wasn't getting any less weird or any more mainstream (if anything, it was getting more weird!).  To blame this obsessive tinkering on Mike Love seems almost like wishful thinking to me, as if we just don't want to face that what brought down smile wasn't external, it was internal.  And that because of that, perhaps Smile was doomed to failure from the start.  Perhaps the same thing that made it so incredible and groundbreaking also made it impossible for Brian to finish. 

Agree. And that's why it's very disconcerting to have Brian look into a camera (on the Beautiful Dreamer doc), and say first that SMiLE didn't come out, among other reasons, "because Mike didn't like it...". Captured for history. Lovely....

[juggler]

How about an evening of "Brian Wilson songs written without a co-writer/lyricist"?

How 'bout one, indeed!

I'm imagining a freakin' incredible evening... 

Our Prayer
Surfer Girl
Johnny Carson
Let's Go Away for Awhile
Time to Get Alone
Mona
With Me Tonight
Little Children
This Whole World
Til I Die
The Night Was So Young
One For the Boys
Mrs. O'Leary's Cow
Still I Dream of It
You're Welcome

[Nicko]

Mike Love was at his "height" in the early formative years. Say from 61 to about 65. As Brian moved on musically, Mike became a sort of an anachronism whos lead singing was equated with surf based music. He did not play an instrument and honestly was a failure at being a "frontman" that the Beach Boys never really needed in the first place. Brian sought out more sophisticated lyrics (thank God) and thankfully started to utilize Carl over Mike. Its quite eveident that as styles changed, Mike did not and therefore became associated with the surf hits. Beyond that, with a couple of exceptions, Mike was mostly a dinosaur destined to be in an oldies band.

Good Vibrations was a moderate success wasn't it?

I'm sorry but to say that Mike was a failure as a frontman and that the band didn't even need one is hilarious. You may dislike his style, but Mike has obviously proven himself to be a success in that role. The other guys, aside from Dennis who was largely kept behind the drums, had all the stage presence of a yoghurt. Now you may watch Mike when he's on stage and want to slap him or you may watch him and want to vomit, but you watch him all the same. Mike clearly has the same confidence/arrogance on stage as all other sucessful frontmen like Jagger, Bono, Morrissey, Robbie Williams etc. and has always been an important part of the band's success.

[Mike's Beard]

At the same time, though, with Brian's increasingly fragile psyche and hypersensitive state, he probably took Mike's comments too deeply to heart.

I hear this all the time too but to me it just seems like a complete fabrication by someone. All I see is Brian firmly and utterly but adorably rolling over whoever and whatever was in his way or not what he had in mind.

But by this point in time, Brian was getting worn down - by drugs, encroaching mental illness, negative reactions, craziness, whatever - and no longer just rolling over whoever and whatever.

I always thought that Brian scrapped SMiLE because of things that were happening to him/his psyche in the present, for example, his hearing new Beatles songs and thinking that they "got there first".

Mike's disenchantment with Van Dyke's lyrics (and not all of them BTW) occurred very early in the SMiLE saga. A lot of writing, producing, arranging, and recording happened AFTER Mike voiced his displeasure. Did Mike continue to "nag" Brian about the lyrics?

For Brian to eventually scrap SMiLE because of the Mike confrontation, he (Brian) would have to GO BACK several months. I thought Brian moved on; the recordings would suggest that.

Very good point, hence the whole "Mike as scapegoat" theory.

[The Heartical Don]

But by this point in time, Brian was getting worn down - by drugs, encroaching mental illness, negative reactions, craziness, whatever - and no longer just rolling over whoever and whatever.

You know, I just don't see it. This is a guy who just would say "no, we don't want to do that" ["we" being Brian], "get on the floor and bark like a dog", "sing these lyrics whether you get 'em or not"*, he argued with and domineered his main lyricist, if he was set any deadlines he apparently chose to ignore them, he commanded studios full of musicians, he mocked Capitol execs face to face with his tape recorded voice, he remodeled his house in many whimsical and impractical ways, he hired the dudes to break their contract with Capitol, he refused to not junk SMiLE to the point of breaking up the band [whatever that meant], he moved them out of professional studios in to a jerry-rigged home studio because he wouldn't be told when he would record or how he would record, and then he produced Smiley. Brian was an unstoppable steam roller. I think we just don't want to believe that he was at the top of his form, in full command of his domain, his faculties, and the material and still didn't feel that SMiLE hit the mark.

