The Smiley Smile Message Board

The Beach Boys are easily America's most successful band and the only band to offer the Beatles any real competition in the 1960s. They are indeed, "America's Band", and to me, the greatest band of all time. However, their nearly 60 year long career has been a series of bad career moves. You might say, they achieved their success and scaled those heights IN SPITE OF those bad decisions. It's easy to be clever in hindsight, but I sometimes wonder what could have been... only to end up being grateful for what we've got. Now that they are approaching retirement, or should I say, ripe for retirement, perhaps we could take stock of what went down, which decisions affected them in an adverse way.

My top five bad career moves:

1. Shelving SMiLE all those years.
2. Not appearing at Monterey Pop
3. Releasing "Summer in Paradise"
4. Recording the 7 minute disco version of "Here Comes the Night"
5. Not continuing C-50 after Royal Albert Hall

I keep forgetting what the "C" stands for in C-50 - is it Celebration?

Murray selling the rights for $750K.
Licensing ‘The Beach Boys’ touring rights to Mike in 1998, seemingly forever and for whatever gig he chooses.

...to name a few.

1. Abandoning Smile
2. Rapidly Replacing Brian Wilson with Glen Campbell, Bruce Johnston etc.
3. Rapidly returning to NEVER-ENDING touring after Dennis Wilson's death.
4. Rapidly returning to NEVER-ENDING touring in the current arrangement after Carl Wilson's death.
5. Kokomo

Each of these things continue to cheapen their existence (well, except number one.)

I would argue that not appearing at Monterey was actually a smart move. What were they going to do? Pop on stage in their stripes and rip through Papa-Oom-Mow-Mow for the likes of Hendrix?

1. Agree
2. They didn't have a choice. Brian had a nervous breakdown on the plane in 1964. It freed up Brian to be more creative in the studio.
3. Dennis was the soul of the band, but they did well even after his death. I think they did right to continue, but the never-ending jukebox tour was perhaps not the best way to look after their legacy.
4. Agree
5. Kokomo is fine. It clicks with the audience and is the most popular number in Mike's show.

As for not appearing at Monterey, well, that can be argued. Bruce concluded that it turned them into surfing Doris Days in the minds of the public. They had already long since put the candy-stripes behind them and had enough mature material to take on the best.

Kokomo was probably their best career move of the 1980s. Does it deserve to be their biggest hit ever? Absolutely not. But it's a nice song with very good production.

Brian giving his vote to mike in 1977.

I’d say that was by far one of the worst decisions that he ever made band-wise; it ranks with scrapping SMiLE

I'm not trying to split hairs, but they most certainly were still wearing stripes in '67.

Reference

4) You obviously gave up after 7 minutes, there are another 3 minutes worth  :lol
5) Wembley Arena (the following night) was indeed the last gig

Call me crazy but I love and have always loved the disco version of Here Comes the Night.

Other bad decisions :

-parting ways with Blondie and Ricky in the seventies. I love what those guys brought to the band ;
-letting Bruce wear short shorts all the time ;
-Full House ;
-Baywatch ;
-Crocodile Rock.

This Monday morning quarterbacking is interesting. Here are my two cents. Not sure if they are necessarily both bad career moves. Maybe just bad moves in general.

• Firing Jack Riely when they shouldn't have
• Not forcing Steve Love to fire Rocky Pamplyn when they should have

Not finding a reason to ditch Mike Love before he grabbed more power than he ever should have. There were far better replacements available to the group that would have been a better fit and would have been 10,000 times less trouble than that douchebag.  >:D

Kokomo is an anomaly in the history of the group.  It was a hit in a period when they weren't particularly relevant.  It was a hit despite no Brian involvement.  It was a John Phillips-penned hit when John Phillps was long past penning hits.   And, yes, despite all that, damned if Mike Love & Terry Melcher didn't turn it into something.  On the one hand, it's a harmless ditty that, yes, a lot of fans really like.  During the last BW show I attended around August 2019, an attendee in front of me (early 20-something girl attending with her Boomer mom) yelled out, "Play Kokomo!"  {CRINGE}    On the other hand, I understand and to some extent agree with the argument that the net long-term effect of Kokomo is negative as ML took and ran with its success as a kind of "proof of concept" for cheesiness as the recipe for success.

If we're talking in purely commercial terms, I wouldn't say shelving Smile made that huge a difference. The damage had been done - they failed to follow up on the success of Good Vibrations in a timely manner - the several months before Heroes and Villains was their largest ever gap between releases at that stage. Popular culture was changing very quickly at the time.

I would argue that releasing Add Some Music as the first single from Sunflower is up there. Under-utilising/failing to properly finish and release Dennis compositions in the early 70's is another.

I agree with this - I think it's a pretty revisionist attitude which leads people to believe that the Beach Boys touring act in 1967 would have completely overhauled their setlist and stage presentation if they had played the festival. It's unlikely to me. I think people envision the hipper early 70's version of the band when they picture this scenario, but the reality is that hipper iteration didn't exist yet.

It seems that I am alone with this opinion, but I am glad that they didn't continue as it would have tarnished the wonderful reunion that it was.
They were all still at the top of their game, even Brian was great. After the reunion the detonation started for both Brian and Mike. The best thing with the reunion is that it actually sounds good.

(1) Not releasing Smile in 1967 (I would add not releasing Smile in 72, but would be redundant and not all that much was done)
(2) Ending the Paley sessions (could have been an amazing comeback for them critically and commercially)
(3) Not releasing from the Caribou sessions after Endless Summer (i.e. a double A-Side of It's OK and Good Timin')
(4) Firing Jack Rieley in 1973 (I love the Brian's Back era but one more FM-style album could have helped their image)
(5) Not completing a Brian-led follow-up to Friends (Brian's mental state dictated this, but what could have been)

I know what you mean by follow-up (a literal follow-up directly after Friends), but here is my take on that:

I see Love You being the follow-up to Friends in a series about Brian's life that is made up of the albums Pet Sounds, Friends, Love You, and No Pier Pressure.

Pet Sounds being the start of a young man's (Brian's) life, falling in love, and starting to become an adult. Friends is the adult (Brian) finding a wife, raising a kid, and starting to become more existential as life goes on. And Love You is the parent (Brian) trying hard to be a good father, at the same time being nostalgic of his past and regressing a bit. Then NPP is that adult/child (Brian) as an old man, trying to stay relevant, but also realizing he just likes sitting in his recliner, writing his Last Song.

Those four albums sum up Brian's life and career flawlessly in my opinion. A lot of people don't like some of those albums, whether because of production, songwriting, etc. But I find they are all full of Brian's musical genius, quirks, and internal ideas that make Brian Wilson who he is.

