The Smiley Smile Message Board

I am somewhat perplexed by the many denunciations of Student Demonstration Time that I have come across while perusing the conversations on this board over the years. I can tell you that while listening to the LP Surf's Up at the time of its release, this particular cut came as a welcomed rush of energy at the close of side one. That response may well have been a function of our, how shall we say, medicated minds, but I clearly recall an electrifying performance of the tune in concert in Miami in '72, and, I'm pretty sure, at C.W. Post in '73 or '74, bring the crowd to its feet. If you can get ahold of the Live at Carnegie performance you will see what I mean.

The Beach Boys of course were never overtly political in their lyrical content, but they certainly did reflect cultural currents of the times during which they were active, from the unabashed hedonism of the early '6os, thru the mind expanding mid-60's, to the dark turmoil of the late-60s. And SDT neatly captures a sense of that turmoil while offering a capsule chronicle of at least a part of "The Movement."

Placing the tune side by side with Street Fighting Man by the Rolling Stones, and Revolution by the Beatles is illustrative. The Stones are all about plunging into the chaos - "summer's here and time is right for rising in the street, boy."  The Beatles are ambivalent - "but when you talk about destruction, well don't you know that you can count me out/in."  The Beach Boys shy away - "next time there's a riot well, you best keep out of sight..."

With the great Pluto-Uranus square now wheeling back into alignment, igniting a revolutionary upsurge world-wide, and reigniting Brian Wilson's creative juices, it will be very interesting to hear the new music he is currently producing and how it now, as did SDT then, reflects the zeitgeist of our times.

I like it, anyway. And, it's Dennis' last recorded drumming before his hand accident.  8)

I agree with the OP about the need for more of a high energy track on Surf's Up, though I think I would have preferred "Sound of Free" here.  There are a couple of problems with SDT:  First, I've never found the Beach Boys to be particularly convincing in heavy rock mode.  It usually comes off sounding forced or wimpy, though this track is arguably more effective than some of their other efforts in this vein.  More problematic are the lyrics.  It's seems like he's really straining to be relevant and engage with some serious issues, but he doesn't have anything meaningful to say about them.  He brings up all of this strife and protest, but then the final conclusion is like "Yeah, it's a real drag, man, best just to avoid it altogether."  Those final lines seem like a disappointing cop out.  I don't think SDT is quite as bad as some make it out to be, but to me, it makes their Reilly inspired efforts to be socially relevant seem like kind of an empty pose. 

The thing about SDT is that the over all message seems to discourage trying to effect social change because a riot may break out and you'll get hurt.  :lol

Live so much better.

The Carnegie Hall version is amazing. They were an awesome live band in those days and they could rock. Marcella is another great example.

I always thought it was a powerful record. Most Beach Boys fans I met who don't like it tend not to like hard rock so much. Not a put down just in my experience.

Not me.  I dig Hendrix, Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, the Who.  I've just never felt that that this was the Beach Boys' strong suit, though I would agree that the live version is preferable.

I have a problem with Mike blaming the victims for protesting and not directing any venom towards the authority's manner of conduct in the shootings. In essence, it's a song about allowing yourself to get trodden on by whatever oppressive regime is coming down on you... a pretty easy message to deliver when you're a white, millionaire rock star who hasn't a fight to be passionate about...

Also, I for one think the basic track kicks ass (the sirens are a bit annoying...) so that's definitely not where my derision comes from. I think the boys should have rocked out a little more to be honest. My disliking of the track is wholly rooted in the lame message, if it weren't for that, I'd like it a lot.

I have no problem with the music or even the message, only the lyrics which sound trite and forced - kind of like Don't Go Near the Water, another cringe worthy effort from Mr. Love.  They should have kept this number as the cover of Riot in Cell Block 9 which is where they copped the music from.  Solid version of it at Big Sur 1970.

In this thread Mr. Desper gives some detailed well-written explanation as to why Mike changed the words in the subject:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14463.25.html Reply #44. Good read, Mr. TM!

I've always found something amusing and ironic about the Beach Boys singing "Don't Go Near The Water", kind of an interesting inversion for them.  Yeah, he lyrics are pretty trite and the "tooth paste & soap will make the oceans a bubble bath" line always gives me a chuckle, but at least ecology was still a fairly fresh topic back then.

These were mainly peaceful demonstratons. (As in "Give Peace a Chance.")  Students were not carrying weapons, and were "no match" for irrational law enforcement, and on the heels of "Four Dead in O-hio" with CSNY (Old Buffalo Springfield) when on May 4, 1970, four unarmed protesters were gunned down in cold blood.  

And, I didn't get that impression, that it was designed to ward off protest but, more to know who the opponent was and decide with information. It also conveyed the danger which had become escalated.  Or, maybe protest, but you might need a flak jacket.  I think it is a great song, and also pertinent to the Band, because those who died, were protesting the war that Carl was arrested for, as a result of his failure to report to the Draft Board.  He had asserted a CO or Conscientious Objector status.

I think it is a grand song. And I'm still proud that they recorded that harsh in-your-face response to what was going on at the time.  It was a small part of raising consciousness for the times.  

Here's that Desper quote, thanks to RangeRoverA!:
 

COMMENT: 

There is no right nor wrong in art, only preference.   But I would take issue with you on saying the production values are sloppy, just because you don't like the sound of a megaphone or sirens. The production values of this song are just as strong, and more complex, than other songs on the Surf's Up album.

If you lived through the 60s, the civil riots, the unrest, the antiwar demonstrations, the crowds of unruly students in the streets, with hundreds of young soldiers dieing every day -- every day, and in-depth TV coverage of people being shot at close range coming into our living rooms every night, you might have more understanding of "the why and wherefore" of the song being part of a surf album. 

Yes, Michael is very correct in stating his concerns. He was seeing all this going on in Santa Barbara, CA where he lived. It was in his front yard. It was in all our lives. It was a sick time. The country was sick. And much of it was needless.