*OK, I am paraphrasing just a tad

Difficult one, this. I think that behind the 'assertive' Brian you paint here, there was/is an enormously shy man who increasingly suffered from some sort of obsessive-compulsive disorder. I see that in his tendency to 'perfect' songs, tinkering endlessly with a gazillion versions differing only in minute detail, and in his indecision as to when something was 'ready'; up to the point that he never readied anything anymore. Perhaps OCD was already clear when he wanted Be My Baby in a tape loop, to hear it for hours on end. That is not normal, not even for a 'mad genius composer'.
People with OCD as illness have another deficit that I recognize in Brian: a growing difficulty with 'weighing' feelings and events properly, to see them in context and apply a bit of relativism to them. That is what struck me in his 'autobiography': a striking example is that he was so offended by a remark of Mike, who sad to Brian: 'those shoes are hideous!', when a more or less 'healed' Brian presented himself to Mike. Any normal person would have forgotten, or laughed away, such criticism; but someone with OCD can magnify such a criticism into monstrous proportions, and endlessly suffer from it as a result.

And that is why I think that Mike's objections to the new material for Smile perhaps had a much, much more heavy impact on Brian than we think. With someone with OCD, feelings of intense guilt and shame can be enough to scrap a whole project merely on such grounds.

Finally: Brian may well have had feelings of guilt towards Mike because he had left him out as lyricist on what looked like the greatest two LPs in the band's history; feelings that he never really disclosed. So for this reason alone he may have taken Mike's comments extemely serious, with the well-known end result.

[Cam Mott]

Don,

That just doesn't sit right for me either, I just can not be agreeable lately.

I don't see obsessive behavior in this period. What could be called mild obsession for some is merely constructive reconsideration for artists, and shelving or destroying beautiful product that did not hit the musal mark isn't uncommon I would say or the result of mental illness. H&V was actually recording for two masters for the same single, I didn't add it up but it seems to me Brian spent much more time on the single side of GV and no one seems to see that as obsessive and I don't see any evidence of obsessive recording for the album tracks.

If criticism could bring down SMiLE than it seems to me Mike's question-about/criticism-of a lyric would be way down the list of culprits and the criticism of the music by his collaborator would be at the top of the list. For some reason no one ever mentions this suspect; I don't because I only see Brian doing as he pleased whether others were pleased or not. When he was no longer pleased by SMiLE he did as he pleased and shelved it.

Brian was like the velvet steam roller in this period of music creation. To do what he pleased, he rolled over anyone and anything with his mild voice, confidence, charm, magnetism, enthusiasm, and humor, but he still steam rolled you. This is how he got all of these diverse people to do his bidding whether they wanted to or not or were humiliated or confused and also how he could then just unilaterally dump all of the  product they all had put themselves out for and still most of these flattened people more or less just shrug and think "Oh that's just Brian, that adorable scamp".

[The Heartical Don]

Don,

That just doesn't sit right for me either, I just can not be agreeable lately.

I don't see obsessive behavior in this period. What could be called mild obsession for some is merely constructive reconsideration for artists, and shelving or destroying beautiful product that did hit the musal mark isn't uncommon I would say or the result of mental illness. H&V was actually recording for two masters for the same single, I didn't add it up but it seems to me Brian spent much more time on the single side of GV and no one seems to see that as obsessive and I don't see any evidence of obsessive recording for the album tracks.

If criticism could bring down SMiLE than it seems to me Mike's question-about/criticism-of a lyric would be way down the list of culprits and the criticism of the music by his collaborator would be at the top of the list. For some reason no one ever mentions this suspect; I don't because I only see Brian doing as he pleased whether others were pleased or not. When he was no longer pleased by SMiLE he did as he pleased and shelved it.