It's fun to listen to those albums in chronological order and see the intellectual evolution of Brian - from young man to old man, you can see how he has changed, and the soundtrack/music to that change is ever-evolving and mind-blowing in many places.

Excellent post and points! I also see NPP as having themes of looking back and in some of the more poignant moments, putting the narrator back in a mindset he had as a young man and saying 50+ years later "how nice would it be to do *this*..." as in Sail Away, first lyric "So many years ago but I remember...". Then he says "I guess you had to be there", that same guy looking back and saying "man, it was great, but if you weren't there you'll never fully understand, however I can tell you about it now".

And it does come full circle from the same narrator saying "wouldn't it be nice if we were older" to open Pet Sounds.

Awesome observation Rab, you made my day and I hope people reading will give those specific albums a listen with that frame of mind and see the connections as you did.

A '72 Smile release is indeed a fascinating what-if.  The group was still in a position to add vocals to the tracks.  Memories were likely still fairly fresh not only with respect to Brian's original concepts but also things like now-missing lyrics.  The tape archive was perhaps more fully intact.     Carl & company did a hell of a job cobbling together Cabin Essence and Surf's Up. What if they *had* cobbled together a whole Smile LP back then?   It certainly may have changed not only the public perception but also the direction of the group.  And yet it very likely would have snuffed out the myth-building that was to come over the next few decades and obviated not only the bootlegs but also BWPS etc.

On the original topic, there are quite a few, actually a laundry list of bad career moves that could fill a long list.

But for me, in my opinion, there is one that stands out above the rest.

When Carl died, the Beach Boys name should have been retired and not offered as a license to a sole original member. That decision alone has done more to divide the fans and followers than perhaps any other single decision in the band's history. If there cannot be a Wilson and a Love and a Jardine on stage performing and being billed as The Beach Boys, there should have been no Beach Boys. Is it any indication of the seriousness of the arrangement in general that the name can be used for live shows but NOT new recordings unless the aforementioned original members are involved? Why is that even a stipulation if it's all and only about generating revenue for the parent company BRI? When you ponder that question, the situation overall starts taking shape and realization sets in that there is more at stake with that name than a franchise to be licensed.

Some issues are about more than making money or appeasement. That's my take and it's been my take since 1998. No Wilsons, no Beach Boys. There were other ways to handle this after Carl's passing.

I was very late to finally accepting Mike's Beach Boys. Finally saw them September of 2019, and it was a great show; all the hits, a few "deep cuts", and a few new songs; but I agree, the name should have been retired when Carl died.
The Beach Boys sure had a strange touring operation for many years. The first was having their leader, Brian, not part of the touring band from 66 onwards. Can you imagine going to see the Kinks in 1966 and Ray Davies is not there? (note: this did happen on one European tour that year - I'm sure someone else remembers the name of his replacement) The Beatles without John Lennon? (and there was that one tour where Jimmy Nicol subbed for Ringo - a situation none of the guys were happy about)
If the bandleader needs some time off to focus on making records, then why can't the band take a break from live shows?
This created a situation where it was seemingly okay for various members to pull a disappearing act - even Mike has done it a couple times - 1970 when Brian filled in for him, and 1990, when Gerry Beckley toured with them. Did Al ever miss a show, or an entire tour? I saw the  Beach Boys at the Puyallup Fair in 1985, and Carl was absent - Brian took his spot, if you can call it that. I think everybody knew back in 1981 when Carl took an extended break from the band to do his solo stuff, but what happened in 1985? They had a new album out, and the highlights of it were mostly Carl's. I was disappointed I never got to hear "It's Gettin' Late" sung live.

Amen. This is exactly why I placed the second on my list:

2. Rapidly Replacing Brian Wilson with Glen Campbell, Bruce Johnston etc.

It set a precedent that is STILL snowballing. It's been a couple years since I've seen Mike and Bruce now, but between 2010-2018 I saw them ten times. Every one of those concerts, I made a point to listen to the folks talking around me, and even talk with some of them about their knowledge of just exactly what and who they are saying. Usually, everyone knows Mike Love is there and Brian Wilson is not...but beyond that, it's hysterically sad. I've had folks after telling me how they grew up with the band, soundtrack to their life blah de blah de blah...ask if any of the Wilsons were on stage that night? Most of the time, no one in their crowd cares - and this is something that has been growing as a result of Brian's rapid replacement in 1965.

On the otherhand, I've seen Brian's band five times between 2013-2018, and everyone was always very in the know of who and what they were seeing. Totally different crowd. I'd bet Brian, Alan, David, and Blondie could all walk clear through the center of a Mike & Bruce concert and not get recognized by one person. Hell, I bet if Mike and Bruce took their ball caps off, they could walk through the crowd and not get recognized either.

I'm gonna vote blowing the reunion album in '95.

All the stars were aligned: Brian was functional, willing, and had great material in the waiting from the Paley sessions: they had A-list record companies and producers with sympathetic aims ready to back the project; and the marketplace had come around to the point where a neo-retro Beach Boys album full of quirky BW originals would have had a warm reception.

This was just a head-slapping missed opportunity and I seem to recall Bruce being unusually blunt (even for him) and frustrated about it at the time.

That's one of the top entries on the list, for sure. I don't know if fans who were too young or just not invested at that specific time would understand how much of a buzz there was from roughly 1993-1996 around this band, and more specific to Brian's re-emergence after ties were cut with Landy, and that included his unreleased work from the 60's.

The buzz was in the right places and with the right people. You would pick up any number of more underground leaning music publications or 'zines and you'd see references being dropped about Brian, Smile, the band in general, etc. And it was not what the touring Beach Boys were doing at that time generating the buzz - Hell, they were still touring with cheerleaders and Hula girls at that time and trying to recapture Kokomo's fluke success. Rather it was like a rediscovery or just a plain old discovery of how great some of this music truly was, both the widely known hits and the bootleg material which started to become more available thanks to more available silverdisc CDR technology and releases that didn't exist in the years prior. Tom Petty was quoted in an interview at the time saying how he drives his family crazy listening to Pet Sounds bootlegs. Billy Corgan was quoted as saying he took inspiration from Smile bootlegs to work on his own ideas with a modular track he was working up. Rivers Cuomo was using production and arranging techniques on that first Weezer "Blue Album" that sounded like he was listening to a lot of Brian's PS and Smile material...and it turned out he was indeed a big fan of BW. Todd Rundgren was reported as being involved in an interactive CD-ROM for the Smile material. Don Was came onboard and was literally all-in with Brian and wanting to bring in the Beach Boys to join the creativity. The band with all surviving members was on Letterman singing the top-ten list, and the crowd went nuts for them. As you said above, major labels, one in particular, came calling when the Beach Boys previously couldn't beg borrow or steal *any* interest from the labels in the 90's.