So Michael was moved to write a song about war protest. His approach was to offer vocal advice to the listener as to what to do when you may be caught up in one of these civil unrests -- so as not to get killed.  Remember Kent State was still in the news when the lyrics were written.

Production Values.  The tonal picture Michael wished to paint OR the setting he wanted use to present his song did give me a challenge to keep production values at their standards and still make a listenable song.

Picture Michael speaking to a crowd of students that are in a rally, in a school yard, surrounded by school buildings and administration structures. He is speaking to them using a PA system and the reflection of his speech is bouncing off of the buildings. There is also other activity and antiwar demonstrations taking place. the sirens are moving around the school yard builds and can be heard around you.

Unfortunately, the sound picture colapes fairly flat in stereo. When you hear this song properly (with Matrix resolution) the production makes more sense. You do get a sense of the school yard space and the buildings sound further removed. The sirens move around the room, not just side to side. The lyric message remains the same, but the production values put into the sound-picture are more easily heard and appreciated.

Some day soon you will hear what I mean.  Until then,

Good Listening,  ~Stephen W. Desper
 

 
   
 

In a way, the Beach Boys' response to the political/cultural upheaval of the late '60s was quite proactive. I'm thinking here of Friends which, while lost in the general hysteria rioting for "PEACE NOW!" - actually offers an antidote in the Zen-like epiphanies of the meditative state. No, TM did not bring the war to an end, but the fundamental insight that aggression/non-aggression is a state of mind, points the way to diffusing the impulse to violence.

                                                                              "Be still and know you are..."

I wonder if Brian and the boys were tuning in to Alan Watts?

Thanks TM and Rangerover. That quote from Desper really puts the song in a newish light for me.

My least favourite song on the album, but I love the album and like the song.

It's funny, but in 1971 I don't remember anyone mistaking the lyrical meaning like people do in here. Over the years something has gotten lost in translation. It was always FOR protesting, but to be prepared that the protest could turn into a riot. Usually, when that type of thing happens it is because the establishment over reacts (not the protesters) causing the riot.

It basically sounds like a song commissioned by government in order to keep people home. Wonder how big Myke's paycheck was that year???? I kid ofc.. :lol

That's what I hear in the song.

Glad you're kidding.  Mr. Desper was correct in all he said. Having been in college then, even going to and from class could be a volatile situation.  It is hard to fathom now, that the rage of the country, from coast to coast, over this Vietnam War, had mobilized students in nearly every college, even and especially "working class" public colleges, which were not the likely center of protest.   And they mobilized before the world wide web.  

Many days you'd get to whatever building your class was in and it would be surrounded by cops, as it was "occupied" (before "Occupy") by student protesters.  No class that day!  

And, it didn't die down as quickly as the authorities wanted.  And, lots of Vietnam Vets who were students under the GI Bill were organizers and participants.  And, they had eyewitness knowledge and personal experience, which was credible.  Things started to change, I think, when their voices began to be heard. They were almost like whistleblowers of their day.

When I hear that song, it "brings it back."   ;)

So glad that Mike did that song.  It ain't pretty, the truth ain't always pretty.

Bravo!

Good thing you put that disclaimer at the end. Some people here might actually believe that.  :lol

Not a put down. I'm in this demographic. To me this is not Beach Boy music,  It gets skipped within seconds.

So you have them pigeonholed just like most of John Q Public? Thought we hard-cores were better than that. ;)

I think I can understand why one might not consider it to be "Beach Boys' music" lyrically. Musically, however, I would, and probably needlessly, point out that SDT is a straight re-write of the Coasters' Riot in Cellblock Number 9, which places it firmly in the back-to-roots trend of the day. Interestingly, the Beatles had also covered the Coasters "Searchin'" for their Decca Audition, and I think the Stones did as well, although I can't quite recall what tune.

They did plenty of covers.  I agree with drbeachboy 100%.  It marginalizes what some think the Band should be doing, which is what they (The Band) consider pertinent.  This is the same Band of "The Trader" dealing with colonialism issues. 

Why shouldn't they have a opinion? Surely their education "on the road," seeing places like the Berlin Wall, The Czech crisis, and their own country's turmoil over time should credentialize them to compose non BB stereotype material.  They should all have Ph.D's with what they've learned about world events.

Write-on, Mike!  ;)

Love this Leiber&Stoller song, which the boys even tried out during the Party! sessions. And I think Mike's new lyrics are very good as well. Never understood why it is so dismissed by most people

Frankly, because they misread the meaning of the lyric.

No, I just hate this sort of blues / rock. I find it mind numbingly boring.

So I'll rephrase. This is not the sort of music I listen to the Beach Boys for. This is not the sort of music I personally want to hear the Beach Boys doing. I am a Beach Boys fan because they haven't had a career making this type of music. They've had a career making the type of music I like. (The way I put it first was simpler)

It also sits quite nicely between and counterpoints the aching nostalgia of Disney Girls and the cosmic epic of Feel Flows. 

S.N. - "No, I just hate this sort of blues / rock. I find it mind numbingly boring."

So is it the blues that turns you off?

Yes. To me it all sounds the same. Very repetitive and simple. I'm more a baroque man than a rock man :lol

I can dig that. But I don't think I can live without the Stones early redefinition of the blues.

I have always dug the sound of this track, big fat and distorted, and yes it is a big left turn for the Boys sonically.  In the CD book Brian still insists he doesn't like it.

Lyrically it isn't as paranoid as "For What It's Worth" or as cynical as "Feel Like I'm Fixin' to Die Rag"*, but then I was never expecting sociopolitical polemics from Mike or anyone else in this band, so the lyrics go right by me.  Having Mike sing through a megaphone is the genius touch.  Cool ride-out, too.  I actually like the sirens and noise, that is what some of those collegiate protest dins sounded like.  Mr. Desper's note explains much.  Though he said he's saving how he got that fuzzed-out guitar sound for his new book (after telling me I was wrong to assume they just plugged the fuzzboxes directly into the soundboard, which is what 10cc did to copy this effect).

