The Smiley Smile Message Board

Is there any fan consensus on Jack Rieley's work and influence on the Beach Boys in the 70s?

What was the good, the bad and the ugly? Any final verdict?

Fan consensus? On here? We can't even decide whether we're buying the new boxed set.

I love the Reiley period. I wish the band would get him back now.

He put some life and relevance back into the band.

Rieley was great for the band imo. He sticked mostly with the Wilsons but the other members weren't overlooked. Imo the perfect situation. He loved and understood the music of the band (early years and recent). Of course there were points and happenings that probably weren't as good but all in all I think he was the best thing for the group since Derek Taylor and his departure (and other things) heralded the road downhill for the Beach Boys

I think he was a great collaborator for Brian and Carl, the songs with his name as a co-writer on it are some of my favorites in their catalog though whether that has to do with him is up for debate.  I really like the way the band sounded live at that time, the In Concert album is fantastic.  On the other hand, I think taking the band to Holland (which was probably the biggest decision Rieley made for them) was kind of a pointless and selfish idea that did the band little service.

For me, probably the most interesting, creative period in their history. With all the beach and car material well behind them, they could stretch out a bit with "Feel Flows" being a perfect example of where they were headed. Rieley's "thinking man's" lyrics were a most welcome change as we were moving along with our lives. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the surfin' stuff was fun and all that but it was time to go forward in new directions. Of course he wouldn't be around long because someone else had different ideas about just what the band should be doing. Shame.

Yeah, someone else being the entire band - the decision to fire him was unanimous.

You're correct, RBB. And I agree with you that Mike gets villainized to an extent sometimes that he doesn't deserve. But on the other hand, I think you push back a little too hard. I mean, the facts are it is Mike Love, more than anybody, that turned the group into a somewhat farcial "oldies" group, a la the Four Seasons or The Coasters, rather than a rock institution like The Who or the Rolling Stones (whatever your opinions of those groups, they obviously are taken much more seriously, although that's been changing since the '90s).

His influence was a net positive, but only just. The concepts, both for updating the band's sound and themes, were solid. The lyrics were mostly -- but not all -- terrible. And much of the actual business side was awful.

Positive. Absolutely. Terrible lyrics?  Generally, they get a lot worse after this period and there are people who'd dismiss VDP's as pretentious twaddle. For all - so we're told - that Mike and Al didn't get along with him, this was a great period for both of them.

The lyrics for "The trader" are among the best the Beach Boys ever had imo.

That's definitely true.

I agree. It seems like the concepts were really good. But a lot of the execution didn't work.

Another reason for the firing was due to him staying in Holland and wanting to manage the band from afar.

Mike may have steered the band back towards the oldies, but that also came from the reaction of the fans after the release of Endless Summer. Remember, even after Rieley's departure, they hadn't gone Nostalgia yet. The main guy to blame there is Jim Guercio.

The old axiom "nature abhors a vacuum" applies here. He stepped into a situation that needed a guiding hand. Probably the most pro-active manager the Beach Boys ever had, at least in terms of recorded output. Guercio never managed them did he? I'm thinking he was mostly involved via Caribou and the post Endless Summer shows.

When you think about it, the history of the band's management (post Murry) was mostly concentrated upon the business end, the live act revenue end of the bidniss.

Jack was the right call at the right time. You would have needed a Kissinger to navigate these guys through the difficult times post 15BO.

I think Guercio was managing them in 1974-1976. If he wasn't, then he still had a lot of influence on their career, especially as a touring band.

And I'd think that Jack breathed a sigh of relief to be done with the hornet's nest as well.

I view Reiley's influence as a mixed bag.

He definitely influenced a lot of the lyrics, as if he helped the group graduate from mostly love songs to more sophisticated, and in some cases, interesting topics. It depends on whether you liked those "relevant" topics, but I do think they (the lyrics) sound slightly forced, and the guys never really returned to those subjects again.

As much as I like the albums he was involved with, all of them had room for improvement and seemed to missing "something", not that it was entirely Jack's fault.

I think Jack Reiley's best contribution was getting Brian Wilson to create some of his most quirky, out-there, and deep material. If there was ever a time when I wish Brian would've and could've recorded a solo album, it would've been that 1970-1973 period. I think it would've been incredible.

 

A necessary jackass.

SJS, that is an amazing idea with the only downside being another big what if?? He most likely had more than enough of his own material and still could sing well. Never thought about until now.

Rieley was a fantastic influence on the band, and the negativity some fans feel towards him leaves me genuinely baffled.

His management and influence resulted in the band's critical and commercial standing completely turning around.

He was behind two terrific albums (Surf's Up, Holland), a fascinating but flawed fan favourite (CATP), and the best live album of their career (In Concert).

He co-wrote, amongst others, Long Promised Road, Feel Flows, Trader, A Day In The Life Of A Tree, Steamboat and Funky Pretty.

His lyrics - although much derided - fitted the bands music like a glove, in particularly the songs he co-wrote with Carl, and are very under-rated indeed ('the river's a bed of sweet berries and flowers' may not be pristine poetry however, when sung by Carl, it sounds magical, as Rieley no doubt knew it would).

He got the band to shake up their live act, the result of which was their greatest, most satisfying period performing live.

He favoured the Wilsons above the less-talented members of the group, something which led to Bruce Johnston buggering off. No more sappy schmaltz clogging up their albums? Result!