So what all happened...it literally blew up to where barely any of those traces of "street cred" and industry buzz courtesy of the right people chiming in made it to the public.

Carl nixed new material. The band was invited to hear new tracks Brian was working on, and they literally blew him off and didn't show. Mike seemed into it originally, and was actively writing with Brian again, but then all of that reverted back to dancing girls on stage and doing a horrible rap song featuring Mike basically singing about himself and playing word games with his name on Baywatch...as the newly reunited Beach Boys stood on the beach with Brian wearing black clothes and Chucks watching Stamos play electronic drums in the sand as Mike mugged for the camera. None of the new material was followed through. Rather, Mike went country and thought playing Nashville fan fair events was the way to go. It wasn't. Bruce for one suggested outside producers, along with Carl...none of it worked out. Mike offended one one of them right out of the gate with an off-the-cuff comment.

Blame goes all around, of course. But it's also worth remembering how all of these gaffes and blown opportunities led Brian on a path to the musicians that would surround him for the next 20+ years and led directly to the Smile tour which is still one of the greatest musical accomplishments and tours fans will ever see.

It’s hard to answer the question about Beach Boys career moves, because it seems to assume that the Beach Boys were all of one mind, and one personality – a group of people making either good or bad career decisions for itself as a whole. But that’s not what they were; they were not of one mind.  Most obviously, what might be a good career decision for Brian is not necessarily a good career decision for Mike.  What’s good for Carl in 1972 might not be what’s good for Dennis (or, it might)  "Brian is Back" (in effect, the decision to commercialize and monetize his damaged personality) was good business for the organization, but it was not good for Brian.  Brian coming off the road in late’64/early ‘65 is a good decision for Brian, but was it a good decision for the overall group? In Murry’s letter to Brian in 1965, he is telling him, in so many words, that what Brian is doing (whatever that was) is not good for the group (the family).  That was neither the first nor the last time Brian received that message from somebody in the organization.  Deciding to hire Tony Asher and move forward with Pet Sounds – was that a group decision, or a unilateral decision made by Brian without the group’s knowledge (until they return from Japan)?  I would bet on the latter – because Brian instinctively believed that he would receive push-back if he had made it a group decision and asked for everyone to agree to his writing Rubber Soul-inspired songs with guy from an advertising agency.

Then there’s the idea of “career” – which implicates both musical creativity and development and also putting money in the bank. What’s right in terms of one aspect of the career is not always right for the other.  (see: Brian is Back and a million other examples)

With the Beach Boys, I would say that the bad career moves were made exclusively by the Wilson Brothers.  This is because they were the ones who had options to make “career moves” in the first place. Owing their talent, they at least had the potential (as narrow as options might have been) to evolve and do things in music other than what they ended up doing.  In other words, you can’t really second-guess someone’s moves unless they have such options in the first place.  So I would say that Mike has made no bad career moves – what could they have been? He fastened himself to the brand – for him that seems to have been the right thing.  But for Brian and Dennis, the brand was poison.

Anyway, doing Beach Boys Party at the end of 1965 seems to have been, in hindsight, a very bad career decision - for Brian that is, as a developing artist in commercial medium, at a time during which artistic development in pop was itself somewhat commercial (meaning acceptable)

I agree completely.

Yet it seems that everything is so interconnected in the universe of this band, and I feel this bad decision would never have happened if Murry hadn't sold the publishing for peanuts.

I think that tragically shortsighted action of Murry's led to Mike (and eventually to a lesser degree, maybe Brian too) to feel like they were OWED buckets of more money than they had in their bank accounts. On one hand, I see Mike's Terminator WILL-NOT-STOP-AT-ANY-COST type of attitude about neverending touring as a way to get more acclaim on a personal level (that he also feels cheated for), and also he's just simply doing what he loves.

But I can't help but feel that the urge/compulsion is to get VERY wealthy in a way that he thought he SHOULD have been, and would have been had Murry not done what he did. Which, to some degree, I understand.

But yeah, bad, bad idea to give Mike the sole rights to the name for live shows. Literally selling out the brand name to pad pockets of all who voted to allow it to happen - but at what cost? We all know what cost, as GF sadly described above.

1. Monterey Pop. If only someone had been able to convince them to ditch the striped shirts, play "Pet Sounds" tracks, "Good Vibrations" and tease "Heroes and Villains." A good reception there might have gotten to finish "Smile" -- and kept the group cool in the eyes of the general public.

2. Releasing "Breakaway" and "Celebrate the News" for Capitol. With the relationship shot, Capitol wasn't going to promote it. They should have given them "We're Together Again" and another track for the B-side and saved those two gems for the new album. Maybe Fred Vail is able to get this one on the radio, and replacing "Got to Know the Woman" and either "At My Window" with "Breakaway" and "CTN" turns "Sunflower" into an all-time classic.

3. So many oldies on "15 Big Ones." When the concept of a double-album of oldies and originals died, they should have scrapped most of the oldies, saving them for B-sides and maybe to sprinkle one or two on each successive album. Replace some of them with tracks already done like "San Miguel," "Soulful Old Man Sunshine" and "Loop de Loop," which were done or almost done, would have made them seem like less of an oldies act. (Sure, those songs had been recorded years earlier, but in the pre-internet days, very few people would have known).

4. Disco version of "Here Comes the Night." I don't think the Beach Boys should have been doing disco at all, but even so, they were far too late. Take off that 10 minutes and replace them with a finished "California Feeling" and a couple of those in No. 3, and L.A. is a solid debut for CBS.

5. The 1995 reunion falling apart. Many of us have wondered how Carl could sing on "Summer in Paradise" but think the Wilson-Paley material was too weak.

I can verify that Rivers was heavily into the BBs, or at least PET SOUNDS. The first thing he bought with the Geffen advance was the GV box set; I know because I was there when he brought it home. I can also remember him asking me for BBs recommendations and I suggested SUNFLOWER (which he didn't like).

Hit the nail on the head, here.

I certainly don't think that single songs can be classed as among the BB's top career blunders.  Sure, a lot of people dislike the disco version of HCTN  (I happen to like it) but it can hardly be blamed for any kind of longlasting effect on the band's reputation.  These things are but a drop in the bucket.  And on the topic of single songs, it surprises me that anyone can suggest that Kokomo was a career mistake.  You might not like the song, but it was THE song when it came out and completely brought them into the spotlight for a considerable amount of time.  I mean, it was a phenomenon.  It can hardly be called a bad career move. 

