Still Cruisin' and Summer In Paradise rerelease?

[guitarfool2002]

The myth highlighted involved staying in bed from 1971-76. An obvious myth, worth busting on every level.

Add to that myth a few additional years prior to 1971, dating it back to 1967 and including not only bed but the sandbox too...and let's talk about the source for where that myth was coming from.

Not specifically checked it out, but that's likely one of those BB factoids that "everyone knows" but, on closer inspection, has no apparent source. Much like the famous "formula" quote. I know of several BB researchers/historians/obsessives/folk with way too much time on their hands who have tried to trace it to the published, contemporary source for the latter, and failed, because there doesn't seem to be one. My best guess on the former - staying in bed for half the seventies - is that someone took a band member's flip response (Mike ? Bruce ? Dennis ?) to being asked where Brian was seriously, and like all good myths it snowballed from there. The reply was, as I recall, "Oh, he's back home in bed."

Anyone have a better explanation (and dear God there has to be one), feel free...

Finally: one can rewite history, accurately, until one is blue in the face, but that doesn't mean it won't be summarily ignored in subsequent projects, or indeed by Joe Q. Public in general. The so-called Loch Ness Monster was comprehensively debunked by an excellent book back in 1983 (The Loch Ness Mystery Solved) yet the myth sustains. Same with Roswell and The Bermuda Triangle.

The staying in bed and the sandbox stuff from 1967 does indeed have a very specific latter day source that has been available to publicly read online for those interested. And it was entered into a court of law just about a decade ago. That goes beyond flippancy or offhanded remarks to journalists.

[Douchepool]

Yeah, we need more lawsuits. Especially over stuff on a message board. 

Given previous experience you'd think people would exercise a smidge more restraint.

[Cam Mott]

I was libeled again yesterday. I guess it's a thing on this board.

[Jim V.]

The myth highlighted involved staying in bed from 1971-76. An obvious myth, worth busting on every level.

Add to that myth a few additional years prior to 1971, dating it back to 1967 and including not only bed but the sandbox too...and let's talk about the source for where that myth was coming from.

Not specifically checked it out, but that's likely one of those BB factoids that "everyone knows" but, on closer inspection, has no apparent source. Much like the famous "formula" quote. I know of several BB researchers/historians/obsessives/folk with way too much time on their hands who have tried to trace it to the published, contemporary source for the latter, and failed, because there doesn't seem to be one. My best guess on the former - staying in bed for half the seventies - is that someone took a band member's flip response (Mike ? Bruce ? Dennis ?) to being asked where Brian was seriously, and like all good myths it snowballed from there. The reply was, as I recall, "Oh, he's back home in bed."

Anyone have a better explanation (and dear God there has to be one), feel free...

Finally: one can rewite history, accurately, until one is blue in the face, but that doesn't mean it won't be summarily ignored in subsequent projects, or indeed by Joe Q. Public in general. The so-called Loch Ness Monster was comprehensively debunked by an excellent book back in 1983 (The Loch Ness Mystery Solved) yet the myth sustains. Same with Roswell and The Bermuda Triangle.

The staying in bed and the sandbox stuff from 1967 does indeed have a very specific latter day source that has been available to publicly read online for those interested. And it was entered into a court of law just about a decade ago. That goes beyond flippancy or offhanded remarks to journalists.

That's very true guitarfool! How come people on this board are letting this slip through the cracks. On a legal document approved by Doctor Mike Love, it says, "Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties..." which is pretty rich because seems to me that Brian wrote the top 40 hits "Do It Again", "It's OK" and "Good Timin'" in that period and also contributed a whole lot of material to a whole lot of Beach Boys albums. Also interesting that those "Wilson-Love" songs that were written and released  in that time period must have totally skipped Mike's mind. Weird. Either that or he was openly lying in his legal documents. Or maybe he's just so obsessed with lawsuits that he didn't even take the time to make sure this one was even factual before he proceeded with it.

Sure is interesting.

I was libeled again yesterday. I guess it's a thing on this board.

Gosh Cam. You were libeled? On a Beach Boys message board? That's big time stuff. I'd feel nervous even posting on here after that. I mean, your reputation will be damaged. Oh wait. Nobody knows who you are.