He introduced Blondie and Ricky to the band's line-up which - no matter how you feel about the duo's song-writing abilities (personally I rate it) - really invigorated the group and their live shows.

He masterminded the trip to the Netherlands. A colossal waste of money? Well, for the record company perhaps, but who cares about them? It resulted in one of the greatest albums of their entire career!

He contributed a perfect lead vocal to ADITLOAT - he can't sing, but his cracked vocals convey the sad lyrics perfectly - and his reading of Mt Vernon is spot-on.

Their album artwork during his period with the group was frequently stunning (to me, Holland has the best front and back cover of their career - an amazing looking record!)

So WIBNTLA was dropped from Surf's Up - and that was Rieley's fault how? Hey, would YOU argue with Dennis Wilson? Thought not. The guy had a tricky bunch of guys he had to pacify and he handled the job well.

So, yeah... Rieley is a GOOD THING!!  

"The lyrics for "The trader" are among the best the Beach Boys ever had imo."

Hence my question mark. Was it Rieley who drafted in Blondie and Ricky or was it Carl (or Al, initially, in another version I've read)?

With the exception of Dennis, the standard of songs by the rest of the group goes pretty much down the pan after Reiley left.

I think that Jack Rieley was a positive influence on The Beach Boys.I actually like his lyrics and I'm not sure why they get branded as twaddle when people fall over themselves to praise Van Dyke Park's lyrics which could also be considered as meaningless nonsense.

This is about as accurate a statement as I've ever read. When people moan about the lyrics to Feel Flows I just think, 'Have you heard the backing track? What should Carl have been singing about over this mysterious-sounding experimental slice of psychedelica - girls and cars?' The lyrics fit absolutely perfectly and it doesn't matter whether they make sense or not - the fact is: they work!

I actually have a question.  On "Feel Flows," the writing credit is (C. Wilson-J. Rieley) but on "Long Promised Road," it's (J. Rieley-C. Wilson).  Would that mean that Rieley actually wrote most of "Long Promised Road"?

Probably still the most underrated of Brian's collaborators. Absolutely love the lyrics he penned for "Tree" and "Mess of Help".

Interesting guy. Tells a good story. Some of them were even true.

He had a good influence I think, but mostly his importance was just another sign of how the Beach Boys have always had weak leadership as a band, and that's ultimately what ended up hurting them.

Though I prefer the post-Pet Sounds, pre-Surf's Up period, I like Reiley and the Reiley-era.

Perhaps ironic, but I think that maybe without him, the group could not have built up the momentum that lead to the 'Endless Summer' revival.

Worth noting is the Rieley period was the only time when Carl was the true leader of the group.

Creatively, I think his influence was sort of emphasizing the arty weirdness, and making it seem more accessible.

Not true at all. Brian, Al, and Mike still all sing about the environment ("Live Let Live", "Don't Fight the Sea" and "Summer In Paradise" all come to mind),

I knew I should've typed "rarely" instead of "never really". :police:

All this discussion is good and fair, but is Jack Reiley really superman?

:lol

It would be great if someone photographed Jack in a "Superman" outfit--it would probably crack Brian up....

I probably missed this point being made in one of the previous posts, but here goes anyway: Jack's influence on Carl's creativity--particularly his songwriting--might well have been his most valuable contribution.

A great collaborater for sure but hardly a great manger. Bruce hated him.

Has "Is Jack Reiley Really Superman" ever been booted?  If not, then could someone, (perhaps AGD if he is in a charitable mood  ;) ) describe what it is like?

"A great collaborater for sure but hardly a great manger. Bruce hated him"

If you read the interviews with Mike and Dennis at the time, Bruce wasn't exactly missed - even though they worked with him during this period and on and off afterwards until he came back fuul time. It was also in this period that he contributed his standout BB song. Remember, as well, that there had been attempts to replace Bruce with Billy Hinsche (at Carl's instigation?)...

So what if he lied? Honestly, what does that matter? Who doesn't tell a few fibs on their CV?

Had he lied and then been an absolute disaster then yes, I would see the problem - but he wasn't a disaster: he was a success! He succeeded in pretty much everything he set out to do with the group; and it's largely thanks to him that we've got Surf's Up, CATP, Holland and In Concert. Surely that completely over-rides any concerns about whether or not he told a few porkies back in the day.... doesn't it?? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain Mike, Dennis and Brian did things back then far worse than tell a few fibs...

Not sure about that. The trip to Holland was farcical for the band members wasn't it? And CATP wasn't a success...

carl always stated that even tho the trip to holland did not make sense in a dollars and cents sorta way, he personally thought it was well worth it for him and glad it happened.

Disney Boy (1985) - I'm a fan, sort of a bystander. Although I like the "Rieley era" - I'd have to qualify that, and, I would analogize his involvement to Landy, in terms of "exceeding the job description." Landy was bought in for medical treatment.  He went beyond that scope.  Rieley, it seems was brought in as a "manager" if I understand correctly.  It seems he is getting songwriting credit.  Does that "exceed the scope?"