Looking at the bigger picture, I think the tour/license arrangement (and all of the decisions leading up to it, including continuing to tour right after Carl's death) is really THE bad career move.  Sure, they made many missteps and lost opportunities, but nothing failed to put a dent in their status as rock legends and the recognition of Brian as a genius.  However, what Mike has done as a result of having the license truly does threaten the band's image and legacy.  Playing piddly little shows, shilling for very questionable political interests, remaking i.e. destroying beloved songs...all of this slowly chips away at their legacy.  They should be widely recognized as the greatest American band ever but sadly the average listener just sees them as an oldies act, and I really, really think Mike is to blame for that.   

I used to feel this way. And was baffled what Carl was possibly thinking when he pulled the plug on the '95 project.  And then a clip surfaced of Brian the day of one of those sessions.  He was exhibiting severe symptoms of tardive dyskinesia.  He was smoking again (a tobacco cigarette? a joint? the jury was out on that).  Overall, his mental and physical state didn't seem to be the greatest.  I don't know what meds Melinda and his doctors got him off or on, but by '99 on, he was obviously doing much better and it's a shame that Carl wasn't around for all that.  But we see things from the perspective of fans who always want more.  "Sing us the song you're the piano man," as Billy Joel once said.  But back in '95 Carl undoubtedly saw things from the perspective of a brother who simply wanted to see Brian healthy and happy. So when I saw that old of clip of Brian at those '95 sessions, I thought, "Okay, Carl, now I  get it."

Okay, if the Beach Boys were suddenly hip again in that time period, why didn't that translate into strong albums sales for I Just Wasn't Made For These Times and Orange Crate Art? I mean, if we're talking popular in an alternative rock way, an artsy Brian Wilson way, as opposed to a commercial sell out Mike Love way, then those two albums should have attracted the young, hip people who dug the uncommercial side of the Beach Boys.

I've seen that footage, and to me, it was just Brian being real. I would take that Brian, or the Brian we saw in IJWMFTT, over the guy we see now, any day. He had things to say back then - often very insightful or illuminating things. Like the scene where he talks about ego and humour. These days, it's just pulling teeth to get anything quote worthy out of him.

Fair point and the kind of thoughtful perspective I always like to consider.

Those albums weren't full of new originals by Brian; but they did go a long way to "setting the table" of appreciation for Brian and expectation for a new BBs album.

The pop underground zeitgeist was in full flow at this point (source: was there). The timing would have been perfect. However, it's a fair point that such an album might have been a critical success more than a commercial one.

Bruce may have been frustrated by the band not pursuing the deals/producers that he was tied into to some degree (the Virgin deal, bringing in O'Hagan to produce), but Bruce was also not particularly enthusiastic or supportive of Brian or the Brian/Andy Paley material.

Bruce said this to Howie Edelson:

"That was a courtesy to Brian for us to be there. Brian certainly wasn't at any kind of peak in those days, but we respected his history and achievements for us to go and record with him and see what it might sound like. We were just trying to support someone who had been successful and good for us. I think if you use your ears, you'll hear that those tapes don't really lift off. It's fine -- but not fine enough."

Whatever Bruce thought the band should be doing in that era, it doesn't sound like it involved the Paley material.

Thanks for the kind words and for your own observations! I still say that 'Guess You Had To Be There' is one of Brian's finest songs in his entire solo career - and it really is cool how it does bring things full circle by looking back on the band that sometimes made songs about looking forward. So many gems to be found both sonically and lyrically in every one of these albums.

NPP was a great album.

Don't think it has been mentioned before
In the rather hot summer of 1976, the Band spent 12 weeks at No1 in the UK Charts with 20 Golden Greats - So their stock was rather big SO in the Summer of 1977 a number of large gigs were planned in the UK (including Wembley Stadium) only to be pulled at short notice BUT they did appear at the CBS Convention (The Golden Goose) at the Grosvenor Hotel London, ironically the night they were meant to play Wembley
This upset an awful lot of fans

What about signing the 8 million dollar cbs contract in 77(?).  It gave us a run of ok albums like Light album, etc The band was in a horrible place (think tarmac incident) and probably shouldn’t have been recording but obviously they wanted the money so they kept putting out records that had a few good songs but pretty much killed their recording career after the contract was up. What it from 77-85 they had only put out 1 album when they had enough great material? I know miu wasnt on cbs but including that in the list of albums they never made would be a good idea too imho

Well, that's the thing.... *you* (someone who likely has no real skin in the game) will indeed take that Brian... full of pharmacologically-induced tics and spasms, back on the smokes (in one form or another), nervous and agitated and being "real" because why?  Well, because he's cutting some interesting tracks and saying some interesting things, so why the hell not?  And, as a fellow fan, I'm right there with you on some level.  At the same time, if Carl saw the whole thing differently from the perspective not of a fan but of a brother and didn't like what he's seeing and said, "No thanks, I don't want to do this" well, I understand that too because I'd probably feel the same way.

In case people haven’t seen it I believe this is the interview in question
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a1mg5p-49C8

The whole thing's here....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUHUGXDIhz0

Man, I REALLY wish we had footage of Carl doing those guitar overdubs...but it goes from Brian and Mike in the studio, Brian telling Mike how Carl's on his way down...to the Brian interview from later that night, where he talks about how great Carl just played. Wonder if Carl demanded the cameras be turned off while he was there? Can't imagine any other reason for that part to not be on film...

It's possible that for Brian to get into that real creative side of his personality requires going through a bit of personal hell. The times he was at his creative peaks, it sure didn't sound like he was peaceful or happy. So, yeah, I get the idea that "hey, I'd rather be calm and peaceful in my personal life, even if it means I'm not creating life changing works of art". I think that's the struggle a lot of artists go through. So much of the time, their greatest art comes from pain; when things are smooth and easy, the music becomes smooth and easy, too.

That may legit be the most uncomfortable interview I’ve ever seen

There’s an interview from Brian from the time his autobiography was published a few years ago where he says pretty much the exact same thing. He’s then asked if it was all worth it, to which he responds somewhat emphatically “no”.

Yes, Bri looks VERY uncomfortable in his own skin. But I doubt it was the interview per se making him feel that way!

Oh yeah I doubt... I meant it was the most uncomfortable one to *watch*

If you really want to delve into what was going on with Brian at this time in the 90's, there are so many more facets to it than what's been made public, and maybe it's not the right place or time to get into more of those details. But for those who have read deep into this era, there have been glimpses of what else was happening via at least one published article and other things that have gotten out.