[guitarfool2002]

The myth highlighted involved staying in bed from 1971-76. An obvious myth, worth busting on every level.

Add to that myth a few additional years prior to 1971, dating it back to 1967 and including not only bed but the sandbox too...and let's talk about the source for where that myth was coming from.

Not specifically checked it out, but that's likely one of those BB factoids that "everyone knows" but, on closer inspection, has no apparent source. Much like the famous "formula" quote. I know of several BB researchers/historians/obsessives/folk with way too much time on their hands who have tried to trace it to the published, contemporary source for the latter, and failed, because there doesn't seem to be one. My best guess on the former - staying in bed for half the seventies - is that someone took a band member's flip response (Mike ? Bruce ? Dennis ?) to being asked where Brian was seriously, and like all good myths it snowballed from there. The reply was, as I recall, "Oh, he's back home in bed."

Anyone have a better explanation (and dear God there has to be one), feel free...

Finally: one can rewite history, accurately, until one is blue in the face, but that doesn't mean it won't be summarily ignored in subsequent projects, or indeed by Joe Q. Public in general. The so-called Loch Ness Monster was comprehensively debunked by an excellent book back in 1983 (The Loch Ness Mystery Solved) yet the myth sustains. Same with Roswell and The Bermuda Triangle.

The staying in bed and the sandbox stuff from 1967 does indeed have a very specific latter day source that has been available to publicly read online for those interested. And it was entered into a court of law just about a decade ago. That goes beyond flippancy or offhanded remarks to journalists.

That's very true guitarfool! How come people on this board are letting this slip through the cracks. On a legal document approved by Doctor Mike Love, it says, "Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties..." which is pretty rich because seems to me that Brian wrote the top 40 hits "Do It Again", "It's OK" and "Good Timin'" in that period and also contributed a whole lot of material to a whole lot of Beac Boys albums. Also interesting that those "Wilson-Love" songs that were written and released  in that time period must have totally skipped Mike's mind. Weird. Either that or he was openly lying in his legal documents. Or maybe he's just so obsessed with lawsuits that he didn't even take the time to make sure this one was even factual before he proceeded with it.

Sure is interesting.

Let's ask them directly in this conversation why they're letting this one slip through the cracks, or ignoring it altogether.

Why is this being ignored, why are you posters here ignoring it? It's in the public record, the wording is spelled out clear as day, it's the published (legal document) source for continuing this false mythology as latter-day as 2005, why is it being skipped over?

Proof was asked for, and delivered - anything else?

[Cam Mott]

Did you miss that part about being libeled?

[Jim V.]

Did you miss that part about being libeled?

Cam, if you don't mind, could you stop interrupting threads with this libel talk? We're here trying to talk about The Beach Boys and you're just here trying to incite.....something.

It's really unfortunate.

[Howie Edelson]

2006 Chuck Negron told me, flat out, quote: "When they saw what was going on, they basically brutalized him. And Mike Love. . . Y'know, Brian's a very fragile, fragile guy and one minute we were doing it and the next minute Brian was crying and saying, 'Look, I'll give you the money to finish the album, you guys are gonna make it, but I can't do it anymore. They won't let me. Y'know, they say I have to do stuff for the family.' It was very childlike the way he talked."

Ray Lawlor asked BRIAN -- not a musician at the session, not a tape-op, not Chuck, not Corey, not Danny -- but BRIAN to tell him what happened at that session -- no prompting of who was there, etc. . . BRIAN WILSON told him that it was Mike who "dictated the terms" of Brian's outside productions to him with Dennis and Carl standing by Mike silently in regretful support. The rules were laid out for him.

They broke a butterfly upon a wheel.

IT HAPPENED.
And just as there was a reason that it happened THEN, there seems to be a reason NOW why it needs to be discredited.

[SMiLE Brian]

Exactly Howie, Mike Love bullied BW for his songs as usual. Such a vile and twisted man.