*Little known fact: Country Joe WAS/is a Vietnam vet.  He was stationed there earlier in the 60s, before the big escalation. So he knows whereof he sings.  He wears his own fatigues ("McDonald") performing at Woodstock.

"Surfing and girls were OKAY but there was a war going on."  And this song takes zero political stance.  It makes reference to contemporary issues and riots but that's the end of it.  The only opinion the song gives is to stay away from riots which doesn't make much sense.  For instance, the Kent State massacre began as a peaceful protest until the police got involved.  Four people murdered, several others badly injured?  Whoops!  Guess they should have avoided that.  I'm not saying Mike was being selfish but I don't think he was as well informed as he would like to think he was.  If he was trying to make a statement, he failed.

It kinda sounds like "Trouble Every Day" drained of all bile and meaning and delivered well past it's sell-by date.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=girnJH7tvpM

I wonder if there's a connection.

Starting out with Berkeley Free Speech
and later on at People's Park...

 it's the same across the nation
Black and white discrimination --
Yellin' "You can't understand me!"
'N all that other jazz they hand me
In the papers and TV and
All that mass stupidity

I know we're all fed up
 with useless wars and racial strife
But next time there's a riot,
 you best stay out of sight.

No way to delay
That trouble comin' every day

Music about surfing, with lots of falsetto! :wink

Music with very complex harmonic writing, music with counterpoint. music with beautiful, unpredictable melodies

I always thought Mike's message was clear, he's condemning the cops that used heavy handed tactics at what was meant to be a peaceful protest.

"Four martyrs earned a new degree - The Bachelor of Bullets"

Sounds like a statement to me.

Sorry but it is absolutely obvious that the song is a criticism of trigger happy guards. Blatantly.

I guess Mike would be the first to tell you that this kind of blues/rock was one of the big influences on the band (obviously including the song Riot In Cell Block #9). Of course STD has a "modern" sound but basically it makes total sense to me musically to be done by the boys.
Anyway, if you don't like it or if you don't want to hear this from the Beach Boys that's ok. 

I agree, it's clearly critical of over-reaction of authorities.

Incidentally, im looking at the original Stateside pressing of Surfs Up now, and it lists the last song on side one as Riot In Cell Block Number Nine (Lieber-Stoller)

.

I don't dislike it as much as I used to.  I'll listen to it, now, when in years past it would get skipped.  I think the song sounds a bit clunky/clumsy.  I've never had a big problem with Mike's lyrics.  All-in-all...I can think of worse tracks...but this will always be near my personal bottom.

This sums it up perfectly. Near my personal bottom indeed!

                                                                             "Rock n Roll will always be,
                                                                               It'll go down in history...

It made it to #7 in Boston.

Imagine that!

Cam -  :beer  :kiss

Rockin track, Mike's vocals sound cool, Carl rips on guitar, Dennis pounds the drums, sits perfectly between Disney Girls and Feel Flows.... I have no clue what there's not to like..... other than the annoying sirens.

I personally always saw it in a rather cynical way. This is just them trying to cash in on the current climate. To me it stinks of desperation, like the disco HCTN. I'm just thankful they never made a punk record.

Had you lived through those times, I doubt that you would feel that way. Plus, at that point in their career, at least here in the U.S., there was no cashing in on anything.

Let us hope that any future attempts at social comment are submitted to the appropriate committee for ideological purity of intent before being unleashed upon an unsuspecting public.

I probably would. I'm a naturally cynical person.

Folks like certain aspects of their career. I can understand why some don't like it. A lot of people pigeonhole their singing style and music type and only want that. My biggest issue in here with the song is/was the misunderstanding the meaning of the lyric.

(http://imageshack.us/a/img29/6447/6282424590e4caa0f24dz.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/29/6282424590e4caa0f24dz.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

As this thread degenerates into a Mike Love Hate Fest I'm bailing out.

They were desperately unhip, and trying to be relevant. This is why you're getting the eco songs, the social commentary songs and the coke songs. Its well documented that this album was all about Jack Riely trying to get them relevant again

Mike could change his clothes and politics at the drop of a hat, depending on which way the wind was blowing. Nothing wrong with that, basic survival instincts.

But you'll have to forgive this grumpy old cynic if he doesn't take any socially aware message of Mike Love's  seriously. (Plus I hate the music)


Last thing I want also, but commenting on Mike's ability to change with the times, and adopting social commentary as a career move is hardly an attack is it?  He's had a 50 year career in music and I haven't. Enough said.

A shallow appreciation of SU.

Oh well, I'm obviously a shallow person then  :)

Stephen, that's  bullshit and you know it. It is not like they sang about that stuff and didn't follow through, especially, Mike & Al with ecological concerns. Ok, so they wrote one stinking protest song. At least it concerned a topic going on all too many times. This is the kind of stuff that annoys me where opinion gets in the way fact. You continue to let your opinion make you cynical, when others who lived through it here in the U.S. try to tell you how it was during those times.

I agree with you Steven, all that effort from the group to seem hip, while Brian barely shows up on the album and has the songs people remember.

"Oh well, I'm obviously a shallow person then  Smiley"

I sincerely apologize if I came across hurtfully, Mr. N.

Please believe me when I say that I do not consider you a "shallow person."

In fact, I am in accord with much that you have to say and don't always take the time to signal that.

I will think twice in the future before letting out a shallow remark of my own.

Back to topic: I can't agree in viewing SU as a mere marketing strategy.

What are you talking about? Songs like Feel Flows, Disney Girls and even Long Promised Road are well remembered, even sung by other artists and songs used on soundtracks. You really need think before you write, we readers would surely appreciate it. ;)

No, I honestly meant what I said. But it's not an attack on Mike. It is my opinion that he wanted to stay relevant to keep his career going. Good for him!

And it's well documented that the Surfs Up album was part of Jack Rielly's (successful) campaign to get the band relevant again.

Of course I could well be wrong and Mike could have really been part of the counter culture for two years. Personally though I think SDT is exactly the same as "I'm pickin' up Bush Vibrations" Very calculated.

