The Smiley Smile Message Board

Interesting read. Not sure yet how I feel about it.

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/160169-when-i-grow-up-to-be-a-man/

She's a wind bag, she is.

Very well-written.  She perfectly describes Brian's enigmatic eccentricity without questioning it.

Thanks for the link !
Some good things, some not so good things in there.


On a first look, it seems like the writer has his stuff down well.
But already in the beginning he writes:

I know it's what the promo says, but if you know about the Beach Boys and about Brian (what every writer seems to claim for himself) then you also should know that Brian toured regularly with the band after his comeback in '76 until his second Landy periode.



True to a point but let's not forget that Mike and Bruce have played very good setlists in the last years and thankfully improved their game in comparison to "the Baker years". This is something one should note and mention if you write an article and talk about Mike's band.




Well, this is something that shouldn't happen. Mike's lawsuit was about songwriting credits. I don't know about any suit about publishing.




It's true that "self-parody" songs happened especially after Dennis' death and the '85 album. But TWGMTR is not one of those. It is a very well written song that just happens to be nostalgic. self-parody and nostalgia are not the same but maybe the writer doesn't know. What is true though is that the Beach Boys' kind of nostalgia in most cases is a sick, dumb and tasteless thing but of all things TWGMTR isn't all that. Had he mentioned "Summer of love" (guilty pleasure for me) he'd had a very good point but he probably is just one of those people who are unhappy that TWGMTR doesn't sound like "Do you like worms" (which then also would be self-parody btw).



I hear that often, but nothing could be farther from the truth. This is a band singing their hit songs which they wrote and recorded when they were in their 20s. It would be sad if their new material was still about those topics but it is not. What happens is the same as McCartney still singing "I saw her standing there" or Chuck Berry "School days". That is what is expected from them and not a point you could critisize.



As was well reported Brian lied in those interviews (he himself said so) because nothing was set in stone regarding  the reunion.



Wondermints (no "the" there) are just a part of Brian's band.... and now of the Beach Boys' band.



Again, to a point true but there's also the other side.




His explanations about "Today!" ae very nice and interesting. But he often quotes lyrics that - although they certainly expressed what Brian wnated - were written by othe people and doesn't mention that.







Yeah, bad, bad Beach Boys. I really get tired of the "the other Beach Boys didn't let Brian do his thing"-sh!t everytime that an album wasn't completed.




I don't agree that it was written in the perspective of a 13 year old. I know the ages they mention in the song only go 'til 23 or something but I guess that was just because the syllables fit beter. Compare : thir-teen and twen-ty-three. It just wouldn't have sounded very good.




I don't know how seriously "Bull session" should be taken but at least one could name Dennis and Mike in the above quote.





The writer doesn't seem to understand that there's a lot of love between the guys after all these years. Especially between Brian and Mike who were very close in their young lives and are family.


Although the article is well written in many aspects, I have the feeling it's just another Brian good - Beach Boys asses article. Maybe not as obvious as others but it's there. As mentioned above I'm really tired of that. To understand the Beach Boys' story it takes more than to know about and believe the myths. It's not all balck and white.
Again, the part about Today! and Pet Sounds was very nice.

Just curious, have there been any huge bands/artists with the lifespan of a Beach Boys (besides Dylan), for example, to ever put out new material that wasn't labeled as "self-parody" or on the flip side: wasn't knocked because they tried new things?  Seems like a lose-lose. 
 

And what really is the POINT of this peice?  Can someone summarize it in a sentence?  It seems like two pages of ramblings from a fan who loves the band's 60's work but doesn't get TWGMTR or why they're out there on tour.  Sounds like a glass half empty kind of thing.

She may be a fan, but she mixes fact with fiction and looks at the group through Brian-colored glasses. And you are right Justin, after 50 years any band could be accused of self parody. If you look at it from since 1985, that is 22 years since a Beach Boys album with Brian has been released. Too much time has passed between albums, so sounding like yourself is a parody? Kind of weird, but that's how I took the article as saying.

I enjoyed reading that and would only quarrel with a few things.  It's very pro-Brian Wilson, as am I.

Question: she says that in fact B.W. was not suffering from schizophrenia?  I know that Landy over-medicated B.W.  But I thought it was pretty common knowledge that B.W. suffered from Schizoaffective Disorder.

Am I incorrect?

Exactly Doc.  And what constitutes as "self-parody"?...haven't people ever heard of a signature sound?  You get the exact same guy who wrote and arranged these tunes 50 years ago to write and arrange new songs in 2012...what do you expect they'll sound like?  They'll sound like Beach Boys songs!...that's in Brian's DNA, that's his sound, his style.  How else should they sound...like Iron Maiden?  Honestly, these critics make it seem like the very second Brian adds that layer of harmonies, it's automatically self-parody.  Makes no sense.

I know she singles out the title track, but any song where the lyrics reference older songs you did = self-parody. The album isn't free from it.