[Mike's Beard]

Here's a question not being asked; Mike co-wrote Darlin', was he aware that it was being used for a Redwood song to begin with or did he agree to let them use it and then have second thoughts when he realised Wild Honey was lacking a potential hit single?

[Howie Edelson]

It is strange, isn't it?

I've brought up "Aren't You Glad" to Mike several times, and he never really has anything to say about it.
I've also never heard him talk about "I'd Love Just Once To See You," or "Here Comes The Night," or "Mama Says," or "A Thing Or Two,' or "She Knows Me Too Well," or "Please Let Me Wonder," or "In The Back Of My Mind," or really anything other than "Do It Again," "Good Vibrations," and the five words to "Wouldn't It Be Nice."

For a guy who SEEMINGLY is all about "I did THAT," there's not a lot he deems discussion worthy from his illustrious catalogue.
That said, I did notice on C50 that Jeff took the liberty of including the final lyrics Mike wrote for the second verse -- which Brian nixed -- during "Vibrations."
(Ever the fan. . . )

Maybe the upcoming book will talk about those breathtaking Wilson/Love teamups.

[wilsonart1]

If you don't use this verse I'm not singing, that's the way to get a co-writing credit. Mr. Love does know how to rain on a parade. You know how it work's , often the most wicked are the wealthiest.  Control the reach of the  justice.

[CenturyDeprived]

It is strange, isn't it?

I've brought up "Aren't You Glad" to Mike several times, and he never really has anything to say about it.
I've also never heard him talk about "I'd Love Just Once To See You," or "Here Comes The Night," or "Mama Says," or "A Thing Or Two,' or "She Knows Me Too Well," or "Please Let Me Wonder," or "In The Back Of My Mind," or really anything other than "Do It Again," "Good Vibrations," and the five words to "Wouldn't It Be Nice."

For a guy who SEEMINGLY is all about "I did THAT," there's not a lot he deems discussion worthy from his illustrious catalogue.
That said, I did notice on C50 that Jeff took the liberty of including the final lyrics Mike wrote for the second verse -- which Brian nixed -- during "Vibrations."
(Ever the fan. . . )

Maybe the upcoming book will talk about those breathtaking Wilson/Love teamups.

I just don't get why that is. So odd. If any of those songs had been a hit, I think the opposite would surely be true.

[Cam Mott]

Has/had anybody ever asked Mike, Carl, Dennis, or Al about what was going on?

[southbay]

So, you guys think Aren't You Glad, Darlin' and Mama Says outtakes will be bonus tracks on that SIP/Still Cruisin' re-release...

[Cam Mott]

Cam, if you don't mind, could you stop interrupting threads with this libel talk?

It was fine for them to interrupted threads with lies?

When they stop and publicly apologize in this thread.  

[CenturyDeprived]

2006 Chuck Negron told me, flat out, quote: "When they saw what was going on, they basically brutalized him. And Mike Love. . . Y'know, Brian's a very fragile, fragile guy and one minute we were doing it and the next minute Brian was crying and saying, 'Look, I'll give you the money to finish the album, you guys are gonna make it, but I can't do it anymore. They won't let me. Y'know, they say I have to do stuff for the family.' It was very childlike the way he talked."

Ray Lawlor asked BRIAN -- not a musician at the session, not a tape-op, not Chuck, not Corey, not Danny -- but BRIAN to tell him what happened at that session -- no prompting of who was there, etc. . . BRIAN WILSON told him that it was Mike who "dictated the terms" of Brian's outside productions to him with Dennis and Carl standing by Mike silently in regretful support. The rules were laid out for him.

They broke a butterfly upon a wheel.

IT HAPPENED.
And just as there was a reason that it happened THEN, there seems to be a reason NOW why it needs to be discredited.

You know, I have to say… I think that part of what drives/motivates a certain chunk of posters to continually debate on this board (and I’d include myself in that discussion) is that it becomes infuriating to think that anyone could be of the opinion that a given BB’s behavior could have never, ever, in a million years veered even slightly into bullying behavior. That a chunk of hard line Kokomaoists think this is such an absolute science fiction-esque impossibility to be equated to dinosaurs still roaming the Earth.