I'll just say there was more going on between Brian and Carl in a familial sense than what some in this discussion are putting on the table, and leave it at that. There were tensions that seemingly went back a long time in the history and it seemed to bubble up again, and perhaps stronger, during this era. It's an aspect of the story that may come out in more detail if and when it's decided to explore it more, but not for the current time I guess.

One thing to consider: Brian had just gotten out of an experience with a certifiably wacko doctor who nearly killed him, tried to take the money he had earned, and tried to control every part of his personal, professional, and everyday life. According to Don Was and others who were around him, once the papers were signed and Brian was free to do what he pleased, he said he wanted to get back to making music with the Beach Boys. That's on the record, and not the first time Brian would say this same thing through the years.

Go back to 94-95-96 etc, and find reports of what he was doing with music. Has anyone who was far more involved personally and musically with Brian during this time than Carl reported anything negative when it came to actually making the music? Absolutely not. In fact it was quite the opposite. Even Mike Love was on board and collaborating with Brian one on one in a way they had not done in a long time. Was had assembled a team of session players to see these songs through, Paley was collaborating with Brian and Was and cranking out literally dozens of new songs, Mike was with Brian working on lyrics and reuniting the old Wilson-Love "team" Mike always says he wants to do, and the whole machine was running.

So what happened after all of this activity? It seemed like the main negative vote against most of it was from Carl. And those episodes where Brian invited the band to come hear his new music and they blew him off just add even more bad feelings to the whole scene.

If the implication is that Brian wasn't up for it, whether personally, psychologically, musically, or otherwise, I'd ask if there are any reports of this from those who were actually making the music hands-on personally with Brian. Unless they're just bullshitting everyone, those who were in the studio and writing with him day to day seem to have far more positive reports of it than Carl, or the notion that Carl was worried about Brian's state at the time and putting the kibosh on it out of concern for Brian. It certainly didn't seem to affect him creating music and those around him didn't seem to have the same experience because they were literally cranking out new songs where even Mike was involved in writing.

Again, without going too far into it, I'd suggest there were deeper issues at play between Carl and Brian that may have been more a factor than Carl seeing Brian's state and being concerned as a justification for all of his "no" votes regarding the music and other activities. No matter what one's opinion is of the music itself, and many think there are some gems among the dozens of new songs these guys were writing and recording, the fact is Brian was working with people he trusted and who supported him, and he was doing what he wanted to do, including writing music for the Beach Boys and doing so with his cousin. And Carl seemed to be the main dissenting voice. I don't believe that dissent was coming from brotherly love, but we'll leave it at that.

And also consider how anyone would react after going through what Brian had been through for the past decade or more and suddenly seeing a wide open path to do whatever he wanted to do. The transition for anyone suddenly leaving a day-to-day life you've led for over 10 years, whether it be in the military, a certain career, incarceration, etc is not an easy one. Then factor in the medications, the quack psychology and control Landy had in place...it's like entering a new world. If Brian picked up smoking again, if he wasn't acting like some would think he should...look at what the guy had just gotten out of after a decade-plus of Landy's bullshit. Yet he could still make music, and he was doing just that at this time with people around him supporting him and making it happen.

We certainly can just leave it at that, but from the perspective of the other side of a discussion, "I know you're wrong, but I'm not going to disclose why" isn't the most satisfying way to conclude things.  I truly do think Carl was a mensch and that his motives were guided by brotherly love, but I'm open to persuasion that I'm wrong about that if someone has something. I remember early '90s quotes from Carl along the lines that he just wanted to see Brian healthy and happy and that he didn't care if Brian ever made new music again.  When I read those comments at the time, I took them at face value.  Was I naive to do so?   I remember reading an account that coincided with the Bri-Mel wedding which I believe took place just a few months before the sessions in question.  Carl served as best man, and he made comments along the lines that he'd seen Brian "go through so much."   And, damn, he certainly had, as far as i can tell. It was 30 years of nearly non-stop mental illness, drug abuse, Landy, overeating, meds, unstable behavior, etc. etc.  Does that sound like an easy brother for Carl to have?  And then throw in the fact that your other brother was Denny?

I appreciate the argument that, well, Andy Paley, Don Was, Mike Love et al. seemed to think Brian was more than capable of getting back to work at what he was famous for, so why stop him?  And as a fan, I'm like, 'Yeah, why stop him? More music, please!"  And yet at the same time, I would completely understand it if someone like a Carl or an Audree did think, "Hey, wait a minute, Brian still isn't in a good place physically and mentally and I'm not going to facilitate or encourage more record-making when it's the very thing that, yes, Brian's extraordinarily and uniquely talented at, but has simultaneously nearly destroyed his life."   You know, that's how I likely would have felt if Brian were my family member.  And yet we see hints in this thread that this wasn't the case at all for Carl and that he had ulterior motives that had nothing to do with brotherly love.

Yeah you’re 100% on the money.... I just hate the fact that Brian went through all that, and seeing that clip made me want to take a piss on Landy’s grave

Totally agree 100% with your sentiment Billy
As i said before, I find that video extremely disturbing

I wonder what Al thinks (or thought at the time) about this time period. I think I remember reading here on the board that Al didn’t know about or wasn’t invited to some of the sessions, and I think that is extremely interesting.

I think you maybe thinking about Als involvement on the SIP album where he certainly wasn't involved in the initial sessions (and was indeed suspended from the Band for a period due to his negative attitude)

Yeah, I was wondering about that too.   From having read ML's book, it seems that the mid-'90s were a sort of Love-Jardine "cold war" (which nearly turned into a hot war the day Jackie Love came close to beating Al with a clothes iron).

And speaking of MLs, an interesting side note... The long version of the video features what appears to be the first ever meeting of Mike Love and the man who has played such a crucial role in the BBs' musical archive for more than 3 decades... Mark Linett.   At approximately 49:00, Mark introduces himself to Mike who asks if it's Mark's house that they're at.  I found this particularly interesting, as this was 5+ years after Mark remastered the Capitol catalogue and 2+ years after Mark worked on the "GV - 30 Years" box. 

My own personal opinion (based on various anecdotes I've read over the years) is that Carl was not interested in the artistry of the Beach Boys at this time. The Beach Boys were primarily a commercial entity by the '90s, and Brian has always been an artist at heart. All we need to look at are the things that the commercial entity known as The Beach Boys did release during this time - Summer in Paradise, Stars & Stripes, etc - and Carl was on board with these things. Then look at the things that failed- the Paley tracks, the Baywatch theme, the Sean O'Hagen situation. We know people like Bruce and Mike even seemed to be enthusiastic to some of these things, as you say. I don't believe Al had much of a strong voice in any particular direction honestly.

