The Smiley Smile Message Board

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204524604576609000066845070.html

Neat little interview! His answers are short, but not canned. Compared to, well, the norm, he seems very relaxed and forward about things. I especially like this:

I bet that interview took a long time.

"Were you angry or relieved when Capitol pulled the plug?

Relieved. Van Dyke and I and Capitol decided that the music was too advanced. We all had had enough. Capitol said maybe in a couple of years people would be ready for it. If it had come out in '67, people would have called it a bunch of junk. It's not really rock 'n' roll, when you think about it—you know, the way rock sounded then. It was too different."

Without provoking another round of "Brian's memory" or "ask him the same question after lunch", the "not really rock'n'roll" quote intrigues me.

We've heard "too advanced" ad infinitum, but my suspicion has always been that the main problem with finishing SMiLE was Brian's terrible and growing sense that what he was doing simply wasn't what people wanted. Not that it wasn't great; not that he didn't enjoy making it, at least in the early stages. But we know Pet Sounds' comparative commercial failure disappointed him, and to a certain extent that was a steroidal expansion on side 2 of Today. We know a great motivator of SMiLE was to make people - a lot of them - smile. We know, from countless interviews, the emphasis he puts on "hits" and "hit albums". What he was doing in '66, his hash-soaked "one key" riffs and modular structures, was another thing entirely, and we know he - and everyone else involved - knew it.

What we also know is that though Brian didn't have a huge connection with the outside world - even at that time, isolated to a certain extent even then by fame, drugs, family and incipient mental problems - he was listening avidly to the radio and to LPs, particularly those of his "competition" The Beatles. He must have heard, as the stoned whimsy of '66 slowly turned into the acid edges of '67, that where music was going was in the opposite to direction to where he wanted to take it.

And I also believe that in '66, at least until November, he did know, fairly specifically, where he was going to take it. Most songs have mono mix downs or track assemblies of some sort. Heroes, as we can divine from several contemporary articles, was very likely similar to - or at least held the sections of - the Humble Harv demo. "The Elements", which I suspect was a pre-VDP idea of Brian's that stuck around for SMiLE (pure conjecture on my part, of which more later),  I'm in Great Shape and final sequencing aside, there are 12 written, tracked and publishable tunes there.

So why suddenly start obsessing, reordering, tinkering, confusing the issue? The lack of support from the label, the Boys, the lawsuit, the drugs - of course. But I can't help but feel Brian almost allowed those issues to distract from the work, or rather they really started to affect the work, because of something far more terrifying he knew to be true: this was music, though wonderful music, that wasn't from where everybody was coming from or going where anybody else was going; it was from another planet and only heading out further into space.

After all the money, the hours, the fun, the family responsibilities, what could he do but try to keep going? But in the way of people with a massive and mounting workload, you start concentrating on one sales proposal at the exclusion of the 500 emails in your inbox: hence H&V and Vega-tables in '67. Maybe if he could get those right... So the Pepper's story EDIT: sorry, should be "Strawberry Fields" not Pepper's, obviously (Brian and Vosse in the car; "they did it already" etc), which has been emphasised and deemphasised continuously in SMiLE myth these last twenty years, might be revealing if not decisive as an event. I think Brian was increasingly aware that winter of '66-'67 that SMiLE was so different to what everybody else was doing, and what "the kids" were wanting to hear, and that there were only two options: that SMiLE would revolutionize rock in a way never done before or since and cause the rest of pop to fall in step with it; or that it would be revealed, at least in the short term, as hopelessly out of step with the times itself.

The hype was massive; the buzz was huge. But apart from Surf's Up on Inside Pop - notably sans band and SMiLE production techniques - Brian gets more and more reticent about letting any of the new music out to the public (endlessly postponing the announced single to the point Capitol had to release "Then I Kissed Her" in the UK instead, much to the band's disgust). These are the actions of either a perfectionist, someone insecure about the commercial appeal of their work (ie. demanding both aesthetically and commercially) - or both.

So isn't it possible he essentially, or to some extent, killed SMiLE - or let it be killed - rather than end up crushed, embarrassed or exposed? Which is of course a crying shame, and only conjecture on my part. But it seems to have certain psychological plausibility from what was said at the time and after by Brian and others.

Anyway, that's why  the "way rock sounded then" comment I found so interesting. I'm not sure I've heard Brian say that before without speaking more expansively about "too advanced" or "art records". For a guy with the pride, competitive spirit, track record and sheer sparkling talent of BW in 1966, wouldn't the idea of looking silly to his fans and contemporaries be just about the most frightening thing of all?

It's certainly possible "the way rock sounded" bit is an externalized view from his back-and-forth with the band at the time. Smile just didn't sound like the band's previous hits, or like what was on the radio. So why were they doing it?