I don't think every lyric on that album is as contrived as you're making it out to be. I mean Al Jardine was screaming "TOOTHPASTE AND SOAP WILL MAKE OUR OCEANS A BUBBLE BATH!", but years later, he's still into the eco thing and still cares. That Al Jardine, what a guy. <3 <3 <3

But erm, yeah, I don't think that's the only instance of sincerity on the record, either. I'll admit some of it probably is contrived, but I don't think it was ever said that Jack Rieley specifically told them "You gotta write a song about toothpaste and soap making our oceans a bubble bath, you gotta write a song about being poor, you gotta write a song about a college protest" etc.

I was teasing, don't worry.

And I've said much worse to you!

And you need to learn to accept other's viewpoints that aren't your own. I am expressing my thoughts on the subject at hand.

That was not a viewpoint. You used nothing to back your statement up. You wrote it like it was fact. That is your problem; you don't think before you write. if you stated why you felt that way, then maybe I would not come back at you the way I do. You can't blurt stuff out and expect people to understand. Back to English class for you!

It's the 2nd time when I see you posting this picture. Have no idea what this odd gesture means.

I think the lyrics for this song are pandering from ML to get record sales and I wanted to show a picture of a more honest ML. (IMO so I don't get flamed again)

Of course Jack Rieley was trying to get them hip again. That was his offer and what the boys were looking for. But I don't think he was dictating them what to write about. It probably was more of telling them they shouldn't think in formula like hits but write about what comes naturally and what concerns them. * Now, regarding SDT I don't know if Mike really felt that way but I don't have any reason for thinking he didn't. Maybe, since Rieley wasn't as fond of Mike, he felt that he had to come up with something relevant even if his mind was on other stuff like TM. Still, in some way Mike (and the group) must've been concerned with this topic and I think it was only natural that they recorded this. Same with the eco-songs. It's just that before Rieley no one told the Beach Boys that they had grown up and were living in a time when people weren't looking for a utopia in music but for someone to tell it like it is.
IMO



*BTW this is exactly the way Brian and the boys worked also in the surf-years. They did the songs as they came to them (mostly Brian of course) and weren't trying to follow a formula or cliche. They did what came naturally. That's why all those soundalikes never made it; they weren't "honest" (for lack of a better word). And that's also why the nostalgic route that Mike seems to prefer these days is as far away from the Beach Boys' music as can be, even when putting all superficial elements of the "Beach Boys Sound" in a song.

Also, they were not the first band to invent or record Surf or Hot Rod music, either. Were they pandering at the very beginning too? Wow, maybe their whole career has been a fraud. See, I don't get this whole line of thinking in this thread. Why do they have to be first in every thing for their songs to be relevant? The whole point is nonsense. If that were the case, you'd only have a handful of performers, one from each sub-genre who would be relevant. Shoot, every band follows some other band, even the Beatles & Stones were influenced by and playing other peoples music.

As a life long hardcore BB fan that grew up in southern California at the same time as the BB 1st started I never took SDT very seriously.BUT.Casual fans + non fans took Surfs Up lp seriously and it was a popular track.It was like the BB didn't exist  for a few years and suddenly became hip with this lp..It was a stoner lp + very popular to listen to. So was the Holland lp..And the live l,p.. SDT was"nt criticized like it is now.It was of the moment and excepted. Now myself with BB expectations I found it a little forced and I didn't like all the fuzz box on the guitar..I prefer overdrive to fuzz box anyday. All these years later the track is easy to take issue with. But in its day it was fairly well received . Most BB music has a timeless spiritual quality to it..SDT doesn't have it..Maybe that's why it gets picked on..IMHO

Rather a strawman argument there, as that's obviously not what I'm saying. There's a big difference between jumping on a fad at the beginning of your career, and, during a bad patch, chucking a load of different styles at the wall and seeing what sticks. Not that, as I've been saying from the beginning,  there's anything wrong with that.

I'm also not saying the album is a complete marketing sham, but, it's lyrical messages are targeting a particular demographic that I don't think Mike has ever really been a part of.

I love the Surfs Up album. It works really well, except for (me persoanlly) that song.

DrBeachBoy, you know I love you an' all, but you do have a tendancy to put words in peoples mouths and to intentionally misunderstand peoples posts. Read back over my recent contributions to this thread again. At no point did I say there's anything with wrong with a band trying to jump start their career again by appealing to a market which has been lost to them. Above all the Beach Boys are businessmen, which is why they've had such a long career.

Well since Jack was writing the lyrics, and suggesting songs to the group about specific things, in some ways he was telling them what to write about.  In the Tom Nolan Rolling Stone article, Jack tries to get Brian interested in writing a political song 4th of July, which he completely ignores - and of course then he gets Dennis to do it.  He was telling them essentially to write "relevant" of the moment "hip" politically and counter culturally aware songs.

And it worked - without Jack's  guidance they would not have had the resurgence in popularity they had Surf's Up through Holland.  He also "dictated" changes in the stage show, longer sets, not just the hits, dress hipper.  But now the same things that contributed to their popularity surge now seem dated and at times insincere or "posing.". We know that the Beach Boys were far from supporting revolution and Brian's interests were not to be "au courant" but to express emotions of everyday life and universal truths and beauty.

There seems to be an underlying assumption here that the Beach Boys were not much more than a bunch of home-room dorks, in over their heads when commenting on anything beyond their immediate concerns as millionaire pop stars.

I will grant that they are not always the most insightfully articulate. After all, these guys had barely finished high school before they found themselves swept along their remarkable life odyssey. If I want serious analysis of socio-political developments I will probably not be turning to the Beach Boys for insight. No Dylanesque or even Lennonesque word-play coming out of Hawthorne.

Still, there can be no doubt that they were exposed to the full range of contemporary ideas and trends as they travelled the world. Think of the 1968 Maharishi tour, derailed by the murder of MLK. So if their expression is somewhat clumsy there is yet no real reason to believe them insincere.