That really does leave Carl. I'm sure it was more complex than meets the eye. I personally think that it was a combination of things- Carl certainly had more commercial AOR tastes from the '80s on; that is evident in his solo material and side projects. Carl also is quoted by Sean O'Hagen as telling him that the Beach Boys were not capable of generating artistically significant material at that point (I'm paraphrasing because I cannot find this story anywhere online- it was there many years ago). And finally, we should recall that Carl and Dennis were at odds with the 15 Big Ones-era "Brian is back" charade. Of course Carl respected his brother, and supported the completion of Love You. But it's telling that Carl's final kick in the pants to the group - leaving in 1981 - resulted in IMO very MOR records. I think the elephant in the room is that Carl was not particularly sensitive to Brian's musical artistry post-'70s. I don't think we can rule out Carl not wanting to "embarrass" the group and/or Brian by releasing records that had more in common with Love You than anything else the group had released.

The proof is in the pudding- "Soul Searchin'", "Baywatch Nights", "Still a Mystery", etc. sat in the vaults while "Stars & Stripes" were released. And while I would place the blame mostly on what you might call "The Beach Boys Machine"- I don't think this is something we can blame Mike Love for.

As a "hip teenager" in 1995, I can answer this question definitively - because Orange Crate Art and IJWMFTT sounded like Adult Contemporary music. I played Love You and Holland and Smiley Smile for my friends, and they all thought it was ultra cool. The Paley tracks - as produced by Brian and Andy, without potential fiddling with by anyone else like Was, Joe Thomas, etc. - would have been a hip record, 100%. No doubts in my mind at all. But subtlety matters. Brian Wilson is a producer with a rare gift ... water it down by letting others get their hands in the mix, and it doesn't hit it.

In fact, I actually listed IJWMFTT as one of the top 10 records of 1995 in my high school paper - along with an array of alternative/underground-ish records. I believe I wrote: "Even though the record is presented in a sort of Adult Contemporary production, Brian Wilson's songwriting still shines ..." or something.

I can back you up on that, Donny, although for the people I interacted with it was Imagination that brought that to a halt

So, there were TWO periods of Beach Boys sessions in '95, held to record new Wilson-Paley material (there was also the beginning of the S&S sessions, but I'm skipping that for the purpose of this post). The first was in March, when Brian, Mike, and Carl partially recorded (but apparently did not finish) the Baywatch Nights theme (and possibly something called "Grace Of My Heart" for possible submission to the movie of the same name - but it's unclear, to me at least, if that ever actually got put on tape). For whatever reason, Al and Bruce were not invited to participate in the recording that was actually done at this time. I suspect maybe the whole Brian-Mike-Carl dynamic was such - and with the three of them being, or course, flesh and blood family - that the thought was, "Let's see how the three of us get along, and if it works, we'll bring the other two guys in." But things fell apart, whether it be Carl walking out, or perhaps the Baywatch Nights deal falling through prematurely - who knows.

Then, the second series of sessions was in November, where "Soul Searchin'" and "You're Still A Mystery To Me" were completed (the Boys' vocals added to Don Was-produced tracks), but plans to record additional songs scrapped when Carl decided he'd had enough - apparently because he didn't believe in the material strongly enough to continue. Or possibly other Brian-Carl related reasons - again, who knows. But Al and Bruce definitely WERE part of these sessions.

Thanks for the clarification....I’d always thought of them as the same, and that the Baywatch Nights was the end.

I wonder if Carl ever sought or was offered career advice from his father in law (beginning in 1987), crooner Dean Martin, and if so, what Mr. Martin may have suggested.

If comments Brian was making about his brother in 1988-91 are to be believed, I think he was angry with Carl for trying to get Landy out of his life. Now, by the time of the Wilson/Paley or Wilson/Was sessions, Landy was long gone, but is it possible that Brian still harbored some resentment towards Carl for the actions he took to get rid of Landy? Even post separation, Brian sometimes had good things to say about the doctor.
It's also possible that Carl, having seen Brian take up with the wrong people many times in the past, look at his new group of collaborators with some suspicion, like, "are they here because they truly love and respect my brother, or are they just hoping to make a lot of $$$?"
I don't understand the comment that Carl's taste in music in the 80s/90s was very AOR or MOR. If you're talking about the kind of music the group was making after he returned to the group in 1982, only the 1985 album really has his imprint. And this idea that, with Brian in charge, they were suddenly going to be avant garde or something, I don't get that, either. The music Brian was creating in the 90's wasn't left field, off the wall stuff; some of it did have a quirky element to it - Saturday Morning in the City comes to mind - but a lot of it was just classic Brian Wilson songwriting - Gettin' In Over My Head, You're Still a Mystery, Soul Searchin'.
That's something I've puzzled over for  a long time - the idea that Brian was this very "out there" songwriter/producer being held back by a group of square guys. All I can do is look at the stuff that's come out under his name. IJWMFTT, OCA, Imagination, all of those were much more likely to gain airplay on AC radio that underground or college stations. That's a path he's stayed on throughout his solo career.
I'm still waiting for the day when Brian goes on stage in ripped jeans and a baseball cap, and plays angry grunge music. Strap on his old bass guitar, and scream about how "I Love to Hate Mike Love"!  :lol :lol

Just listen to the Wilson-Beckley-Lamm album, and you'll hear where Carl's head was at musically - as nice as it is to hear his voice, it's pretty bland stuff. Almost all of Carl's songs from '79 on are very MOR/AC-ish - sometimes they're quite sublime (e.g. "Where I Belong"), but he's definitely going for a "contemporary" sound (although, by the time of Wilson-Beckley-Lamm, that style really wasn't contemporary anymore).

Brian's stuff since '76, on the other hand - including the mid-'90s work he did with Andy Paley - definitely did NOT fit in with what was considered "mainstream", and I think that's why it didn't interest Carl. Of course it wasn't "grunge", and of course it wasn't "avant-garde" - but it would've gone over very well, I think, with the then-hip Ben Folds Five crowd, y'know?

What happened instead, is the group went the route of what they thought was going to get them hits - going country with a slew of guest stars ('cause it worked for The Eagles), produced by the king of MOR slickness Joe Thomas....and guess what? Brian's camp thought Thomas was just what HE needed to get HIM some solo hits! Unfortunately for both of them, there was just no way either side was going to get the kind of huge commercial success that Michael Bolton or Celine Dion were enjoying, no matter how hard they tried...that ship had sailed. Meanwhile, what little chance they had of ANY kind of "success" (street-cred critical acclaim) was blown when they shelved the Paley stuff and went for the fluff.