But your broader point --


I think describes Brian's creative life almost exactly from Smile to the present day. He cannot complete projects on his own because he's terrified by how they might be received. Look at the Paley sessions -- dozens of prime songs in the classic style, just begging for overdubs and finished lead vocals.

He abandons them all. It's easier to do Stars and Stripes, and he knows his and the band's reputation won't be on the line.

Thing is, "the way rock sounded then" wasn't really Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, or Friends either. We will never know for sure, but how could Smile have negatively affected their career more than what actually happened during the release of the above 3 albums?

What's the best way to describe the album?

A teenage symphony to God. That's how Van Dyke, my collaborator, described it. It's a teen's expression of joy and amazement. It's unrestrained. We thought of ourselves as teens then, even though we were in our 20s.

I find it interesting that Brian is now attributing the "teenage symphony to God" phrase to VDP.   Of course, it's something Brian said himself in published interviews in 1966.   Maybe VDP did originate it.  That's possible, I guess.  However, the grandiose religiosity of the statement sounds more like Brian than VDP, in my opinion.

Hi drbeachboy:

I think it's the difference between the most elaborate part of your four course meal catching alight and singeing a grilled cheese you're making for a friend. It's as much about your own investment in the meal as the reaction of the people you're making it for.

Vague confusion or ambivalence about Smiley Smile - it's okay, it's "music for people to chill out to". Vague confusion or ambivalence about the album that's "as much an improvement over Pet Sounds as that was over Summer Days" - devastating.

Brian can say all he wants in hindsight, as hindsight is a great vision to the past, but really, as things turned out in real life, Smile if not popular in 1967 would not have hurt them any worse than what actually happened. Most musical visionaries just release what they compose and let the listener make the decision whether it is listenable or not.

Brian's points about SMiLE are really thought provoking and show that he still has a lot of deep ideas stored in his head about the past. I wish he just sit down with somebody he trusts and tell the whole SMiLE story and in time the whole Beach Boys story album by album.

I'm just saying I'm not sure it is a matter of hindsight: the "chill out" comments from both Carl and Brian hail from the early seventies, and the "improvement over PS" quote from late '66. I think Wirestone got it bang on - and we all know that SMiLE was the beginning of the great retrenchment that "Love You" aside never really ended, at least as far as the BBs and Brain were concerned - but I'm interested by the specific nature of his answer to the WSJ.

Which is to say, the lack of support from the family and label would never have been conducive to completion of the record, but listen to Pet Sounds, Today, "The Little Girl I Once Knew" or just Brian in the studio on the SMiLE session tapes. This is a guy who has real ego, real push, real authority. The great loss of faith (and "faith", whether it be in God or to whatever higher muse, is a recurring and important component to how Brian viewed his own work) in the album had to come from somewhere.

In context with the great risks and leaps of the past two years, I'd say it also had to be something specific, and largely internal that shook that faith. My suggestion is that Brian started to realise, better than anyone else involved, who had their own agendas and angles of perception - the Vosse Posse, loving the resources, freedom, friendship and incredible music they were hearing; Capitol, already gunshy after Sounds and still trying to sell the group as surf music; the Boys, at once thrilled by the musical experimentation and frustrated they weren't having any say in the direction of a product they would have to present to the public, not to mention understandable concern over their bank balances - that no matter how good it was, the music he was making would not achieve the goals he set out wanting for it. That's got to be a killer, and who do you share those concerns with when there are so many people depending on you? How do you even articulate that fear to yourself?

Which I'd say is fundamentally different, psychologically, than noodling around with your family on a Baldwin organ or recording vocals in a swimming pool for a laugh. It didn't mean he didn't care, or that he stopped being interested in new sounds and ways of recording (though I'd argue reading the 1976 interviews on this site that's exactly what had happened by 15 Big Ones). He just stopped investing so much; as many people have said, he "gave up the production race". That's why it was easier to put out SS, WH etc even if they were weird and out of step with the rest of music. He wasn't trying to be the best anymore, but had settled for just being in the game, and maybe doing something technically or musically adventurous when inspiration struck. But he was no longer forcing his muse to offer up its secrets.

Not, I add, that there would be anything wrong with that if there was any evidence to suggest that Brian was much happier as result of that step back - or that it was a positive step forward and not a partial surrender. I'd argue that the events of the next twenty years would pretty conclusively argue that wasn't the case.

I wasn't arguing SMiLE really would have been worse for their careers than the albums that did come out; just that for Brian an ambivalent critical and audience response to SMiLE would have been far more devastating than an actively negative one to Wild Honey, just because of how much he had invested in the former.

it's interesting that he brings up "diamond Head" in the interview..so maybe the song did have it's origin somewhere during the smile era..or maybe he had a concept of doing a song about Diamond Head but didn't actually come up with the song until later..