Brian was like the velvet steam roller in this period of music creation. To do what he pleased, he rolled over anyone and anything with his mild voice, confidence, charm, magnetism, enthusiasm, and humor, but he still steam rolled you. This is how he got all of these diverse people to do his bidding whether they wanted to or not or were humiliated or confused and also how he could then just unilaterally dump all of the  product they all had put themselves out for and still most of these flattened people more or less just shrug and think "Oh that's just Brian, that adorable scamp".

Thank you Cam for what is a controversial but very well-voiced opinion - and I take it seriously. Yes it's true: some people in the world of arts have forms of charm (charisma), humor, and maybe also an outward impression of insecurity that makes them nigh on invulnerable, or better: others shy away from venting criticism at them, for fear of not being with the 'in crowd' any more, perhaps. I still am debating with myself whether Brian fits this profile; but well, you raise some strong points there. Surely there was something immense happening in 1967, in the zenith of an age in which 'happenings' were where it was at. By definition, no one seeing themselves as 'important' would want to be excluded from such a happening to end all happenings (so to speak).

[Runaways]

Sure, but why is Mr. Love the only guy in "rock n roll" who provokes such snickering questioneering? (is that even a word?) Exactly what marketable skills do ANY of our rock n roll heroes possess outside of music-making?

I mean, at worst (as far as credits go, which seem all-important to way too many people) he was "merely" a lead/back-up vocalist/frontman for what is inaguably the most important and succesful band America has ever produced! He also provided many great lyrics and co-wrote many a song, some big big hits!

Why do these simple facts continue to be sneeringly brushed off?

cause he's a massive jerk who's behavior never showed much love for music except in how it'd get him money.  and his stage behavior/attire is a joke.  

but i give him credit for everything he's done.  and i don't think it's entirely his fault, i feel like Carl tried too hard.  there wasn't a fashion fad that he didn't miss out on. 

[Ganz Allein]

Difficult one, this. I think that behind the 'assertive' Brian you paint here, there was/is an enormously shy man who increasingly suffered from some sort of obsessive-compulsive disorder. I see that in his tendency to 'perfect' songs, tinkering endlessly with a gazillion versions differing only in minute detail, and in his indecision as to when something was 'ready'; up to the point that he never readied anything anymore. Perhaps OCD was already clear when he wanted Be My Baby in a tape loop, to hear it for hours on end. That is not normal, not even for a 'mad genius composer'.
People with OCD as illness have another deficit that I recognize in Brian: a growing difficulty with 'weighing' feelings and events properly, to see them in context and apply a bit of relativism to them. That is what struck me in his 'autobiography': a striking example is that he was so offended by a remark of Mike, who sad to Brian: 'those shoes are hideous!', when a more or less 'healed' Brian presented himself to Brian. Any normal person would have forgotten, or laughed away, such criticism; but someone with OCD can magnify such a criticism into monstrous proportions, and endlessly suffer from it as a result.

And that is why I think that Mike's objections to the new material for Smile perhaps had a much, much more heavy impact on Brian than we think. With someone with OCD, feelings of intense guilt and shame can be enough to scrap a whole project merely on such grounds.

This is exactly the point that I was trying to make. And as someone who has OCD tendencies and knows a few people who have it really strongly, I can tell you that the inclination toward being hypersensitive and taking others' comments too deeply to heart are quite real and can lead you to give up on things too easily. As I said before, I don't blame Mike for bringing SMiLE down, but I do think that his negative attitude toward much of it had a more serious impact on Brian than a lot of people think.

[phirnis]

Sure, but why is Mr. Love the only guy in "rock n roll" who provokes such snickering questioneering? (is that even a word?) Exactly what marketable skills do ANY of our rock n roll heroes possess outside of music-making?

I mean, at worst (as far as credits go, which seem all-important to way too many people) he was "merely" a lead/back-up vocalist/frontman for what is inaguably the most important and succesful band America has ever produced! He also provided many great lyrics and co-wrote many a song, some big big hits!

Why do these simple facts continue to be sneeringly brushed off?

cause he's a massive jerk who's behavior never showed much love for music except in how it'd get him money.  and his stage behavior/attire is a joke.  

but i give him credit for everything he's done.  and i don't think it's entirely his fault, i feel like Carl tried too hard.  there wasn't a fashion fad that he didn't miss out on. 