And, when it comes to the question of the mixing of art and money, the myth of the starving artist as repository of truth is debatable.

And add Carl's conscientious objection to that list as well. A brave act, made even more humble by his "at least I had the money to fight this" remark.

No, I'm not saying for one minute these guys weren't affected by what was going on around them. Who wouldn't be?

But if political commentary was that important to them, why wasn't KTSA, and BB85 full of protest songs? Why just this album, at this time?

This is why I am cynical about it, but not critical. They were fighting for their careers.

As a whole SDT doesn't work for me. The instrumentation is good, track is fine and the fact that it's based on Riot In Cell Block #9 doesn't bother me the slightest.
The lyrics, weird lead vocal processing and siren however are abominable, utterly shite. The SU album definitely needed a rocker, but sadly this was not the one. When Sound Of Free comes out, it will quickly take that spot from SDT.

Sorry, but this sounds like another straw man argument to me.  No one is objecting to the fact that the Beach Boys wanted to be successful and that they needed to reinvent themselves for a new decade, but when the group suddenly gets into a range of explicit political issues that had rarely touched on by them before or since, it's hard not to wonder what was driving that.  I don't blame them for writing songs about surfing and cars early in their career in an attempt to win over a broad audience, but to take on complicated political topics in such a hamfisted manner, at the urging of their manager for the sake of burnishing their image does seem a bit cynical to me.  Would they have felt compelled to pursue this course if they were still scoring hits with more traditional Beach Boys fare?

I can really get behind what you're saying here. Ham-fisted...hmmm...yeah, I guess.

It was quite a time. They were probably better off commenting by indirection.

Well, I think it's a great album, despite any impure motives, real or imagined. The only track I can't stand is SDT, and that's more to do with the musical style than the lyrics. My favourite track, by a looooooong way, is Day In The Life Of A Tree. That, and "Don't Talk", are the only two songs by anyone that make me cry.

SmileBrian used the word pandering, not me. I react to what you all write. At the beginning here, you brought up that the Beach Boys should not record this type of music, pigeonhoing them to just certain types of vocals. You then changed that to not liking R&B as a genre. So you went from stating one thing to meaning another. I took issue with former, but have no issue with the latter. You don't like it, that's cool.

Interesting, the polarization this track accomplishes.

If there is anything we can agree on maybe it's that when this track comes up on the playlist, some of us are apt to turn up the volume, while other turn it off.

Going slightly off tangent here, but...

I personally couldn't care less what Jack Rieley's intentions were or weren't - the results speak for themselves: two great albums, one interesting curio, and a cracking live album. He helped Carl produce the greatest songs of his entire career. He also co-wrote several great songs with Brian and Dennis. He got the Boys selling records again and filling stadiums.

What particuarly annoys me is when people basically say (as AGD does in his book) that Rieley was a bad egg because he lied to the band about his CV and past achievements (or lack thereof). Ok, fair enough had he turned out to be a disaster as their manager then his fibbing would understandably be an issue ('gee, why did they trust that charlatan?') - but he wasn't a disaster: he was a success, and he succeeded in making the band relevant again! So, you know, who cares about his prior track record and whether he did or didn't embellish it somewhat. Besides, who amongst us hasn't told a few porkies on their own CV every now and then...?

I think Jack Rieley is one of the most unfairly maligned persons in Beach Boys history. (Oh, and his lyrics kick ass too!)

Having been along for the ride since the beginning I'd have to say that the Jack Rieley era was the best...no, wait - the Today/Summer Days/Pet Sounds...no, wait again, definitely the classic Surfin...no, I mean the Smiley/Honey...but then there's the...

High schoolers in the 1950's were far and away better educated that those now.  Brian was in college as well as Al and I think Bruce.  Someone admitted them.  The standards were far more rigorous than today.  And, even a "tutored" certificate, was efficient, because it was usually a small group or individualized instruction.  I still credit my high school education for being able to get through college, grad and post grad.  One "study" a week.  It was harder than college.

As for the Maharishi Tour, I held a ticket.  Front row.   And hours before the show, it was cancelled.  (I haven't decided if I'm going to forgive them  :lol ) My sense is that there were two distinct tours going on.  The April one looked like a BB tour. And, the latter in May was Maharishi who reportedly was going to make a movie.  It also appears that the latter was tied to Maharishi and without him, it was a no-go.  (Badman) p.219. Some of his stuff is unreliable.  MLK was killed April 4, 1968.  Those dates appeared to be in the South.  The Maharishi Tour was listed as May 3rd to May 21st.  

Back to the high school preparation.  It would be no stretch for any 1950's or 1960's grad to be quite capable of complex thought and writing.  I don't think Lennon went to college.  And any well-travelled and worldly rock band member had an "in your face" education.  I have little doubt that Mike's SDT lyrics came from a "place of rage" over what he saw, across his country, where the college kids got a pass for military service and could major "basket weaving" to stay out of Nam, whereas those who did not become admitted to college such as Carl, or any auto mechanic or cab driver, would be shipped off.  And, he found a song (melody) that readily lent itself for adaptation.  And, it made Top 10.

It was unfair and frustrating for a double standard for military service to exist.  And, as much as he has written about pleasure filled and those works judged as trite, there is a sort of self-educated (autodidact) quality I'd apply to a lot of his work.  And that which he has used to raise environmental awareness, which was so ahead of its time, it is not even funny.  "Don't Go Near the Water." Mike and Al. No surprise and I'm impressed that those are sincere as well. And TM is now being taught in some schools to combat school violence.  Change takes time. 40 years.  They lost dough on the tour, but won the war as "change agents." Not unlike Pet Sounds'  "long and winding road" journey to recognition.  

Nowadays, Mike (or any of the band) could likely drop his "work" on a college admission desk and be granted credit for his work "in life" which no book or professor could teach.  It is why colleges and universties  recognize and award doctorates (honorary) such as Northeastern did for Brian a number of years ago.  It recognizes autodidact education.  And "credits" innovation and technique in business and the arts.  