Second, "lying matters." People who inflate their "credentials" often are not straightforward in other areas.  And, it is a "given" that a new chief, always targets the most knowledgeable in the organization to "broom them out." Johnston appears to have had "industry credentials" that were "bonafide." That would make him a threat to a new boss, with "inflated credentials." No boss wants an employee or worker smarter than he. If during his,"sabbatical" he wrote a Grammy winning song, guess who the smart one was? And, it appears that he was still doing "under the radar" work for the Band.

Third, was the Band operating from a position of strength?  Carl was under the eye of the Draft Board, still. Was Rieley fair to Al and his work? Was it fair for Brian? Or, did he take a sharp look at the "power base" and "move" accordingly? It looks like classic business organizational behavior to me.  And a very clever "schmoozer."  It's nice to have a "junior year abroad" (I'm still waiting for mine  :lol ) but, at the expense of whom?

Some of that released stuff was already recorded long before Rieley appeared on the scene. Surf's Up was performed solo and live by Brian Wilson in 1967.  Everyone was waiting for its' release.  (For some, more than SMiLE.) The 73/74 live show was and still is tops in my book. Maybe, for some of the Band, the move gave "perspective" in a market  that was friendlier, but, eventually they returned home.  

Ive always wondered why Carl always wanted Billy Hinsce for everything (Besides the fact they were in-laws)
I herd Carl wanted Billy to take Bruces place since '67 i belive.

Wow. Couldn't disagree more. Of course, I wasn't there at the time and I never met the man - but from what I've read, he had a perspective and a motivation that singlehandedly SAVED this band. If he had silent ulterior motives or he embellished the truth, SO WHAT. It's called sales. Everyone tweaks the truth. Everyone lies. Or in the words of Tony Montana - 'I always tell the truth...even when I lie'

Seriously though, I think you're giving way waaaay too much credence to Bruce. A glorified sideman...no more. Attributing some type of industry stature, or 'wisdom' to the likes of Bruce is a joke. Seriously. Come on...

I'm not exactly sure why so many see the Rolling Stones as a "rock institution," especially in comparison to a group like the Beach Boys.  Heck, I've even got doubts about anyone who would elevate The Who to a loftier standing than America's Band.  On the other hand, perhaps my lack of musical sophistication is showing and I'd be money ahead by keeping my ignorance under wraps.  :)

The reason is at least from my vantage point because they influenced a lot of other bands particularly bands from the "second wave" (or third wave depending on how you look at it) of rockers to come out of the decade of the seventies.  Bruce Springsteen, Tom Petty, John Mellencamp, Joe Cocker and others all I believe have cited The Rolling Stones as being major influences on their development as musicians growing up in the sixties.  One of the common threads I tend to pick up on in some of the stories of these artists being fans of The Rolling Stones is that they preferred The Rolling Stones because their music was much more adaptable in concert and in some cases just plain easier to learn than say the music of The Beatles or The Beach Boys.  Lets face it there are not many groups out there than can even adequately replicate Brian Wilson's harmonies on stage or otherwise and I believe both Springsteen and Petty have both stated that as youngsters while they were Beatlemaniacs, they tended to shy away from performing their songs in concert as teenagers or young adults because they found The Beatles' vocals too hard to replicate on stage. 

I think The Rolling Stones basically made rock music more accessible to the layman learning how to become a musician.  You could learn "Satisfaction" or "Paint It Black" and sing those songs without much trouble because at least in my opinion Jagger was never the greatest vocalist to begin with.  So that is where I believe their following started from and also in the early seventies before the "second wave" hit, The Rolling Stones may have been the best live act in the world at that time although some would say The Allmans could've given them a run for their money as there was obviously a period there where everyone for a short while anyhow made that shift trying to sound like The Allmans. 

We don't have to agree.  That is fine. And, I've always felt that "the truth is stranger than fiction, but always more amusing."  I'm trying to be objective with the timeline.  If you've read or seen any of Billy's stuff (Hinsche) you might see that his parents were adamant that he finish college. I suspect he was Draft Material for Uncle Sam, as well.  I think he got out of college in 1974.  And, he has great credentials as well, having been a teen rock star in Dino, Desi and Billy.  

So, I'm not getting the "revisionist" Rieley adoration.  I suspect that he was in the right place at the right time.  And, a move to Holland for Brian was not a good one.  The shows were certainly "big-time" but they were already on the college circuit for some time.  And, his business "model" was not "sustainable over time," especially as the Vietnam War had been winding down, and the "exile" was coming to a close around the bicentennial celebration and realization that the BB's were America's Band.  I also think that Carl was in his "growth spurt" musically, apart from Brian, being on another continent. Each of the brothers was/is a gifted composer.  It was an individual peak in his mid 20's  and out of his brother's shadow. He was the "baby brother" until he wasn't, in Europe.

Falsehood always a strange way of catching up with people, whether it is a politician or movie star or a friend.  They say that "honesty is the best policy."  ;)

I completely disagree with pretty much everything single thing you've just said.

Firstly: you say 'Rieley, it seems was brought in as a "manager" if I understand correctly.  It seems he is getting songwriting credit.  Does that "exceed the scope?" - er, well yes, it does, but... so what? The songs he co-wrote were almost all absolutely brilliant, so where's the problem? Landy 'exceeded his scope' and the results were disastrous, Rieley 'exceeded his scope' and the results were great - exceeding scope is not in and of itself bad. It all depends on the results. Also, he didn't force Carl to co-write with him at gun point you know.
(Oh, and you only use double apostrophes when you're quoting something that someone's said. Just saying...)