Maybe Carl's motivations should be looked at from a slightly askew perspective... if Carl did indeed say that "the BBs were not capable at that time of producing artistically relevant content" or whatnot.... maybe that's not a dig on the BBs.  He was right.  They were not.  Not at all, not even close.  What would make anyone think otherwise, by 1995, if they paid attention to their timeline?
On the other hand, that doesn't mean that Brian Wilson was not capable of creating artistically relevant content.... nor Carl Wilson, frankly... but perhaps this was a moment of realism from Carl at this moment, as someone who was better than probably anyone else at understanding the "big picture" of a 35 year old band of 50-somethings and what could possibly be best for all parties.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I take Carl saying that about "the Beach Boys" as including Brian. Like, he was judging "artistic relevancy" by a standard that included widespread mainstream success (radio-friendly, Grammy-worthy), not "hip cult status".

I don't believe ANY of the Beach Boys were looking at "hip cult status" as a goal for the band. For one thing, hip cult status doesn't pay the bills. What's the difference between a straight pop or rock album that sells 200,000 copies and a hip cult status album that sells 200,000 copies? For you guys, the hippest of the hip, it would be "status, man - people won't laugh at me when i walk down the street; they'll gaze in awe and say 'there goes a f---ing genius!'". For a band with a long history of hit records, it wouldn't mean squat. By the 80's, it had been established that, with our without hit records, the Beach Boys would continue to be a big draw as a touring band. I'm always seeing "Kokomo" referred to as a comeback record for the group, but the truth is, they hadn't been away. They were very visible throughout the 80's - the 4th of July concerts, appearing on various tv shows, touring every year, doing the state fairs, etc. Oldies radio was very big in the 80's and 90's, so you were going to hear their music one way or another, it was everywhere.
I don't believe Brian or Carl or Mike were sitting around listening to college radio stations, trying to find out what was hip. We know what Brian was listening to: Be My Baby.
Artistically expressive? I'm sure Carl felt the Beckley/Lamm/Wilson was artistically expressive. It gave him a chance to deal with some mature themes in his music. Those guys weren't trying to write about "love gained and lost between the ages of 15 and 25". The production style or even the songwriting style may not have appealed to a hip audience, but listen to the words on songs like "I Wish For You", "They're Only Words" or "Like A Brother". That's writing coming from life's experiences.

I don't know the context of Carl's "not capable" remark, and was unfamiliar with it until this thread.  It is pretty much consistent with the overall impression, though, that I gleaned from Carl's various interviews and comments from the late '80s to mid-'90s. Carl loved the music and loved performing for the fans, but at the same time there was also an unmistakable ambivalence about the entire Beach Boys enterprise.  He wasn't seeking super-stardom for the group and wasn't chasing the next hit or trying to compete with anybody.  Let's face it. The man was shouldering more than his share of burdens....  Brian's horrific Landy situation (which ultimately involved courts, lawyers, government agencies, etc.), Dennis' death, an elderly mother, Audree .  Anyone think all that was easy on him?  

Carl was also realistic, maybe too realistic.  Perhaps the most talented pure musician in the group, Carl knew damned well what they had done in their peak period... and how extraordinary that music was and how extraodinarily unlikely anyone, including the BBs themselves, were to reach that plateau again.  I'm a huge fan of Al Jardine, and think he's a thoroughly decent, talented guy, but there's an interview with him from 1994 in which claims that "Under the Boardwalk" on SIP "might be the best thing we've ever done" (that's an exact quote).  I read that at the time, a period when I was first getting into Pet Sounds, Smile, etc., and I thought, "What planet are you living on?  How can a member of a band have such a wrong-headed view of his own band's work?"  Similarly, that was a period when ML was basking in the afterglow of Kokomo and regularly declaring it the best thing the BBs had ever done, etc.     My point is that you never heard this kind of nonsense out of Carl.  He knew that they had done something very special musically that first decade and was under no illusions that they were still operating at that level.

Well it's short-sighted, isn't it? The idea is not chasing some hip-cult status (and I would argue that's exactly what Bruce had in mind with the Sean O'Hagen deal by the way).

I think maybe you're on a tangent that is conflating my points with something else. I'm really talking about the facts here ("proof is in the pudding")- The Beach Boys (including Carl) signed off on and supported records like Still Cruisin', "Problem Child", Summer in Paradise, Stars & Stripes, Status Quo remake, Full House, Home Improvement etc. etc etc ... while at the same time- Brian Wilson was making very "Brian Wilson"-sounding music and this was ultimately not supported to completion by the group- with particularly notable stories surrounding Carl's lack of support.

I'm certainly not indicating that the group was thinking about "hip cred" and that should have been their focus. Several of us are simply pointing out that there was an absolute brew of newfound respect and admiration growing at this time for Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys are legitimate artists. This was among the kind of hip/underground "alternative" scene of the '90s.

No one is saying the group should have catered to this scene (though clearly, they were aware of it to some degree w/ Sean O'Hagen etc.). What I am saying is had they supported Brian Wilson as a leader, it's quite possible (even likely IMO) that the resulting work would have been critically appraised in it's time, and I believe would have been significantly more commercially successful as a result of the "buzz". What I think is probably indisputably true is that the Paley material has aged well, and everything the group actually did release has not. And it's not a case of hindsight being 20/20- those of use who were there at the time knew what was going on, even as a teenager in my case. I read about the Paley stuff as early as maybe 1997(?)- Dominique Priore was raving about it- and finally heard in around 1999. I thought Imagination was terrible and was so disappointed. Stars & Stripes was an absolute joke.

And I think we are kidding ourselves if we don't accept that there seems to be a lot to suggest the reason for these things playing out as they did had a lot to do with Carl. My personal take is not that he was driving the bad stuff- but by this time, he probably considered the Beach Boys to be a commercial enterprise, not an artistic one. And the commercial decisions made were done so with regard to short-tern, tried and true formulas which were out of date by the time the group did it.

^ YES. I think you and I are really on the same page here, and I also think it's fairly obvious.

I'm not trying to paint Carl as a villain in this- but I do think that he is probably one of the biggest reasons that the Beach Boys didn't make one last, great record. And who are we to say we know better than Carl? Maybe it would not have turned out well.