And, Jack "inflated" his credentials. That would likely never happen today with the Internet.  Some of that work was already complete when he arrived on the scene.  And they were long already on the college tour circuit. 

Well. Said. But what's. With all. The abruptly short sentences. And full stops.

This is an "informal" message board.  No one who has anything to say should need fear being judged for grammar, spelling or punctuation.  No grades, here.  :lol  We need fearless and spontaneous posters. 

As for the writing, it's the ipad, with fake, virtual keys.  Maybe.    ;)

Have a  :beer

Happy weekend! Summer is here! In the Northern Hemisphere!

We all need smiley brews!!! ;D

Yes, all around!  :beer

[giggle]

I thought I was being pretty consistent, but obviously we've misunderstood each other somewhere. I really feel I've said all I have to say on the matter, so rather than it going in circles, shall we just agree to disagree?  :)

Yeppers! :)

Is that a yes? Or is yeppers an incredulous exclamation?

That an American slang YES.

I share your assessment of the Surf's Up album, but given the sacrifices made by the young Americans who answered the call, I don't know if I'd call Carl's actions particularly "brave".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6kgUnUHNrw

Not a discussion I'm getting involved in, sorry.

While I don't doubt that the soldiers who went to fight showed incredible bravery and sacrifice, the Vietnam war remains the most stupid, wrong-headed and pointless war the US has ever started (yes, even more stupid than Iraq) and Carl was absolutely right to refuse to take part. So I'd say 'principled' and/or 'noble' describes his actions better than 'brave'.

The war was a disaster for the USA and a catastrophe for the SE Asians.

But pretty good for 80's film directors and Smokey Robinson

It really started in the 1950's and that area was part of the established French colonial empire.  Kennedy inherited the mess.  And, was, in part, at least over "communism" and they had a lucrative opium crop. Sound familiar? (Afghanistan)  But, the story is meritorious of study and, yes I agree that it was a bad move.  This would be Sandbox territory.   ;)

Among the best books (I'm not a book reader!) I read, as a kid were by Dr. Tom Dooley who was a physician/humanitarian republished as a trilogy- entitled Three Great Books And, I guess what he did was distill the medical, political, social and economic situation from the vantage point of working as a doctor, in refugee camps.

They sort of served as a translation in lay persons' terms about a world we didn't understand at the time but needed a crash course on, and he had a simple but gripping way of telling the story; a book you just couldn't put down.  I guess he was a real educator.

The Three Great Books are: Deliver Us From Evil , The Edge of Tomorrow, and The Night They Burned the Mountain.

Vietnam: A History by Stanley Karnow is the go to:

http://www.amazon.com/Vietnam-History-Stanley-Karnow/dp/0140265473/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1371993207&sr=1-1&keywords=stanley+karnow+-+vietnam+-+a+history

Oliver Stone got the grunts-eye view note perfect with Platoon.

Francis Ford Coppola the kaleidoscopic insanity.

Stallone's Rambo pix are comic book BS.

While I have no doubt, Karnow did good journalism, Dooley, gave a bird's eye perspective as a "medical service provider" and at some point, had some "gay relationship scandal" thrown his way, which got him kicked out of the Navy.  I never had heard that, and read it just this morning.  I don't know about veracity, and often, when there is a story that the govt. doesn't want to get out, there are sexual misconduct allegations, such as with the wiki guy, Assange. 

At any rate, this guy served the people's medical needs with few or no supplies, and told a compelling story, not just as a story teller (which is what journalists do) but one compelled as an American and doctor/humanitarian, to tell the world about people that were generally unknown to Americans, who were his initial audience, with some degree of transparency. And, his work told of the plight of this nation's people caught between old colonialism and predatory "neighbors" looking to annex the vulnerable nation.

The music nexus (connection) is that there was a Kingston Trio hit, entitled,"Tom Dooley" which was unrelated to the doc, in 1958, at the height of his fame.  A #1 Billboard and is credited with the "folk boom" (Jardine) and is a Grammy HOF awardee. 

Casualties Of War is another quality 'Nam flick, albeit a pretty horrifying one. It's a Brian de Palma film, with Sean Penn and Michael J Fox.

And of course Full Metal Jacket. Kubrick = legend.

I've always been a fan of "Student Demonstration Time". I think it ends side one of the Surf's Up album nicely, and brings a nice hard-core edge to an otherwise dark album.

:) Mark

Having given a fresh listen to SDT today, I can say that it's not quite as bad as made out to be. The lyrics are quite dated, and the music isn't bad but it's pretty much Riot In Cell Block #9.

I can safely say that SDT isn't the worst track off Surf's Up (though it is one of the weaker tracks). That dishonour goes to Take A Load Off Your Feet.
That being said, TALOYF fits Surf's Up better, and SDT would have been much better off as a non-album single.

I dig SDT - mostly for Carl's guitar playing. He usually doesn't get to play like this and it's cool to hear him playing in this style.

Yup that was my favorite part too  :-D

Yeah, Carl's guitar part is brilliant!
Mike's vocals is horrible on the other hand. Very obnoxious and nasal, could have been a whole lot better

Mike's lead was processed to be like that, as through a megaphone.

I've always liked his vocal on the song. I figured it would also be done through a megaphone live, kinda like what Roger Waters does now with Waiting for the Worms.

I dig the song too. It's groovy and adds a bit of variation to the album, in the best possible way.

A song like STP coulda sat there all this time on any CSNY or Buffalo Springfield, or half the rock bands of the era's albums and gone by without much notice, but since this is the Beach Boy's, it's a lightening rod for debate....

I take this as a compliment to The Beach Boys, so all is well....

I happen to love the song.

And they had a band member who refused to fight instead of just singing about it.

Riot in Cell Block 9 would seem to have rolled off the tongue at that time as naturally as an apple falls from the tree. I think it was added to the live set in 1970.  I think they were performing it in France that year - there's a color video on YouTube I think, but am too lazy to double check. Anyway, it must have seemed a natural next step to rework the lyrics. And, if you think those lyrics are outdated I suggest you take a look at the headlines these days.

the song's about staying home altogether..... It does not talk some talk it can't walk.

and the band member who refused to fight plays some rippin' guitar on the track!

all is good.