Anyway: secondly, I much, much prefer the songs Rieley co-wrote to Bruce's sappy originals, and I don't think Bruce leaving the group was a bad thing at all (and neither did several members of the band at the time either). Yes Bruce won a Grammy for I Write The Songs - that doesn't change the fact that it's a load of gooey sentimental slime, and I'm very pleased indeed it never graced a Beach Boys album. Barry Manilow was welcome to it!
As far as lying goes, I stand by exactly what I said previously: Rieley was directly responsible for spurring the band onto creative and commercial success. Whether or not he told a few porkies to get into a position in which he could achieve this for the band - honestly, who cares...? Unless you're some kind of holier-than-thou Samaritan I fail to see why it's an issue whether someone did or didn't embellish the truth forty years ago.

Thirdly, Rieley - quite rightly - thought the Wilson's were the main creative talent in the Beach Boys and acted accordingly. 'Was he fair to Al?' What, you mean the same Al who produced arguably his finest song-writing moments on Rieley's watch (Lookin' At Tomorrow, California, All This Is That) - that Al do you mean?
The Beach Boys were clearly a very tricky band to handle - all that political infighting, rivalry and power-playing! Rieley did what needed to be done, and he did it well. After he left, it all slowly and surely fell apart.

'It's nice to have a "junior year abroad" (I'm still waiting for mine  :lol ) but, at the expense of whom?'
Well, at the expense of the record company - but, again, who cares? From the article I read in Mojo magazine the band all certainly enjoyed themselves in Holland, in particular Carl, Blondie and Ricky (ok, not Brian admittedly, but he wasn't exactly enjoying himself in California either, or anywhere else for that matter...) The trip to Holland resulted in a brilliant album, one that many fans feel is the groups last real masterpiece. In fact, perhaps if they'd been taken out of their comfort zone a bit more often we might've had a few more Holland's rather than the likes of MIU and KTSA.

So yeah, I don't really understand any of your points at all, sorry (or rather: I don't ''really understand'' any of your ''points'' at all, ''sorry''  :))  

 

That is fine to disagree.  As an American, I understand the position of being once part of a "colonial empire."  Europe was the seat of power when it came to "expansion" as it were, and power was once measured in terms of how much land, natural resources, and "evangelization" of religious systems.  I get (and love) The Trader, and a lot of that era's and look at it as "Carl's era" (within the Rieley years) more than that of Rieley.  I like that an activism of sorts was transparent, as well as Leaving This Town (Fataar/Chaplin/C.Wilson/MLove). Rieley is listed on around five songs.

Carl always gravitated towards the Soul, R&B, Blues influences, so that The Flame inclusion in the BB's band was absolutely no surprise.  Carl was so young when the Band started that, he spent years on the road (before he finished high school ) and that is a tremendous teacher.  He didn't read in a book the Germany had a "wall." He had the opportunity to see it. 

And as for the Grammy - that is an objective fact, and I find Manilow's work brilliant, some of which, was classically inspired, such as "Could it be Magic" was Chopin's Prelude in C minor, Opus 28, Number 2.  I Write the Songs was his biggest hit. Can't argue objectively with that, either. Whether there is a "value judgment" of sappiness, is irrelevant.  Whether Brian was "happy" or not, is not for a non-medical person.  I'm no doctor. But he did go home to CA. Home base for the BB's is not Holland. It is CA. Holland was a "field trip."

There is a lot of Jardine work on Holland as well. (California Saga, The Beaks of Eagles, California) but, I've read that Loop-de-loop ( incredible vocals) was nixed by Rieley.  On his watch? Al is a great songwriter in his own right. And it isn't confined to Rieley's watch. 

And, I still don't like liars.  CV "fibs" are a great way to get fired. 

But, the big question to me, and one I've pondered for over 38 years is - Why did the Beach Boys abandon what they were doing with Reiley, rarely returning to that type of music/lyrics, and go in almost an entirely different direction? It had to be more complex than Endless Summer.

How long were they with Jack Reley, maybe three or four years? After Reiley was fired, could they not have taken what they learned and continued to follow that path? They didn't need Reiley's tutelage anymore. Reiley's "philosophy" wasn't that complex. However, almost overnight it was if they abandoned everything that were doing since 1970 - musically and lyrically. Why?

Brian went from writing things like "Til I Die", "A Day In The Life Of A Tree", and "You Need A Mess Of Help To Stand Alone" to reverting to themes that he had moved on from in 1965. Obviously it was the same with Mike Love. Carl almost stopped writing. And look at Al Jardine. Al's contribution on 15 Big Ones was "Susie Cincinnati" (was that Brian's choice?), his subject matter on MIU was relatively lightweight, he recorded "Lady Lynda" for L.A. (Light Album), I guess "Santa Ana Winds was Reiley-like, but then on Beach Boys 1985 he was back with "Crack At Your Love" and "California Calling". Dennis was the only Beach Boy who stayed progressive.

I wrote in an above post that some of the Reiley material sounded forced, especially the lyrics and themes. Was it forced? I agree that a lot of it was good; did The Beach Boys think it was good? I suppose those Reiley albums had some moderate critical and commercial success. Were The Beach Boys happy with that? Were they satisfied? Why weren't they happy ENOUGH with the musical direction during the Reiley period that they would go down the path to 15 Big Ones, MIU, Keepin' The Summer Alive, and The Beach Boys 1985?