It just seems so hard for some people to say, “yes, perhaps a time or two over the decades, Brian sadly got bullied to some degree by his bandmate(s), however inadvertently that may have been”.  Why is that such a hard statement to find even a kernel of possible truth in?

Or how about this: Can Kokomaoists at least concede that perhaps a time or two, Brian was most likely on the receiving end of behaviors by his bandmate(s) (behaviors that might not necessarily be quantifiable as “bullying” if directed at more emotionally strong people, but due to Brian’s emotionally fragile condition, MAY had an inadvertent effect on Brian, equivalent to bullying?) Can we at least say that?

Or do we continue the charade that such statements are absurd, outright fantasy? C'mon.

I really think that if a few people on the Kokomaoist side of the political “spectrum” could at least concede that could possibly have happened with Brian, even beyond any known/documented and debated incidents that have been discussed to death on this board, that there would be less bickering. It wouldn’t instantly reduce bickering to zero, but it would amount to less bickering. Kind of how someone like myself (who was accused of being on an extremist side of things – an assumption which I wholeheartedly refute) is able to apologize and say that sometimes I may go too far in my postings. People sometimes go too far, including the BBs themselves! What good does some “hard line” attitude have in the end?  It does not further any cause in any perceptible way.  

Are the hard-line Kokomaoist defenders motivated by a deep desire to not WANT to believe that Brian could have ever been bullied? Even just a bit? Is it just too painful/sad an idea to reconcile? Hell, I did not WANT to believe that Phil Spector killed a woman. I would have loved for it to not be true. Obviously that’s an apples and oranges analogy, and I am not remotely equating any BB’s actions to the actions of Spector, but my point is that nobody wants to think that a musician whose work you greatly admire may have done some not-so-nice things to others.

And if anyone wants to still deny that it EVER could possibly have happened (with Brian on the receiving end) at any time during this band’s history… I ask this question to those people: What actions/words WOULD a bandmate have to do/say to another bandmate for you to quantify those actions/words as bullying? Not all bullying is physical, or on the level of Murry or Landy. Where exactly would the hard-line Kokomoaists draw that line, and why?

[Howie Edelson]

I think that part of what drives/motivates a certain chunk of posters to continually debate on this board is that they TRULY don't know what really goes on behind the scenes and beyond the interviews.
People who post THOUSANDS of times about something regarding people they've never met, let alone asked them about said topic -- yet seem to have it all figured out.
As a journalist I've never relied on a snitch sideman in ANY band to feed me info. Ever.

I still maintain that this can end on a high note -- with fans far happier and principals far richer -- thanks to proper management.

[Douchepool]

Proper management and the Beach Boys have never been great bedfellows.

[Howie Edelson]

Not yet.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Can Kokomaoists at least concede that perhaps a time or two, Brian was most likely on the receiving end of behaviors by his bandmate(s) (behaviors that might not necessarily be quantifiable as “bullying” if directed at more emotionally strong people, but due to Brian’s emotionally fragile condition, MAY had an inadvertent effect on Brian, equivalent to bullying?) Can we at least say that?

I'm not one such but there's a well documented instance of Brian being bullied to the point of tears to include a song on an album against his express wishes. So no argument there. I'm sure there were many others. Capitol's insistence at including "GV" on Smiley Smile springs to mind.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Not yet.

Do I detect a cautious optimism, Howie ?

[GhostyTMRS]

I'm going to do something radical here and actually address the topic of this thread. 

Still Cruisin' and SIP should be re-released or paired together as a twofer of whatever and it should've happened a long time ago when people cared about such things. Whether or not people love them or hate them (and I'd argue that hardly anyone cares about them) is irrelevant. They were Beach Boys albums that came out under the name Beach Boys, Carl Wilson sang on them, they were in stores, they existed. They're part of history, and not having albums in the catalog available does a great disservice to the group's legacy regardless of whether or not they were any good. End of story.

[Howie Edelson]

Andrew -- that's EXACTLY what it is.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Cautious optimism beats none at all, especially when it comes from someone who, unlike pretty much everyone else here (myself included) actually knows WTF he's posting about.

I await any further developments with cautiously bated breath.