Care to elaborate what you mean specifically by Carl trying too hard? Sounds intriguing to me.

[oldsurferdude]

Mike Love was at his "height" in the early formative years. Say from 61 to about 65. As Brian moved on musically, Mike became a sort of an anachronism whos lead singing was equated with surf based music. He did not play an instrument and honestly was a failure at being a "frontman" that the Beach Boys never really needed in the first place. Brian sought out more sophisticated lyrics (thank God) and thankfully started to utilize Carl over Mike. Its quite eveident that as styles changed, Mike did not and therefore became associated with the surf hits. Beyond that, with a couple of exceptions, Mike was mostly a dinosaur destined to be in an oldies band."

Well, feeling this way, you're obviously not a Beach Boys fan!

Hermin's Hermits were pretty good 60's pop! No Mike Love in sight there! I'm sure they have a board too!

Ok, Eric-I'm not a Beach Boys fan-when did YOU become a fan-now approach this very carefully-once again, v e r y  c a r e f u l l y-(hint: OLDsurferdude)

[oldsurferdude]

Mike Love was at his "height" in the early formative years. Say from 61 to about 65. As Brian moved on musically, Mike became a sort of an anachronism whos lead singing was equated with surf based music. He did not play an instrument and honestly was a failure at being a "frontman" that the Beach Boys never really needed in the first place. Brian sought out more sophisticated lyrics (thank God) and thankfully started to utilize Carl over Mike. Its quite eveident that as styles changed, Mike did not and therefore became associated with the surf hits. Beyond that, with a couple of exceptions, Mike was mostly a dinosaur destined to be in an oldies band.

Good Vibrations was a moderate success wasn't it?

I'm sorry but to say that Mike was a failure as a frontman and that the band didn't even need one is hilarious. You may dislike his style, but Mike has obviously proven himself to be a success in that role. The other guys, aside from Dennis who was largely kept behind the drums, had all the stage presence of a yoghurt. Now you may watch Mike when he's on stage and want to slap him or you may watch him and want to vomit, but you watch him all the same. Mike clearly has the same confidence/arrogance on stage as all other sucessful frontmen like Jagger, Bono, Morrissey, Robbie Williams etc. and has always been an important part of the band's success.

obviously, for you to enjoy live music, you must have a "front man" to validate the music for some strange reason. The Beatles, for instance, got along quite well without one as did many other groups-Growing up with the BBs was good but as time went on, we all thought he was rather embarrassing and very full of himself. His cornball humor, his attire and general clown-like appearance was a turnoff . The public and the group kinda had to put up with him.

[Dancing Bear]

obviously, for you to enjoy live music, you must have a "front man" to validate the music for some strange reason. The Beatles, for instance, got along quite well without one as did many other groups-Growing up with the BBs was good but as time went on, we all thought he was rather embarrassing and very full of himself. His cornball humor, his attire and general clown-like appearance was a turnoff . The public and the group kinda had to put up with him.

Oh my. 

[Dr. Tim]

Hi boys and girls!  Remember me?? I'm THE THREAD

Didn't that go on for some 50 pages a few years back?  Over just this subject?

One might still be a "velvet steamroller" and be seriously unbalanced enough to take any lack of enthusiasm as an unforgivable insult.  Or have an unpredictable violent reaction.*  The point being: it's not Mike's fault per se, though he seems to gleefully recall his dismssal of the hippy-dippy acid alliteration etc. at the time.  He wouldn't know that any negativity on his part, however temporary, would get so blown up.   And yet in Brian's head it did - which strictly speaking would be his doing, yes, but it's the advancing disability talking, not a willful genius leading everyone and Capitol off a cliff for $hits and giggles.  Nor can Mike be blamed for wondering just what the hell was going on during these difficult months in light of the bizzaro behavior, and sounding off about it.

Meaning: both Cam and Don are right.  We're back to the zen koan again.