Whenever I think of that transition from the Reiley Era to 15 Big Ones, I can't help but think of that line from "That's Not Me" - I went through all kind of changes, took a look at myself, and said "That's Not Me". Is that what the guys thought about themselves? "I miss my pad and the places I've known". Is that why they went back... 

Rieley was absolutely 100% right to scrap Loop De Loop. The idea that the band - following the commercial catastrophe of Sunflower - would have returned to prominence by releasing a lightweight, throwaway ditty called Loop De Loop is farcical. Yeah it's a fun song, nothing more. They might as well have released Games Two Can Play as a comeback single.
And I'm not saying Rieley was behind Al's finest song-writing moments - however I am saying the pressure Rieley put on the group to think outside the box and up their game directly resulted in Al producing his best work in an effort to compete. Nothing else Al has done since comes close to matching his work during this period. Susie Cincinnati? Lady Lynda? Yeah they're ok, but no 'California'.

You say: 'I Write the Songs was his biggest hit. Can't argue objectively with that, either. Whether there is a "value judgment" of sappiness, is irrelevant'.

NO IT ISN'T! It's completely and utterly relevant. 'I Believe I Can Fly' is R Kelly's biggest hit - it sold millions and millions worldwide! That does not stop it from being absolutely bloody awful and vomit-inducingly cheesy. I wouldn't want my favourite band in the world going anywhere near it. Likewise 'I Write The Songs'. I mean, what exactly are you saying? That you'd rather the Beach Boys had released songs like I Write The Songs rather than songs like Feel Flows?

Quote: 'Home base for the BB's is not Holland. It is CA. Holland was a "field trip."

Yes it was. SO WHAT? Why is that even remotely a problem? Why is it an issue that the Beach Boys didn't record an album in CA? What is so wrong with Holland as a country exactly? The Stones recorded some of their best albums abroad - should they have actually stayed put in London and never ventured overseas either?
I'll say it again: the trip to Holland resulted in a great album, which sold decently at the time, and is now widely considered a classic - so what's your problem?

I think the answer is: MONEY. Something about which Dennis was largely indifferent, hence his continuing progressiveness. I think Carl needed Rieley to spur him on - the evidence speaks for itself. His song-writing rarely, if ever, achieved such heights again, even when he clearly tried. As for Brian, well he deteriorated so badly from 1972 to '76 that who knows what he was thinking. Painful to say, but the lyrics to Love You are clearly those of a disturbed and ill man, and trying to revert to his comfort zone lyrically was probably, well, a comfort.

All I can tell you from my perspective as a lifelong Beach Boy fan (I'm 59), who first saw them at Carnegie Hall in September, 1971, was that beginning with Holland and In Concert, I could now take all of my college doper suitemates (who were fans of The Dead, New Riders, Allman Brothers, Floyd, Yes, KC and Genesis, etc.) with me to see the Boys at all of those great concerts in the college circuit in upstate NY (all noted in Jon and Ian's book, no doubt, which i just ordered!) like Buffalo, Syracuse, Oneonta, Rochester, Cortland, etc. Starting the shows with Hippie Jack standing up there introducing the (funky looking, very unslick) group, one by one (with the added cache of having Blondie and Ricky up there, too), in his own inimitable (and very serious, almost demanding respect) style, gave them an aura of a newly hip group, where lighting up a bone was perfectly apt. Even with all the newfound hipness, some of the same sh*t happened with the "fans", who insisted on yelling out requests during Carl's sublime rendition of Surf's Up (one time, Dennis completely lost it and screamed out "SHUT UP!!!" as loud as he could in the middle of the song - shook everyone up.

As everyone here has pointed out, this carried over during those great shows of the early 70's (saw them with The Kinks, etc.). And I'll never forget picking up Holland in the record store and bringing it back to my dorm, staring at that picture of long haired Brian turning around, looking so intense and angry. It was shocking to see him after all this time, and shocking to see him like that. And the album was a favorite on the floor of my dorm (especially Trader, Steamboat, Only With You, and, yes, Leaving This Town). The change in hipster credentials for fans of my age was palpable...

Disney Boy (1985) - taste is personal as to each individual.  "Cheese" as you describe some music is your opinion. It might not be shared.  And if R. Kelly's song sold a gazillion copies, it only means that it was "pleasing" to the buyers. We don't get to decide what people like.

If you're read this board and my posts, you'll see readily that I play 73/74 in some manner every day!  That would not be in line with your post above.  I like it because of that period, and that includes some great stuff such as that long wailing version of Leaving This Town.  And, I think of Carl and the Passions AND Holland as a single corpus. It was done in Brian's studio. (CATP) A few of Holland were done in the States. And without the inclusion of Sail On Sailor, Reprise would not have released it. Cristgau gave it a C. He gave Wild Honey an A. It ranked #12 in Canada, 20 in the UK, and 36 in the US.

Holland made it to #12 in Canada, 20 in the UK, and 36 in the US. And Sunflower, #29 in the UK, and 151 in the US.  It has some pretty decent stuff.  How much of it is promotion, and how much is timing of the release?  This has been discussed ad nauseum.  The live context became more important with this band.  And there is always the question of "diminishing returns."  And, as between CATP and Holland, about 50% seems to have been recorded in each country.