Riot...

http://youtu.be/Er3CayqRQpA?t=3m52s (http://youtu.be/Er3CayqRQpA?t=3m52s)

Man oh man I love this track and wish the band had explored more hard rock. They certainly could kick ass when required and this song does it for me every time. No way I'd substitute it with anything else.

HEY Thanxx for that!!  It's About Time was Rocking for sure! Thought Riot was just more of a shuffle....

Some quotes from earlier in the thread (anonymised - this isn't meant to be a riposte to anyone in particular):




Case closed, then?  I don't think it is.  And here are some reasons.

I agree that by proclaiming that "we're all fed up with useless wars and racial strife", Mike puts himself firmly on the side of social progress, and "They said the students scared the Guard though the troops were battle-dressed" is a clear denunciation of the Guards' claims.  So yes, it's definitely critical of the authorities; that's a given.  However, if that was the only message that Mike intended for people to take away from the song, then he failed.  After all, he also included the crass "Bachelor of Bullets" line, hardly the most sympathetic lyric ever written, and then the final line ("But next time there's a riot, well, you best stay out of sight") can clearly be interpreted more than one way.  So while we can agree that he's attacking the police / National Guard, his attitude towards the protesters is rather more ambiguous.

But even if you're inclined to dismiss such concerns, the fact remains that "Student Demonstration Time" isn't a manifesto or a poem, it's a song.  And an analysis of the meaning of a song that doesn't engage with its musical content is not any sort of analysis.

Musically, "Student Demonstration Time" makes use of the work of another artist, and to quote from or borrow another artist's work is an act pregnant with meaning.  (Anyone who finds the musical quotes in parts of Smile evocative will surely agree with that.)  So what is the meaning here?  It's notable that Mike didn't choose to rewrite "Blowin' In The Wind" or "We Shall Overcome" or another anthem of social change for his protest song; instead, he set his lyrics to "Riot In Cell Block #9", a novelty R&B song.  To set political lyrics to the tune of a novelty song is not an apolitical act; furthermore, the manner in which "Student Demonstration Time" is executed hardly shies away from the "novelty" angle, with its wisecracking lyrics and shrieking comedy sirens splattered over the top.  And listen to the way Mike sings it!  It's a great vehicle for his voice, and he arguably delivers one of his best ever rock'n'roll vocals, up there with "All I Want To Do": he tears into lines like "The pen is mightier than the sword, but no match for a gun" not with the finger-pointing earnestness of (to pick a pertinent example) Neil Young on "Ohio" but with almost gleeful R&B relish.  Surely that's no way to sound like someone making a serious point - he's enjoying it too much!  And so the musical setting of "Student Demonstration Time" comprehensively undermines any message the lyrics might have had, and Mike must surely have been conscious of that.

(To dig even deeper: If you believe that "Student Demonstration Time" is unambiguously pro-student, consider that in the song it borrows from / invokes, the rioters are prisoners - armed robbers and the like - and thus de facto bad guys.  While it's admittedly pretty unlikely that Mike intended for listeners to draw inferences from that, I'd argue that if you don't want your audience to make unconscious connections between your song and the contents of "Riot In Cell Block #9", there might be better ways of achieving that than rewriting "Riot In Cell Block #9".)

These are reasons why I think that "Student Demonstration Time" sends out mixed messages and leaves Mike's true opinions somewhat murky.  The fact that a number of contributors to this thread have questioned Mike's intentions regarding this song is entirely understandable; they're not misunderstanding it, they're just responding to different aspects of it to the people who can only hear a criticism of the authorities.

(In case it counts for anything: I actually really enjoy this song, and think it gives the Surf's Up album a nice shot in the arm right in the middle, just like "Macbeth" does on John Cale's Paris 1919.)

Glad you like this song. I do, and always found it to have a powerful message.  I think the concept, which was the then-current issue with the police/National Guard - prior to cell phone video was "police brutality" with full battle regalia, shields, tear gas, as against unarmed students, during peace protests.  The "defense" of the police was that "they said that the students scared the Guard" (absolutely propaganda and utter nonsense.) Mike is giving the law enforcement "party line." It would be rare to have it on tape to lend transparency to the brutality. Once events were captured on film, things started to change.

The protesters are powerless.  It is deadly force against the unarmed students, and intolerance for the Bill of Rights' Freedom of Speech and Assocation.   What the students get as credentials, for their "education" is not a Bachelor of Arts, in a civilized college or university experience, but the hard-knocks, "Bachelor of Bullets," exercising their rights  in a free society.

And it employs the sonority of the megaphone, also used as a tool of intimidation to break up the crowds demonstrating.  I find it an unfunny (is that a word?) song, as it brings to mind, events of my college days, during the Vietnam War.  And, I was and am so proud of this song, that my favorite band, took a stand, and didn't turn a "blind eye" to events that drove the vehicle of change.  

And, I think the melody lends itself very well to these lyric concepts.  It is sort of a jolt in the middle of the album.  I agree.
Few tell the relationship as between music and political and peaceful protest, as well as Graham Nash, formerly of the Hollies, later of CSNY.  CNN has Nash in their program The Sixties, British Invasion.  He was a visionary to move musicians to use music as a tool, to be socially responsible and for youth to empower themselves, for example, with "the vote" which did happen quickly, around 1972, so that those who had to serve in Vietnam could at least have the ability to vote. A harsh song, for a harsh era.

Or, alternatively, Mike liked and recalled the song from his youth and decided the melody was ideal to set some new lyrics to.

There's such a thing as overthinking (e.g. the lower case i in the Smile artwork, or the "Surfing Saints" from Cheetah): sometimes the obvious answer is the obvious answer.

