Surf's Up

[brianc]

Are you sure Alan said that about Surf's Up (Part 2)? I know he posted here awhile back that there were several empty Smile era tape boxes but I don't remember him saying that specifically about Surf's Up (Part 2). I thought the current thinking was that the 1/67 Surf's Up session didn't take place or was for something other than Surf's Up?

I'm not sure what the current thinking is.

As for whether my assertion was correct or not, I would hope it would be taken as a message board post and nothing more. I was simply going by memory. Nothing thus far has gone on to contradict my statement, though it's possible someone will step up and say I was wrong. I just remember Alan telling me about a "Surf's Up" tape box that was empty. For some reason, I thought he said it was a tape box from the 1/67 session, and even repeated on a message board. But I could be wrong. Last week, I posted about a Fall 1961 Pendletones concert poster that was seen in a book which I didn't remember where. It started a great little conversation, but because I wasn't writing for a publication, rather a message board, someone corrected me that the poster was not for a "Pendletones" show, but for the Pendletons. It wasn't for a Fall '61 show, but a summer '61 show... and the group in mention were a real-deal folk vocal trio who even have a MySpace site.

My point is... I don't mind being wrong, if it spurs conversation that we learn something new. There are pieces of research that I don't need to go to my notes for, because I know them and their references for fact. But in the case of the "Surf's Up" empty tape box, I'm going from memory. If anyone knows differently, please chime in. That's how I remember it being told to me.

[brianc]

I guess what I don't like about Domenic's book is that he tries too hard to chalk up SMiLE's non-release to Mike Love, which everybody seems to do, but to write half a book about it is a little extreme. I don't care for Mike Love, but I wouldn't solely put the blame on him.

I have to say, I don't think that's what Domenic said in his book. When he and I talk about why it didn't come out, Domenic always tells me that he thinks it had more to do with the Brother Records/Capitol Records lawsuit, and then the release of Sgt. Pepper that killed Brian's force behind the album. If anything, I think Domenic feels that Mike squashed a lot of the positivity surrounding those sessions through the years, and helped create a negative mantra from the Beach Boys corporation about Smile. I pressed him hard on it one time and he said that he felt Mike and the other Beach Boys questioning VDP about his lyrics might have made Brian question them too, and may have led to him cancelling the album, but that it shouldn't all be put on Mike's shoulders.

Van Dyke, however, remembers it as being almost solely the fault of Mike Love, and claims he bowed out from working with Brian because he sensed such an overwhelming negativity from Mike and the others (not Dennis).

[Mark A. Moore]

He's gonna save the world through pop culture. I admire his devotion to the '60s. He's really steeped in it.

Glad you liked Dumb Angel 4... thanks for saying so. I still feel like it wasn't design-oriented enough to really appeal to artists and designers... and conversely, it wasn't Beach Boys-oriented enough to really appeal to Beach Boys fans. It was stuck somewhere in the middle, where the artists were just kind of scratching their heads at the collector mentality of the articles, and some of the sloppy layouts. And the Beach Boys fans never seem to like surf instrumental material, for the most part. I probably went too far with all the celestial suns and Mondrian graphic design stuff, but hey, the All Summer Long album thrilled me to death and I tried to deconstruct it's time and place. I consider DAG #4, on a whole, to be a failure, because I'm a perfectionsit and wanted it to be so much better. But maybe its appeal was limited to begin with, and I just didn't know it going in.

Brian,

Bite your tongue, my friend . . . There is nothing remotely "collector mentality" about my Jan Berry article in DAG #4 . . . (and by the way, you still gotta return my Audition Record of POP SYMPHONY and the other materials I sent for that issue).  Mine is one of the few pieces in DAG #4 that's based on hard-core documentation and interviews . . . nothing like the strictly "opinion" approach. And what did I hear all the while? . . . "Beach Boys dorks are not our audience or market . . . we're all about the Bohemiam surf aeshthetic . . . Shag is what it's all about" . . . Ha!

And yeah, we all know your type setter f*ked it up, introducing minor errors and whatnot (to my piece for sure) . . . plus the larger dust-ups with Harvey Kubernik and Mark London  . . . (at least as explained to me).

It's too bad, really . . . The magazine sold 5,000 copies . . . and in a perfect world, we should all be digging DAG #5 right now. I signed on for that ambitious vision . . . but it didn't happen.

M.

[brianc]

Okay, well, looks like a bitter derailing of this thread further, but I suppose I asked for it.

Bite your tongue, my friend . . . There is nothing remotely "collector mentality" about my Jan Berry article in DAG #4 . . . (and by the way, you still gotta return my Audition Record of POP SYMPHONY and the other materials I sent for that issue).  Mine is one of the few pieces in DAG #4 that's based on hard-core documentation and interviews . . . nothing like the strictly "opinion" approach.

Fine, Mark. It's all good, pal.

And what did I hear all the while? . . . "Beach Boys dorks are not our audience or market . . . we're all about the Bohemiam surf aeshthetic . . . Shag is what it's all about" . . . Ha!