"Healers" unite people and find ways of bringing out the best in everyone.  They don't encourage division and keeping bandmates apart.  And, the Stones are Europeans.  There is a difference.  There isn't a thing wrong with Holland (the country.) They spent thousands moving sound equipment.  That story is on this forum someplace. 

Those were heady times to be a Beach Boys fan. I am 3 years younger than you and remember things quite the same way. It was same for me with my friends.

''Healers'' unite people and find ways of bringing out the best in everyone' - bloody hell... You must be religious or new age or something right?

Anyway, please read the post by PS above, directly before yours. He hits the nail on the head re what Rieley did for the band, and he has the added advantage of actually having been around at the time to directly witness the results of Rieley's influence.

As for Holland the album: again I'm having difficulty seeing what your exact point is. Holland peaked at #36 in the US. Yes, not exactly stellar, but a vast improvement on Sunflower's #156. Why did it sell so much better? Content and image.
And to say Holland ''has some pretty good stuff on it'' is almost as irritating as when Paul McCartney describes the Beatles as a ''good little band''.

And yes, I know thousands was spent moving equipment to Holland - I just don't understand why you think this is an issue. So what about how much it cost? Look at the results. Look what PS says. It may have been an expensive trip but the results were worth it! Or would you rather the group hadn't gone to Holland in '72, the poor record company had been spared the expense and we didn't have the Holland album, because that genuinely seems to be what you're saying... Otherwise I just can't see what you're actually getting at.
Hey the Beatles trip to India ended in disappointment, but I'm still glad they went as they wrote about half of the White Album there. Would you rather they were spared that subsequent disappointment, even if it meant we were all deprived of Blackbird, Dear Prudence and Back In The USSR? I assume not. The same applies with Steamboat, Trader and Mt Vernon & Fairway. 

Oh, and I Believe I Can Fly is horseshit. Sung by a pervert.

I really enjoy reading all this, some proper discussion going on! Keep it up.

By the way, do we have any actual information on how Rieley possibly mismanaged the band (like, dollars and cents -wise, and aside from the fact that it was pretty expensive to haul all that equipment to Holland, which I think is justified by the end result).

I think I need to scan the interview I did with JFR3 back in summer 1982 for Stomp (at the time he was managing Kool & The Gang). Dated, of course, but some interesting stuff therein.

Holy sh*t. THIRTY-ONE years ago...  :old

Paragraph 3 - sentence 2 reference is to Sunflower, and not Holland.  (good stuff)

"I Believe I can Fly" is your analogy.  

Macca was being modest, in my opinion; He's not a "braggart."

And managers need to not be devisive, in order to motivate a quality product from the team whose leadership they assume. It is where "bully bosses" break things that don't need fixing.  Effective leaders work with people, not against them.  

At the end of the day, he may have been a source of support for Carl, who appears to have blossomed as a writer, there. But, it is Carl's vocals that make those songs.  Another vocalist would not have handled Long Promised Road as well.

(The Real Beach Boy

I really hope they will release a box set one day covering the 1970-1974 years. We need more live shows from that period. They even played songs like Hold On Dear Brother and Here She Comes. Give it to me...now! :D

Andrew: please do scan that interview for us, it would be much appreciated. Regardless of what anyone's "final word" on him may be, Jack is a great character and an articulate fellow who almost invariably has something interesting to say, whether its the whole truth or not. If he hadn't existed, he would have needed to be invented--the BBs history would not be nearly as remarkable without him.

Say what you will about him, but in the short-term, he accomplished what he was hired to do. He helped make the band relevant again in the eyes of the fans and with the rock press & promoters.

In my case, it's mostly because Van Dyke's lyrics never make me wince, gag, or shake my head because they've just clunked like a hobnailed boot dropped into a piano.

I would say there's truth to this. I'm not the biggest fan of VDP's lyrics, but they're much easier to respect. There is a ton of imagery and word play going on and it's simply impressive. With Rieley, he's a fine lyricist, but a lot of times they can be quite preachy and they get on my nerves.

It's similar to the song "It's About Time," I kinda like the instrumentation going on, but once it gets to that middle eight and Carl starts singing about everyone loving each other and being a huge family because that's what the world needs, it makes me hate the song.

Would "It's about time we get together and beat the sh*t out of one another" have worked better for you? ;) Also, are you talking about first listening to it in 1970 or sometime in the not too distant past?

I understand the song is a product of its times, but it still aggravates me. It's not even that I necessarily don't agree, if people worked together more often and helped each other out, things would probably be better in a lot of situations. But, still I find it a tad too much. I don't usually mind the songs that have social aspects, but it's so in my face in this certain song that it's just off-putting to me.

Maybe your revision would have made for more of an entertaining song.  :P

.....

Just picture Carl softly crooning how he wants to beat the sh*t out of you.

I think it works better.

A reply to Filledeplage's last post (it was getting tiresome having to scroll through all our endlessly repeated former quotes)...

Ok...

What your last sentence is meant to mean I honestly cannot fathom. ''The Band [your capital B] brought him ''abroad'' - ''in good faith''.
What does that even mean? Let's try it without the double apostrophes: the Band brought him abroad in good faith. Nope. No idea. I think you're making reference to the fact that after 2+ years of Rieley's (highly successful) management the Beach Boys agreed to go to Holland with him to record one of the greatest albums of their career - but yet again, I'm missing what point it is you're trying to establish...