One also wonders- was this a fear of success too? I personally think Carl probably was fine w Stars & Stripes, Problem Child, etc ... because as you say, he knew no one was going to compare these things to Pet Sounds, or even Holland. But the minute you have a new "Brian is Back" ... you're right back to 15 Big Ones Part II. I really do think that Carl was simply not interested in going there, and probably held Brian to a different standard than Mike and the current Beach Boys. So when he says the Paley stuff is not strong enough- he wasn't comparing it to Summer in Paradise ... he was comparing it to Brian and the group's best work perhaps?

Things to think about anyway.

I think you hit it on the head there, particularly that Carl was not looking at the Beach Boys as a place to express himself artistically in the 90's. That's why we got the BLW project - that was a place where he could create and not worry about Mike or somebody saying it wasn't commercial enough.

For whatever reason Carl had given up on them by the early 90s. He resisted doing the 93 tour because he didn’t think they would sound good .Al pushed that one . Al and Brian were on board with a Pet Sounds anniversary tour in 96 that he also nixed because they couldn’t  handle it vocally . He had a ton of songs from the 70s that he never performed ever again for some reason only he would know . Heck Al pushed him to do SOS in 95. He was satisfied singing GOK , GV, and Darlin and calling it a night every tour .

Hawaiian shirts on stage
Shorts on stage
Cheerleaders
Full House Episodes
Bruce switching from bass/keyboards to clapper/mic technician

I agree. Also, it seems to me that, perhaps not right away, but over the years Carl was affected by Dennis's death more than he ever let on. He not only lost his brother, but he lost Dennis's creative spark, and he lost the person who was his creative ally in the band when the urge to become an oldies band was so very strong. Perhaps Carl's priorities shifted, and he realized that the band wasn't the be all and end all of his life.

That.
After all the years of looking out for his brothers, taking care of his mother in his old age, I think he just wanted things in the band to be as calm and stress-free as possible. He could have offered any of his BLW songs to the Beach Boys, but would have had to hear Mike and Terry complain that they weren't commercial enough, so why bother?
After all Brian had been through, I would not have wanted to book a tour performing an album where most of the leads were his.

I think that's dead-on accurate.  As fans, it's sometimes hard to see things the way that the band and their families see them.   From all accounts, Carl was a sensitive, thoughtful, good-hearted guy.  How could he not have been affected by everything that happened to Dennis and Brian?   This thing called the Beach Boys had given them fame and fortune... had entertained and brought joy and inspiration to millions of people world wide.... had produced an incomparable body work that would change the history of popular music.... and yet had destroyed or nearly destroyed them all.  

I've mentioned it before on here, and I wish I had retained a copy or a citation, but there was an early 1990s newspaper article in one of the Oregon newspapers in which Milton Love had some interesting things to say about the group.  On the one hand, he was proud of what the guys had accomplished, but on the whole he was ambivalent about the phenomenon of "The Beach Boys" and the strife and damage the enterprise had caused among and to his sons and nephews.    He made a comment along the lines that the only one who had survived the Beach Boys relatively unscathed was Al Jardine.    

IIRC there's a TV interview with Carl from the late 1980s where the host asks him about their new song and he can't help but look a bit embarrassed as he replies, "Still Cruisin' after all these years".

Forgive for not finishing reading through the entire thread yet so some of this may be redundant.


1) At some point in the 1970's, not using an outside producer (all the guys were good-- but even the Beatles had George Martin.)
2) Not releasing an original album within in a year of Kokomo
3) Giving away two of the biggest hits of the 70's to other artists-- You are so Beautiful (debatable, I know) and I write the songs
4) Not playing Montarey Pop Fest
5) Not releasing Smile earlier

Speaking of Carl, a nice change of pace story giving his 1965-1973 BB lead vocals the spotlight from UDiscoverMusic.....


Carl Wilson’s Best Beach Boys Songs: 10 Essential Tracks (https://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/best-carl-wilson-beach-boys-songs/[/url)

Video from NYE at Mar-a-Lago

It looks like Mike and Dean Torrence  performing Kokomo (:31 into the video)

https://youtu.be/RRwtDKguyso?t=31

Dammit Mike... ::)

Not a mask worn in sight. Did Mike get tested before performing? Did anyone in his band? Like for f***’s sake, politics aside, this is not safe!

More

https://consequenceofsound.net/2021/01/vanilla-ice-beach-boys-mar-a-lago-nye/?fbclid=IwAR3PBLkqx2IC4Aj97mI5qvqqQU8spZB9nY5QwCPxGgaaqQ_bpZbuEVD-KH8

1. Abandoning SMiLE

2. Allowing Mike to have the band's name under licence.

3. Focusing on covers for the 1976 'reunion' album (15 Big Ones).

4. Allowing Landy such control over Brian for so long.

5. Tube socks on stage - 'nuff said!

Mike can't even resist literally touching the crowd. He's still bumping fists from the stage.

Well Florida has been pretty good in dealing with corona as compared to New York and California where they are so strict on masks. Weird eh?

Damn. I used to like Dean Torrence.

“Florida breaks record with 17,000+ coronavirus cases in one day“
https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/12/31/florida-breaks-record-with-more-than-17000-coronavirus-cases-reported-in-one-day/

1/20/2021....

Well isn't that something. So why is California where we can see people walking alone on the beach and driving alone wearing masks, on huge lockdown still soaring then? Testing? No testing?

Because it's a huge population and it's not a total lockdown. Keeping stores and restaurants open and allowing people to eat indoors is not helping at all. I'm not taking the sides of any states or governors, they're all doing terribly right now. I live in New Jersey and we were doing great in May/June but then Murphy lifted restrictions and we're right back where we started. And I absolutely blame him for that. This isn't a partisan thing. Health experts were warning this would happen since it started and nobody listened to them.

That's a really good point.  I hate these off-topic discussions, but I'm going to be a hypocrite and add my 2 cents.  I was on a Zoom call with a bunch of friends from all over the USA before Christmas, and everyone was ranting about their mayors/governors etc. with much blame being cast around.   I just have to shake my head.  Okay, I'm sure some misguided decisions have been made by nearly everyone at all levels, but you know what?  When you're dealing with a highly contagious disease in a population that doesn't have herd immunity, there are no easy perfect solutions. Anyone who claims that they know how this pandemic could have been easily dealt with is a liar or a fool.  Every time someone says, "Yeah, well X country (Sweden, Japan, wherever) did Y or didn't do Z, and they're not having all these problems," next thing you know those countries ARE having all the same problems.  With a  highly contagious disease in a population that doesn't have herd immunity, there is no real possibility of progress. No matter what happens, you're basically back at Day Zero every day. Outbreaks can grow exponentially at any point.  Until there's herd immunity due to vaccines or prior infections, no one is going to wave a magic wand and solve this.