Uh, I don't remember saying it was all about Shag, ever. He has one little article in there, and no artwork. As far as the "Beach Boys dorks" thing... not sure what you are trying to do here. Dom and I both admit to being Beach Boys dorks or hardcore fans ourselves, and yet hoped to transcend that world, and not just put out another ESQ. That magazine already has its audience.

And yeah, we all know your type setter f*ked it up, introducing minor errors and whatnot (to my piece for sure) . . . plus the larger dust-ups with Harvey Kubernik and Mark London  . . . (at least as explained to me).

Who is the "we all" here, Mark? Who knows that our typesetter messed up? And "introducing" would be going a bit far. She reverted back to an older version of the article YOU submitted to us, thus eliminating a few minor changes you had hoped for. Dom and I both felt like crap about that, and yet, you went on to make an effort to blackmail us, just as you did Dean Torrence with his "Popsicle" reissue interview. It's all laughable to me, as you trounce in here on your high-horse, coming out of nowhere, claiming you are going to show how Jan Berry's legacy is the equivalent of Mozart. We gave you a chance to do something cool, and you've had this attitude since the start, Mark.

It's too bad, really . . . The magazine sold 5,000 copies . . . and in a perfect world, we should all be digging DAG #5 right now. I signed on for that ambitious vision . . . but it didn't happen.

What did you sign on for? You wrote an article. You got it published with all manner of unseen images, in full-colour. It's a lot of space. Who else has published one of your pieces with that much ink? And one that has been seen by that many eyes? Please. Besides that, you got free promotion for your project on our site and blog. Let me know when you make the investment to publish something yourself. In the meantime, I hope you enjoy "Pop Surf Culture."

[Mark A. Moore]

Well, we just put up some money for our album . . . and it aint easy, that's for sure (even with help).

What I wanted with DAG was an on-going series . . . like the Psychedelic issue originally planned for #5 . . . in which we were planning that I would write about "Carnival of Sound." But we don't always get what we want. It was a business thing for Brian (as publisher)  . . . and for me it was just a very cool way to promote my studies.

With Dean and "Popsicle" . . . he made some egregious misrepresentations about Jan. I didn't blackmail him, I just pointed out how Jan's career documentation significantly contradicted Dean's account.

I realize now what Brian was saying about the "failure" of #4 . . . constructive self-criticism . . . But I think overall it was outstanding. And I really liked the design, too.  I'm obsessive over my own stuff, so naturally was dissatisfied with small problems in my article.

M.

[brianc]

This is the last I'll say on the matter, so as not to derail this thread any further than I already have...

I myself have, at times, been arrogant, immature and reactionary, so I'm not going to act holier than thou. I'll only say that I felt it was right for me to be self-critical, as we all sit here criticizing Brian Wilson day-in, day-out. I'm proud of DAG #4, even if I hoped it would be better. But the very day it came out, Domenic and I were offered a book deal with Santa Monica Press, to do "Pop Surf Culture." There is no way we would turn that up, just to publish more of your Jan & Dean articles. That's nothing against you, Mark. It's just the way things went. I'd like to think that was an indication that SOMETHING with DAG #4 went right. I think when "Pop Surf Culture" hits shelves next month, everyone is going to be stoked.

[Mark A. Moore]

No, I wouldn't expect you to keep it up just for Jan & Dean . . . You had an elaborate plan for #5 . . . only part of which would have included J&D . . . the "Carnival of Sound" and "Save For A Rainy Day" stuff.

DAG was cool extra publicity for my stuff . . . as I pursue my own publishing ventures.

Now that the album will be released this month . . . I'll be moving on to the next step in the process . . . which is an in-depth Sessionography for J&D.

M.

[Surfer Joe]

As somebody who's interested in all the surf culture stuff, and its music and its graphic art (I'm a cartoonist and graphic artist myself), I'll look forward to all of these projects. Bring 'em on!

I guess the Beach Boys are a sensitive and personal subject to people, because it seems that anyone who writes about them goes right up on the cross, to some extent.  David Leaf, Domenic, AGD- before the Internet gave me access to so many other fans, I would never have dreamed that anyone was anything but grateful to those guys.  But whatever you say or do with this band, somewhere, somehow, it's going to step on somebody's crank.

[Cam Mott]

But whatever you say or do with this band, somewhere, somehow, it's going to step on somebody's crank.

That's what she said.

[brianc]

Now that the album will be released this month . . . I'll be moving on to the next step in the process . . . which is an in-depth Sessionography for J&D.

To say that I look forward to this would be a gross understatement.

For the record, Mark, I have no qualms whatsoever about you disagreeing with me, or even with you being critical of my work or setting the record straight, as you see it. I'd only ask that the private business stuff be kept off this board. It doesn't help anything, and especially naming names of people we fought with... it's just uncalled for. Everyone knows that businesses have squabbles and people mess up. I suppose I'm not immune to the facts coming out. But in this instance, I'm pretty sure no one asked for those facts, and maybe three people total were interested in "what went wrong" with Dumb Angel #4.

[Surfer Joe]

That's what she said.

All right, who let that guy back in here?