You say: ''At the end of the day, he may have been a source of support for Carl, who appears to have blossomed as a writer, there. But, it is Carl's vocals that make those songs''.
I disagree. Carl's vocals are great  - as always - however it his vocals and the terrific melodies, the superb production and - yes! - the lyrics which make these songs incredible. I mean, really, is the sole saving grace of Feel Flows Carl's vocals? Really? Because I'd say his voice is so heavily processed that almost anyone could be singing it, and that it's the awesome production/instrumentation - courtesy of Carl - and the crazy, cosmic lyrics - courtesy of Rieley - that make the song was it is (a masterpiece).

''And managers need to not be devisive, in order to motivate a quality product from the team whose leadership they assume. It is where "bully bosses" break things that don't need fixing.  Effective leaders work with people, not against them''.

Ok, fair enough. But aside from Bruce leaving - something which (and this is important!) several members of the band welcomed at the time - all of the band seemed to happily go along with Rieley's (and Carl's) direction for the band, and the results were unarguably positive! Strong albums? Yes. Decent sales? Yes. Reputation restored? Yes. Good material? Yes.  And from all members of the band. So... what is this devisiveness of which you speak? It seems to me that the band was perpetually riven with devisiveness, and this was something which Rieley was momentarily able to quell, but which - upon his departure - returned with a vengeance and basically ruined them. Or what, do you think their late '70's work is superior to their early '70's material?

Oh, and I Believe I Can Fly IS sh*t. It is.

The lyrics to Feel Flows are beyond godawful. The Trader at least attempts to be about something.

I'm guessing "abroad" is a typo for "aboard". Should really be "on board", of course.

Ok. So what lyrics should Carl be singing on the (great) chorus and fade of this mystical, psychedelic track? What fits better than 'white hot glistening shadowy flows'? What particular lyrics better fit Carls' heavily processed vocals over this crazy sounding, far-out track? Perhaps he should be singing about girls and cars... The lyrics were written to fit the track - they fit. It works. Name a better psychedelic song?

I still fail to see his point either way. They brought him in in good faith and... and what? How did he betray this good faith exactly? He co-wrote some tremendous songs? Ooh, what a fucking bastard! He drastically improved their record sales and reputation? What a scoundrel! Honestly, how dare he! What next? Sell-out concerts? Classic albums? The best live album of their career? I mean what a sod!

It's very easy to say quite specifically what Rieley did right, however it seems whenever anyone tries to say what he did wrong they have to resort to vagueness and half-formed opinions and arguments. This speaks volumes, in Rieley's favour. Poor bloke. I bet he reads posts like this and thinks 'Fucking hell, I wish I hadn't bloody bothered...'

Andrew - "aboard" is sort of a nautical metaphor for "on board." - I did laugh - I certainly did not mean "a broad!"  :lol

Disney Boy - 1985
Within the quote - I think it is correct. I'll blame the iPad with a mind of its' own!

And "good faith" could connote a certain "reliance on his then-expressed credentials." Using "The Band," I mean The Beach Boys.

Reasonable minds can differ.  If we all agreed on everything, we'd have a pretty boring forum!

Happy Fourth of July!  :beer

Is that really how this discussion is going to conclude? What a cop out! I'm English - i dont even celebrate 4th of July!!! :)

Well, it seems to me no-one can give a decent well-written non-vague argument as to why exactly Rieley was bad for the group. The merits clearly outweigh any  apparent negatives.

About the best argument i've heard so far is 'Bruce didn't like him'. Well hey, Bruce doesnt like liberals either...

Uh, maybe to you, but to me they were incredible. Songs do not nesessarily always have to be about something-they can embellish the music without always always having to tell a story as is the case with Feel Flows-it was always more of a dreamy sound experience than anything else.

I don't give a sh*t about lyrics for the most part...both songs kick ass.

Naw, i think he means that 'the Band bought him a broad in good faith', but it turned out that he wasn't into that.

I like a manager like i like my Beatles... queering the pitch.  :lol

This is accurate.

Oldsurferdude - I'm with you on this one! Feel Flows is just grand.  ;)

Hey we agree on something!!  :-D

Love Feel Flows - and the Trader. But I prefer Feel Flows

“If God hadn’t intended for us to eat animals he wouldn’t have made them out of meat.” ~Sarah Palin

Presumably she's ok with cannibalism as well then...

Well I've had a feeling that she eats the brains of conservatives.  It would explain a few things, like why they like her.

The Rieley period was alright. I don't think Surf's Up comes even close to Sunflower, but I'll let Rieley off because of his amazing lead vocal on ADITLOAT :P

Rieley was a shyster. However, he worked wonders to improve the BBs image.

IMO He's the best manager the BB's ever had!

I wish he never left. He was great for the BB's, he was manager during one of their best times, and he was around for 3 of their classic albums!

Yeah, Surf's Up as a whole just isn't that strong. In the Rieley period the highlights are incredibly good, like 'Til I Die, Surf's Up, Marcella, etc...but the rest is not always great. Reluctant as he may have been Take Good Care of Your Feet, it still happened.