I agree with all that you say here, but my point was only addressing Brian's remark in the interview "the way rock sounded then". I can understand experimenting with Smiley, as lots of bands were doing this. Afterwards, The Beach Boys had the chance to sound the way rock sounded, but as it turned out Brian didn't follow his future self's advice. Wild Honey and Friends did not follow that advice. If nothing else, they may have been ahead of their time. Wild Honey by 6 to 8 months and Friends by at least 2 years. They really didn't fit with what was popular at the time that they were released.

or maybe they put those words in his mouth...

Oh - sorry drbeachboy, I misread what you were saying a bit. Yeah, I agree - the question that has to follow, if he was that tuned into "what rock sounded like then", is why the BBs didn't try and get a bit heavier in '68/'69. Maybe Brian just wasn't up to it, or didn't know how, no matter what he may have heard in the charts?

I mean, they never really got into "hard rock" very convincingly, even under Carl's auspices much later on. When they tried it was Carl's solo stuff, "Under the Moonlight" and "Student Demonstration Time" - not bad rock music, necessarily, but owing far more Chuck Berry than to "Dazed and Confused" or "Baba O'Reilly".

One way of reading Brian's comment in the interview, that's still relevant to my posts above, is not that he knew what was going on in music and just didn't bother to try doing it - but that in '66, on the cusp of what should have been his brightest achievement yet, he could see the wind changing and realized that where it was blowing just wasn't he or the Beach Boys were meant to go (except in that stripped-back WH/White Album/John Wesley Harding way, which of course the BBs were a year too early to get any love for). Ie. it wasn't a matter of "won't", but "can't" - which makes what the statement in this latest interview not only revealing but extremely and bravely honest in a weird kind of way.

Of course, that's just what I'm reading into it!

That's a nice interview.  Brian is articulating his thoughts pretty well there.  Also, great thoughts here by The_Holy_Bee.  I couldn't put it any better.  I think Wild Honey was an attempt at going in a more 'mainstream' direction from Brian.  I mean, they couldn't do what Led Zeppelin or The Who were doing.  That was never their thing.  So, what was Brian to do?  Rock music was changing so quickly, and he likely did feel the wind changing.  It's no wonder that he pulled out of Monterey Pop.  Not sure if Brian attended that festival, but there was a great performance on Saturday night by Otis Redding with Booker T. & the M.G.'s (were the Beach Boys supposed to play that Saturday night headline slot?).  Perhaps Brian saw that and thought maybe he could go in that direction.  I don't think Wild Honey was necessarily a year too early, I think it was just a little too stripped down in the production, and (a lot of folks are going to throw stuff at me here) I don't think Carl's voice was ready yet for the two songs that were released as singles from that album.   

Also, another point - that's two recent interviews I've seen that talk about *Capitol* pulling the plug on SMiLE in 1967. Is this historical revisionism, or just the result of poor research?

The impression I'd had was that Capitol were desperate for something, *anything* from Brian and the Boys, album-wise, and that they'd never have cancelled anything, especially after the success of Good Vibrations. And also that the cancellation was entirely Brian's decision...?

This

"If it had come out in '67, people would have called it a bunch of junk."

is absolute rot.

"2004 remake" is an interesting way to put it

Yeah, but if you think about it, he has to believe this. The alternative is "Man, I really screwed up by not releasing this back in the day. My career might have turned out differently if I had." That's one of his demons right there.

The most interesting part of this, is the statement that Capitol was saying that they might wait a few years and release it. 

On the Endless Harmony cd there's a live version of Wonderful (I believe) and before it, Mike says that many years ago they recorded an album called Smile, which should be out... any time now, or something like that. 

So I'm wondering if maybe there WAS kind of a conversation in the band, that one day they might actually release the album, a few years down the road? 

Something's popping up in my mind too where somebody was saying that Carl actually did some work on the album, a few years later?   Is that correct?

That is 100% correct! The Beach Boys denied themselves the opportunity to grow with their established fanbase at the time as the Beatles did. The reality was that by 1969 no-one wanted to "Do It Again" like Mike believed.

This at first seems intrusive but they are pictures of Brian's home taken for the WSJ article.

Interesting

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_61djkGwfEZo/Rg5dDGzzNwI/AAAAAAAAAlM/eAbQ0F7YZSk/s1600/Wilson_PICS.jpg)

Wow. That is just not a house I would choose to live in.

On second thought, maybe it just looks weird because no on is in it.

Wasn't Brian's house on the market a while ago? Maybe these pictures were taken then.

They do look like estate agent images.

Is that Anderle's painting of BW above one of the fireplaces?

So it was really Mike, not Brian, that was ahead of his time ;)

Nope - wrong color, wrong shape and anyway, Anderle still has it.  ;D

You've better eyesight than me!  I should stick to BBs sites!   ;D