*Brian's hysterical reaction to the movie "Seconds"; his banning a male friend from the studio because his girlfriend was a "witch" (as in really really hot, might get a woody or something) (See Peter's book)

[BJL]

obviously, for you to enjoy live music, you must have a "front man" to validate the music for some strange reason. The Beatles, for instance, got along quite well without one as did many other groups-Growing up with the BBs was good but as time went on, we all thought he was rather embarrassing and very full of himself. His cornball humor, his attire and general clown-like appearance was a turnoff . The public and the group kinda had to put up with him.

I think Beach Boys fans inability to accept Mike Love for who he was is a big part of our own insecurities about obsessing (and oh do we obsess) over a band that most people remember for surfin USA and kokomo.  

The way I see it, yea Mike Love could be a jerk, but so could a lot of people (Brian included).  Yea Mike Love wrote some dumb lyrics (so did a lot of people, Brian included) but he also gave us everything from Good Vibrations to Only for You and Pacific Ocean Blues (not to mention I get Around, etc.).  And he was crazy.  He cared so much about what people thought, and yet was pretty incapable of fitting into other's perceptions of cool.  Unlike most late sixties orientalists, he actually loved transcendental meditation (and everytime i see a picture of him on stage in his robe, I smile on the inside).  And his cornball sense of humor really fit in pretty well with Brian's in a wierd way (witness the early sixties in the studio tracks, which I love!)  IN fact, I think one of the problems the beach boys had is that Mike and Brian had this sort of mock rivalry going on, which was all sort of a joke, and then suddenly Brian Wilson turned out to be mentally ill, and suddenly the joke wasn't funny anymore for him, and that sort of threw mike for a loop.  Finally, Mike was right about how bad drugs were for Brian.  He may have been wrong about the lyrics to hang on to your ego, but he was right that an addiction to uppers and a bunch of hangers ons was not a good way to live a life, let alone make a record.  

Oh yea, and when Mike blasts into those bass vocals parts (my understanding is that he came up with many of them himself, not withstanding various writing credits deserved or not deserved), he is cool!!!!  

Long story short, I love all the Beach Boys.  I love Brian even though hes crazy (and possibly manipulative), Al even though he'd rather chill at his ranch and write feet songs then anything else, Bruce even though he's not a *real* Beach Boy (just kidding, sort of), David even though he vanished (it wasn't his fault, and the rythym guitar playing on the Surfer Girl LP kicks ass), Carl (nothing not to like about him!) Dennis even though he was a womanizer who probably took advantage of thousands of girls in his younger days (and then turned into a grizzled old bum who just happened to be a genius but couldn't keep it together enough to release a second album he's basically finished), and yes, MIKE!!!  Even though he's a cornball, a bizarrely old fashioned (but none the less charismatic) frontman, who led the beach boys through years of karoake WITH CHEERLEADERS FOR GODS SAKE, well, that's exactly why I love him!!  

[Mike's Beard]

They all have flaws and have all messed up from time to in their lives, as have we all. The problem with being famous is your mistakes are lived out in the public eye.  If I could critise Mike for one thing back then it would be his image.  "Wild Honey" era there he was sporting an old man's flat cap (to cover his bald bits), a fluffy ginger beard  and a shirt collar/knitted jumper combo.  That's not how to look cool in a rock band!! That may sound a tad harsh but like it or not how the group looks plays a big part in selling records.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Back to "The Thread".  I wonder how much Capitol Records actually cares anymore about the BB.  I went to their website today and, while they still list Brian Wilson as one of their artists, I could not find the BB.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Mike Love was at his "height" in the early formative years. Say from 61 to about 65. As Brian moved on musically, Mike became a sort of an anachronism whos lead singing was equated with surf based music. He did not play an instrument and honestly was a failure at being a "frontman" that the Beach Boys never really needed in the first place. Brian sought out more sophisticated lyrics (thank God) and thankfully started to utilize Carl over Mike. Its quite eveident that as styles changed, Mike did not and therefore became associated with the surf hits. Beyond that, with a couple of exceptions, Mike was mostly a dinosaur destined to be in an oldies band."

Well, feeling this way, you're obviously not a Beach Boys fan!

Hermin's Hermits were pretty good 60's pop! No Mike Love in sight there! I'm sure they have a board too!