I won't argue that definition but if she wants to dismiss an entire album because of the "good vibrations" line from "Spring Vacation" (don't think there are others, are there?) that's a bit careless.

I agree it's well written if you take it one paragraph at a time, but as a whole, it's an incoherent essay that wanders all over the place.  It's also pretentious piffle.  Seriously, analyzing "Bull Sessions with Big Daddy"?  Besides which, even if you believe Brian is only doing this reunion tour for the money, then whose money is he doing it for?  His own?  I fail to see how that makes him being exploited by the Beach Boys, considering they were doing okay financially touring without Brian (except for Al, but I don't think he's broke).  Come to think of it, Brian was already doing okay financially, between past songwriting royalties and the fact at least a couple of his tours did well financially, and his solo record sales probably didn't lose money.  Maybe Brian wants to tour with the Beach Boys because he likes being around them and making music with them, at least in limited doses, and he doesn't really think his backing band has better vocals without them?  Nah, couldn't be, according to this writer.

Yes -- Beaches in Mind references Fun, Fun, Fun and Spring Vacation also references I Get Around though in a not-so-cleverly concealed way.

And "County fair" in Strange World  ;D

So, was "All You Need Is Love" a Beatles self-parody because they sing "She Loves You"? Also, are we all self-parodies when we reminisce about our life, because we share memories with each other. It's a fine line being drawn here with the new album.

A supercilous, purportedly learned, article. The parts where the writer attemtpts psychology are rendered laughable because of it.

Sorry, I don't need this. And don't need no more detrimental sh*t on the group's present.

Perhaps it can be an ok first read for people that don't know much about them.

So tired, just so very, very tired of all the BS and oversimplification.

Didn't read this garbage.  Don't need it.

Neither did I, and I don't think I will based on what folks have said here. It sounds like another boring "Brian good, Mike bad, all there is to the BBs is Pet Sounds and maybe Smile but forget everything else in their catalogue" kind of deal.

The article isn't as straight laced as that, but yeah, you kind of get that vibe. Although I really liked the author's comparison between Today! and Pet Sounds, recalling themes of the former popping up in a fuller form on the latter.

It's not garbage. I felt very much the same about the reunion in the first instance - another 'Brian's Back' debacle - and if we decide to judge every article on whether they play along with our very finely tuned POV of the band, well, nothing's going to work.

A journalist is not a hardcore Beach Boys fan. How hard is that to understand?

She certainly seems to have read several books and if she's actually sat through "Big Daddy" enough to analyze it from the Brian-centric point of view,  that is hardcore something.

If she is not, then she shouldn't write like she is one. She came off like she was a big fan, but really only sees things one-sided. Shoot, I can just come here and get that line. ;)

If she was hardcore, she'd know it was a joke. If you don't realize it too, then maybe fandom is becoming way too serious.

No, but that is unquestioningly a self-parodic moment of that song. On purpose too.

Well there's also the "We used to get around" line but I think that's it.  But to be fair, the lyrics to that song are pretty bad.  It's not bad to reference earlier songs if a good song is written around it (see Bruce Springsteen's "Thunder Road" and "The Promise").  And she wasn't dismissing the entire album, she did praise "Summer's Gone" and those other ending songs.  

You're all looking way too hard into this article.  It's an editorial piece, it's not meant as a reference book.  You guys need to chill.

Well, exactly! If that's the way she's come to view things through her love of the music, who are we to slag her off? I mean, how many think-pieces on this tour explicitly quote Stephen Love?

Also, it's not like it's really easy to find definitve information about the group.  They try so hard to hold on to the whole Beach Boys myth, even the Endless Harmony and Beautiful Dreamer docs are so ridiculously and obviously sugarcoated, you can't blame people for looking for answers and not getting the right ones when it comes to the Beach Boys.  The Beach Boys need to realize that there's nothing wrong with going more into detail about drugs, Manson, Landy, legal issues, and all of the countless things that they constantly choose to gloss over.  They need to tell their story straight the way the Beatles did with the Anthology.

I keep forgeting that this is the age of the Internet and people can write stuff as fact without doing any fact checking. Writing truth is secondary these days.

Did the Beatles talk about John Lennon's drug use, or Paul's pot habits and miserliness, or Ringo's blow habit, or George's mania about Hare Krishna and his sleeping with Ringo's wife in Anthology? Or how they resolved all the many multi-year lawsuits they had against each other and what all the issues of those were?   I haven't watched it in many a moon and don't recall how they handled controversial topics or whether they touched on many of them at all in their own film.  That film and the Beach Boys docs mentioned mostly exist for people to hear the music and see clips. 

I'm not talking about the film series, I'm talking about the book that came out a few years later.

The other poster mentioned two film docs by the Beach Boys so the Anthology film was brought to mind.  To be honest, I've never read the book Anthology, just seen the DVD.  I used to own the multi-DVD set with outtakes.  I enjoyed the music clips on it.  I don't remember the interview segments too well so I'm not sure what they went into.  Having not read the book, I don't know what's in it or who was involved in writing it.