His Q&A session from a while back was incredibly interesting. The venom in his descriptions of Mike is pretty entertaining, as are his explanations as to why he booted Bruce Johnston.

I am skeptical of everything he says because I don't think he's the most credible man, but I like what he did. He had a vision and a direction to take the band, and tried his best to make it happen for them.

Yet Al maintains that Jack wanted "...Feet" on Surf's Up; Al was the one who didn't expect it to be included on the album.


Reference

Sharp, K. (2000). Alan Jardine: A Beach Boy still riding the waves. Goldmine, (26)15, 14-104.

I'm quoting Jack himself here in an interview from a while back:

"Fourth Of July was set for the album but then fell victim to glaring envy -- so the world got Feet instead"

"Meanwhile, Carl Wilson and I began to write. Long Promised Road began
to be created. Then came the seed for Feel Flows. Til I Die became a
must. Tree was born. Love, Jardine and Johnston began to get testy
about it all. There was a long meeting during which they tried to
force me to march into Mo's office and sell him on Loop. I refused
and Brian Wilson, Dennis Wilson and Carl Wilson backed me up. Love,
sensing that I might be on to something by rejecting the
string-o-hits crap as out of date, suddenly came up with Student
Demonstration Time, which had Carl and I blushing with embarrassment
and which thoroughly disgusted Dennis. Then Jardine demanded that his
Feet song go on the album. Johnston got Tears. When Carl and I
compiled the album running order, most versions had the Wilson songs
on one side and the jive on the other. It was uncool, so we changed
to the running order you know."


Again, while I am skeptical of the truth in his words, it is coming straight from the horses mouth.

From here: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,9651.msg168258.html#msg168258

Three points:

"Tears" isn't on Surf's Up...

Dennis drummed on "SDT"...

Has Jack ever so much as alluded to the existence of "(WIBNT)LA" ?

He has selective amnesia, but the albums they made under his management were great, so I'm in favour

Not that I give much credence to the idea of Dennis being disgusted with SDT, but is it possible that the track was recorded for 'Riot In Cell Block #9', and later used as the track for Mike's new lyrics? Riot had been performed live through most of 1970 and after the first mention of a SDT session that I can see (on your excellent Bellagio site), but SDT seems to have replaced it around the time of the next session referenced for SDT. It's probably unlikely but is it possible?

I chalked that one up to just being a brain fart. He meant Disney Girls I'm sure, but slipped up. If he answered all of those questions in one sitting, I can see how it would have happened.

Dennis named "SDT" as "the last track you'll ever hear me drumming on" in a contemporary interview. Not "Riot".

On page 33 of "The Beach Boys: In their own words," there's a passage from a 1971 interview with Dennis where he says, " And the last song I'll ever play drums on is Riot."

EDIT: NEVERMIND

I think the best role that Jack Reiley filled wasn't so much his environmental influence, but that he served as a collaborator with Brian on some good songs.

It only hit me when I listened to the 1974 interview that was posted a few weeks ago. Brian hadn't recorded much since 1972 in Holland. He didn't sound like he had any plans. He certainly didn't sound inspired. He needed something or someone.

With the exception of collaborating with Mike Love for the M.I.U. album, Brian went from Jack Reiley in 1972 to, when, 1987-88 with Andy Paley without any serious collaborating on a specific project. It would've been interesting if Reiley hung around and continued collaborating with Brian. Who knows what they could've come up with in 1973, 1974, and 1975.

I stand corrected, and gratefully so.

In what context did Dennis speak?  Seems to me he could have been speaking facetiously. ( print the sction of the interview?)

No worries, Andrew :)


Dennis used Riot as a reference point, after which he says he cut his hand, rendering him unable to play the drums until the nerves in his hand had healed properly, he was advised, in three years time. I don't detect any hostility on his part towards the track itself based on the interview.

OK, so one point of my original triad remains - has JFR III ever made so much as a passing reference to "(WIBNT)LA", either at the time or since ? If not, there's got to be a lulu of a reason, given that he's bigged up other Surf's Up tracks which are manifestly inferior.

AGD, do you know how involved the band was in WIBNTLA? For some reason I've always thought of it as something Dennis kept private, but that's really only because of how the song is never mentioned by the band, or folks who were around at the time like Jack Rieley. I have talked to Stanley Shapiro, and what he said seemed to imply that no one around Dennis believed in what he was doing, aside from Brian. Was it that Dennis kept the music he was doing to himself, or that the rest of the band was trying not to be involved with him? There are a lot of stories of the other band members being 'jealous' of his talent, but I've never found that to be a very believable story.

You can hear Brian, Carl and Mike singing on it.  So they were involved to that extent.

Well... Brian & Carl are on bvs, so they knew about it. There's only one documented session (i.e. that I'm aware of: I strongly suspect that when c-man's sessionography hits the net, I'm in for a busy few days. Most excellent !), 5/23/71 at the home studio. So, drums & keyboards were most likely Dennis. Yeah... possible that Mike & Alan knew nothing, but their manager, who was then the lyricist for all three Wilson brothers ?  Hardly likely, IMHYEO.

BTW, and make of this what you will, "SDT" was mixed, using that title, on November 3rd 1970 (although further work was done on 7/23/71).

...YEO = "yet educated opinion"? Call this an "educated guess"! :)

Damn close: "in my humble yet expert opinion".  ;D