The Smiley Smile Message Board

I think, the sectional, modular approach was significant, not just for the production freedom it entailed, but also because the theme of the song demanded it. Brian was an excellent composer, when it came to interpreting lyrics. This is something that somebody like Schubert would always do, having the piano part be like the rowing of oars, or the hoofbeats of horses. But Brian Wilson does this a lot too, on songs like Busy Doin' Nothin'. Which compositionally, is sort of like masturbation.
[I don't mean to seem edgy with that, I think it's just part of the song's humor. Like Brian is just working really hard on these minor tasks, building them up into these little releases. That's the charm of the song to me, the self depreciating humor, it's masturbatory, Brian just hanging out at his house, stupidly feeling like a complete Casanova.]
But he does this on a lot of songs, Fire, Passing By, or even Friends where the stumbling waltz rhythm is like the sort of clumsy waltz of friendship. There are a lot of clever examples of this with Brian. Heroes and Villains to me encapsulates that in the extreme. The song is really about how the distinction between heroes and villains, isn't clear. When you think of Heroes and Villains, you think of cowboys and indians, with the point being, we treat the indians as villains, when that isn't quite the case. Just like the hip community was sort of the indians to the conservatives' cowboys.
The song was recorded in sections to reflect this. The earlier versions of the song have no chorus, which isn't very conventional. The song is nothing but a parade of songs, all variations upon a single theme. Just like the battle between heroes and villains is always repeating. This is why Brian insisted on recording Heroes this way, and why it exemplified the modular approach.

note: i was writing this in the most complex Brian song thread, but thought i would spin it off into a new thread. So just feel free to talk about what a great song Heroes is, and what your personal theories are. Because to me there is no question, that artistically it's Brian's most complex song.

I was thinking the same thing re: complexity. It tends to get ignored, maybe, because the final single and BWPS/TSS edits bow more to a pop convention in some sense - there is a chorus, there's two verses. Whilst the 'bridge' is actually 3 or 4 unique sections, it still has that underpinning verse/chorus/verse thing. Not unlike GV, mind, although that pushes the chorus to insane levels of complexity/craft at the end.

But the part 1/part 2 single.... That's a complex thing in terms of structure! Part one only has one verse, and a reprise of it which lasts all of ten seconds. But everything else is unique. And then there's Part two.... 

Then if you want to get into the nuts and bolts of the sessions, you could potentially have that with Barnyard, Great Shape, Do A Lot, Bag Of Tricks, more vocal variations....

I dig the lyrical analysis too, wish I could contribute something that was a bit clever to it.

I see three reasons
1. V D Parks was obsessed with this kind of thing (song cycles)
2. They smoked a lot of pot

lolcat i c wut u did thar

I agree that Heroes and Villains is by far Brian's most complex work.  The sheer volume of pieces recorded for this song is staggering, and it's completely different structurally depending on which version you happen to be listening to.  Was anything besides the first verse ever set in stone?  Heroes is really interesting...  I think it's my favorite song but I don't feel like I've ever heard the right version of it or that I ever will.  It's the idea of the song that does it for me.  He was reaching for a level of perfection that really isn't possible in a pop single, but the important thing is he tried to get there.  I think the Humble Harv demo comes the closest.  When he says "I think this is a beautiful feeling", for just a moment, you can get a real sense of what he was trying to achieve.

Well said.

Same.

The pain :(

I was thinking about doing a Heroes and Villains part 1& 2 mix, and I suddenly realized why it is so hard to do. The song does not have enough lyrics. I mean, other than the "three score and five" part, there aren't really any other verses to use for a second half. The only thing recorded was endless variations of a chorus.

I think what would be interesting is somebody doing a version that includes "I'm In Great Shape" and possibly "Barnyard". I tried to do one that started with the usual first verse that ends with the fluttertone (as used on the "Early Version Outtake Sections" version) and then goes into "I'm In Great Shape", just like the Humble Harve demo. But I couldn't edit it to the point where the transition sounded right. What I then tried to do was tie in the end of "Great Shape" with the "early version" of the "intro", which if you listen closely is called "part 3". And then ended it with "Barnyard", because I guess that would be used as a fade. Or maybe not. But anyways, I think somebody good should try a version that goes like so:

• First Verse (ending w/ fluttertone)
• "I'm In Great Shape"
• "Heroes And Villains: Intro (early version)"
• "??"
• "Barnyard"

I imagine that is maybe what an October thru December version may have looked like. And I'm also kinda bummed Linnett and Boyd didn't try to do a version for The SMiLE Sessions set that used "I'm In Great Shape", as the Humble Harve demo is good of evidence as any that it was supposed to go that way at one point. And I figure if they could put together a "part two", or piece together "early version outtake sections" from January and February, why they couldn't have tried something similar for the fall version of "Heroes And Villains". That is probably my biggest bummer of the whole set, because this is something that could be done, whereas the lack of recorded lead vocals from 1966 and 1967 can't be remedied, since we don't have a time machine.

Anyways hope to see someone give this a shot.

My favorite version is the "In cantina version".. But i suspect it would have been even lesser  of a hit than the one released..Why..? Cause it would be harder to dance to..Yes i know ya cant  dance to.."GV".. That both of those songs were HITS is unusual for the 60"s..BW knew a record you cant dance to would have problems..

Actually, "in the cantina" is a waltz, so technically it should be easy to dance to.

Yeah and he talks about repetition which I think is another key to understanding Heroes, most obviously demonstrated by the edit that runs from Gee to the dum dum section. That is so repetitious to the point that, however dazzling and beautiful the vocals and individual sections, the sequence itself is an odd choice. It's almost like dance music or something, which makes me wonder whether the repetition here is really informed by the drugs he was taking - maybe the amphetamines?

I suspect though, that this sequence (and Part 2 which I believe this is the core of) was designed to be a kind of demo of this Heroes riff that he was into, and in a way, a sampler for Smile as a whole. This is Cam's theory (although I think cam went as far as to suggest Part 2 was the album in microcosm, containing a section that represented many of the songs i.e. heroes Intro = Fire, All Day = Dada, Swedish Frog = Barnyard suite etc, although I may be misrepresenting his idea here) these sections definitely feel more throwaway to me - almost like Brian was just trying to fill the b side, and having fun in the process, rather than trying to construct the perfect pop song.

I think if you run with this idea of the Part 2 sections being more throwaway, or variations on the Part 1 components, it begins to make more sense of why brian re-recorded the fade. It's similar, but by no means an improvement, and suggests to me that he was planning to keep the fade for the A side and quickly put something together for the b side. I also wonder whether the Gershwin style riff (the track 'Part 2' on disc 2 of the box) was a variation on Western Theme and designed to fill an equivalent spot on the b side.

Trying to dance to those songs would be interesting because your right in saying they are not dance tunes.