Ok, Eric-I'm not a Beach Boys fan-when did YOU become a fan-now approach this very carefully-once again, v e r y  c a r e f u l l y-(hint: OLDsurferdude)

Ok, I don't want to fight about this, and I don't want to be accused of elder-abuse!

Let's just say I love the Lovester and I love the Beach Boys! I love the Beach Boys and the lovester is a huge part of the Beach Boys. I don't see any conflict in the story at all! It bugs me in the same way that a lot of "Beatle fans" relentlessy bashing Paul bugs me! I love everything The Beach Boys ever did!!! Only song I can honestly say I despise is Problem Child. Everything else ranges from acceptable to ok, to good, to great, to mindblowing! I'm sure to some, this mindset immediatly disqualifies my opinion, but hey, I can live with it!

When did I become a fan? Well, I was born and raised in Hawthorne where the Beach Boys were worshipped like they were Jesus, by every cool local kid I knew. I knew this big huge black guy named "Moose" who used to walk around in a Kangol jumpsuit with a huge ghetto blaster. He'd be blasting Run DMC and then he'd go from that to blasting Good Vibrations and signing at the top of his lungs!!! I miss that guy! He was a summer camp counsoler and he'd talk about The Beach Boys all the time, and he had a collection of ticket stubs and Beach Boys concert programs. So, I guess I've been a fan since I can remember.

[Cam Mott]

One might still be a "velvet steamroller" and be seriously unbalanced enough to take any lack of enthusiasm as an unforgivable insult.  Or have an unpredictable violent reaction.*  The point being: it's not Mike's fault per se, though he seems to gleefully recall his dismssal of the hippy-dippy acid alliteration etc. at the time.  He wouldn't know that any negativity on his part, however temporary, would get so blown up.   And yet in Brian's head it did - which strictly speaking would be his doing, yes, but it's the advancing disability talking, not a willful genius leading everyone and Capitol off a cliff for $hits and giggles.  Nor can Mike be blamed for wondering just what the hell was going on during these difficult months in light of the bizzaro behavior, and sounding off about it.

Sure, it could be both. I'm saying the evidence tells me that Brian was not unbalanced by lack of enthusiasm or even insult [from the Boys, or VDP, or Capitol, or some guy off the street], the bit about enthusiasm, insult, and mental illness is sort of speculation it seems to me. To my mind, neither was he confused, aimless, or obsessive but confident, prepared and selective. Those things may have eventually affected Brian that way but not during the SMiLE period or really until '70ish or even later maybe.

[Nicko]

obviously, for you to enjoy live music, you must have a "front man" to validate the music for some strange reason. The Beatles, for instance, got along quite well without one as did many other groups-Growing up with the BBs was good but as time went on, we all thought he was rather embarrassing and very full of himself. His cornball humor, his attire and general clown-like appearance was a turnoff . The public and the group kinda had to put up with him.

 

You're comparing the members of The Beatles with The Beach Boys??? Do you seriously think that Carl and Al were as popular performers on stage as John and Paul? Jeez. I don't think it can really be argued that the live set-up of The BBs worked as it proved popular for so many years.

I presume that you don't mean everything you say anyway as surely nobody could be that cretinous unintentionally...

[oldsurferdude]

obviously, for you to enjoy live music, you must have a "front man" to validate the music for some strange reason. The Beatles, for instance, got along quite well without one as did many other groups-Growing up with the BBs was good but as time went on, we all thought he was rather embarrassing and very full of himself. His cornball humor, his attire and general clown-like appearance was a turnoff . The public and the group kinda had to put up with him.

 

You're comparing the members of The Beatles with The Beach Boys??? Do you seriously think that Carl and Al were as popular performers on stage as John and Paul? Jeez. I don't think it can really be argued that the live set-up of The BBs worked as it proved popular for so many years.

I presume that you don't mean everything you say anyway as surely nobody could be that cretinous unintentionally...

Cretinous and I mean everything down to the last dot on the i. Call me what you want-I could care really care less. Yes the Beatles did have Paul and John but they didn't have Dennis Wilson and that is all the they needed to have "stage presense"-not some rooster struttung around on stage, who thought he was God's gift to women.