Of course there's such a thing as overthinking.  No question about it (though if this site isn't a place where one can safely overthink the Beach Boys, I'd like to know what is).  But there's also such a think as underthinking.  I think that setting lyrics describing events in which real people died to the music of a raucous novelty song and expecting people not to find the end result a bit flippant and unsympathetic might be a good example of underthinking.

But why is it that when Brian incorporates musical allusions into his work (like the quotes from "Gee", "The Old Master Painter" etc in Smile), we credit him with enough musical intelligence to understand that these references will evoke particular feelings and provoke particular responses in an audience (and indeed we might conclude that he consciously chose to embed such allusions into his work for precisely this reason), but when Mike utilises music from another source, we simply shrug and say, "Well, it must just have been a song he liked, probably best not to think too much about it"?  Why don't we hold them to the same standards of artistry?

Respectfully submitted.

My sense is that the very concrete lyrics are through the lens of a bystander.  It isn't flippant in my view, as much as caustic and harsh. They paint a picture rather than invite you to find an interpretation. Artistry is not one-size-fits-all.

It retells a catalogue of past events, while the riots/demonstrations are still ongoing and menacing, with the final caution to "stay out of sight."

Brian also incorporated "Get A Job" into "Night Blooming Jasmine", and also the "Shortenin' Bread" riff into any number of tracks. I kinda doubt there was any deep thought involved there.

Aww, do you not think this sort of thing is ripe for analysis, then?  How disappointing!  To me, there are few things more interesting than why artists make certain musical choices, and what the results of those choices are.  Musical quotes in particular are pregnant with meaning, whether the artists mean for them to be or not!  To dismiss musical decisions because the artists may not have given them conscious consideration (and, in the case of "Student Demonstration Time", I truly believe that a little more consideration might have been in order) is to miss a trick: the decisions are still important, because they impact on the way in which an audience responds to and interprets the music.

And look at the way in which the audience has responded to this song: reading this thread, there simply isn't a consensus.  And I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb, or overthinking things, if I suggest that the differences between the ways in which forum members have interpreted this song might, at least in part, arise from the sort of weird cognitive dissonance that results from the combination of these specific words with that specific music.  (There may be other reasons for the difference of opinion, like the preconceptions that people may hold regarding the motivations of Mike Love, but I'm trying to extend some benefit of the doubt here.)

So... you're investing a song with a meaning that it never had, and which wasn't intended by the composer ? I'd call that shaping the evidence to fit your idee fixee.

I think the lyrics were written to fit the song like " hey we already do riot in cell block 9, let's change the lyrics to fit themes jack Reilly has been telling us to do."

"I know we're all fed up with useless wars and racial strife, but next time there's a riot, well, you best stay out of sight"


I don't see any great mystery here as the author makes a clear statement that, basically, when a riot goes down, for whatever reason, you'd better run fast or the cops will pound your ass.

   "Student Demonstration Time" is, in some respects, more lyrically direct and straightforward than either "Street Fighting Man" or "Revolution."  Lennon didn't know if he was "out" or "in"! (45 rpm single vs WHITE ALBUM version.)

  Those who remove this track from their custom versions of SURF'S UP miss the point. If you remove ANY of the tracks, SURF'S UP is no longer SURF'S UP. You can add but not subtract!

I personally love that the track come rampaging us out of the sweet lull of Disney Girls and those innocent kids with tootsie rolls in their hands who are now getting shot and beaten by cops at demonstrations

 Agreed. SDT has always had solid standing with me.

Never thought of it that way.

Not quite - I'm suggesting that the meaning may not have been consciously intended by the composer.  Unconscious thought processes can be telling, too.

Here's a case in point.  You yourself mentioned Brian's returning to "Shortenin' Bread" as an example of a musical quote that probably doesn't bear all that much examination.  But what was "Shortenin' Bread" to Brian?  It was a song he remembered from his childhood, music that took him back to a particular time and place, that carried with it certain resonances of the sounds that, to coin a phrase, turned him on as a kid.  Fast forward to That Lucky Old Sun, a semi-autobiographical work, and the riff shows up in a song called, of all things, "Goin' Home"!  Was that a conscious or an unconscious association?  Who knows?  But I'm not going to sit back and dismiss it as meaningless.

People have been doing this sort of analysis on serious art music for a lot longer than the Beach Boys have been around.

Interesting that you have such a comprehensive handle on Brian's addiction to the "SB" riff when, unless my memory is failing (and that's entirely possible), I don't recall him ever saying word one about why he likes it so much. You're assuming, no more.

As for "Goin' Home"... your premise somewhat falls down because Scott wrote the lyrics.

Sure, it's speculation.  I don't deny that.  Nothing wrong with putting forward theories, and always happy to retract them if evidence to the contrary emerges.


Well, somebody made the association at some point during the song's creation.  And I'm sure Scott has his own set of ideas and associations about "Shortenin' Bread" too, as do we all.  I don't think there's anything wrong with finding this sort of thing interesting!

Oh, agreed, this sort of speculation is fascinating (I do it all the time... "What If... ?" is a wonderful (and cheap) pastime !) and can be very fruitful (sure didn't do Einstein any harm), but I have to throw a small flag on the play when it's presented as possible/probable/cast-iron fact, as in " It was a song he remembered from his childhood, music that took him back to a particular time and place, that carried with it certain resonances of the sounds that, to coin a phrase, turned him on as a kid". Was it ? You don't know, I don't know... likely only Brian knows. Basic rule of any research - work up from what you have, not down from what you want the answer to be.

I suppose what we're talking about here is the Beach Boys revolutionary street cred back in the day - and by extension today - which, given their "image" must seem preposterous. But again I would argue that that legitimacy is to be found within the cultural rather than political sphere, and that by that metric they stand shoulder to shoulder with the best of their generation.

Ah, but what then specifically is revolutionary in that body of work, particularly within the context of the upheavals of the late 60's?

Again, I would argue in favor of the cultural currents converging on Southern California and thus reflected in the music. I'm thinking especially of Friends here and its reflection of Asian spirituality - and the admonition to duck when the bullets start flying.