The Smiley Smile Message Board

Discuss, review and rate Smile: The Story of Brian Wilson's Lost Masterpiece, released March 10, 2005.

(http://www.smileysmile.net/images/albums/smilemasterpiecebook.jpg) (http://www.bestwebbuys.com/1860746276)

I didn't buy it due to the trashing some folks gave it here on the message boards.  They say too much time is wasted talking about the music scene at that time.. and some claims are not backed up with evidence/sources.

This book contains a rather sensational extract from a book by Chuck Negron (of Three Dog Night) featuring Brian being bullied and humiliated by the other Beach Boys during a Redwood session.  I know the name Priore (like that of Leaf) are swear words to some people but how reliable is Negron's account?  Should we believe it and if not, why not?

Yeah, that whole bit about Redwood is very interesting.  I wonder if any tapes exist?

The book is a HUGE disappointment. After his great Look... boo I was hoping for the definitive story. It is OK if you know nothing, but it does make some very big unsubstantiated (and in some cases plain wrong) claims which undermine him when he reaches at other points. AND he virtually ignores the second coming.

BIG missed opportunity.

Paints a nice picture of the whole California music scene, but it just has too many errors and things that are probably assumptions for me to get behind it. Unfortunatly, it's sort of being thought of as the last word on Smile.

I won't pick it up again.

Beg to differ, but it's decidedly NOT OK if you know nothing, as it states personal theories and unsuubstantiated gossip (and in at least one case an outright lie) as fact. There's some good stuff in there, but on the whole, the sloppy research and inflexible attitude of the author undermines any claims to be the last word.

I couldn't agree more, and that comes from an old Dom acolyte and acquaintence. Very disappointing.

 There's good and bad stuff in it for sure. And Dom is certainly extremely polarizing.

The facts (i.e chart stats) are played with loosely. Some of his stuff has been disproven since it came out.

But even Dom's detarctors have to admit this: he is brilliant at painting a scene of mid 60's Los Angeles. It's popular to think of Brian as an artist who created (even at his peak) in a vacuum, but Priore shows that Brian was influnced by the era and that scene.  Another thing he did was give opportunities for those in the SMiLE-era who have never spoken about their involvement.  - Van Dyke Parks and Danny Hutton.  whether one  agrees with their take or not, these are two guys who desvered to have their side told.

It's not definitive, but it's not garbage either. Come to think of it, I don't think anybody is going to be able to paint a definitive picture of the SMiLE era.

'Scuse me ? Did you really say Van Dyke had never spoken about his involvement in Smile before ?

I'm speechless.

Let me rephrase that. (And I apologize for forgetting Beautiful Dreamer :o )

The stuff he gave Dom seemed to be more "detailed" , for lack of a better word.   "This is what we did and this is how we did it". For better (he was there and he explains his lyrics!) and for worse(claiming that the Beatles stole SMiLE) , Dom gives him a forum to vent his spleen.  In fact, prior to 2004, I don't really recall reading anything of any great length from Parks about SMiLE.  The most in depth interviews on the subject came from Anderle, Mike Vosse.  Certainly not from Parks (although if there are some from pre-2004, I'd love to see them) and certainly not from Brian "I burned the tapes" Wilson.

where may i post a question on the most fierce Beach boys concert on-stage fracases??
example, Carl's drunkenness, mike swinging at brian, dennis kicking his drums at Mike,
Alan giving a dirty look to Brian, steve love calling Blondie C. a n*****, etc.??? you know i mean.

the true dirt. lets see these in a made4 tv film bio!!!

Not in this forum!

ok....where then?

must we mask the true sin nature just to hear endless summer once more from the top??
seriously, it amuses me when i think of these all american "boys" having real problems and deal w/ them in less than the PC ways they're all "supposed" to behave.

we can't seem to get enough of hearing the RHONDA sessions w/ ol' Daddy Murray?! geez, whydoya think?

i'ts sad but real & true..alot more than their 80's republican do-gooder postuering.

these are the basis of what Oliver Stone should found a "true-life"biopic
AN AMERICAN FAMILY indeed!!! i can see the caption line now.....
                                     ENVY, GREED, ,DEPRESSION, INCEST....AMERICA'S BAND
                                                                                                                          THE BEACH BOYS

....ps- Start in 1967, After Pet Sounds "faliure"!!!!!
          when should this film end, though, pleae somebody humour me...lets discuss

Bull-foda-sh*t.

"It's Ok"

I'd be interested in your opinion on the Chuck Negron book extract which depicts Brian being subjected to some rather unpleasant treatment by the rest of the band durin the Redwood period.  Complete lies, or what?  And if so, what would make one come to that conclusion?

I read that when it came out. That's the only place anyone has ever mentioned anything like that, which of course doesn't invalidate it. My Three Dog Night knowledge is lamentable. Could have happend as described although A) doesn't sound like Carl at all and B) someone better qualifed pointed out the session dates don't jibe. I'm preserving an open mind... but it's funny a close friend like Danny Hutton hasn't, to my knowledge (corrections welcomed, usual address), said word one about it on some 39-odd years.

However, the claim in Priore's book that the Beatles covertly heard Smile[/i] tapes on a visit to LA - and to be fair he's only going on what Van Dyke told him - totally falls apart with the most cursory internet research. As described, no way it could have happened (and on being questioned by a friend about it, Van Dyke merely stated that he based this claim on both Smile and Pepper utilising sound effects). Any responsible author would have taken the half-hour (tops) to check a few Beatles sites and do a rough timeline. No-one was in the right place at the right time until, at best, early 1967 - when Pepper[/i] was being mixed.
 
Another example - Priore claims that the reason we stopped playing Smile at the Stomp Convention in the early/mid 80s was because we were leaned on by BRI. As one who back then was helping out at the gig and preparing the tapes for playing, I can unequivically state that this is totally untrue. Why did we stop playing the tapes ? Because by late 1984, pretty much everyone had them anyway.

The best, the only foundation for any book like this, is facts. Not what you've heard, not what you want to hear, not what you think, not what you want to think - checkable, hard facts.

Or how about his claim that Dennis Wilson is not audible on Pet Sounds?  When he clearly has a vocal on WIBN and plays drums on That's Not Me?

The whole description of how "WIBN" was recorded (viz, in mono) had me rolling on the floor.

The book has some great contextural material (I'm told it originated in his as-yet unpublished book on Sunset Strip - no matter, it's good stuff) and some excellent and heart-felt writing but, speaking personally, when something as simple as the chart position for Spirit Of America is stated inaccurately, the veracity of the more arcane stuff becomes debateable.

One thing I want to point out here that I've heard raised elsewhere: Priore has been given a hard time for stating that Oppenheim captured on film a spat between Mike & Brian about the lyrics to "Surf's Up" when no such footage exists. In defence of a fellow author and BB commentator, his book was published some time before Oppenheim's film reel notes were unearthed and put up on the old Smile Shop MB. The guy's not clairvoyant.

That's true. But it was also the first time such a claim was made, and unless Van Dyke made another unsubstantiated claim, Priore's only source is one highly ambiguous sentence from Jules Siegel. "Gone very badly" can mean anything. The only sensible thing to do would have been to double-check that his interpretation was right, and considering that Siegel's e-mail address has been on the net since the 90s it wasn't a hard thing to do. And when asked by Smile Shopper Jasper, Siegel couldn't remember any fight, of course. Such light-hearted use of unsubstantiated does not a good history book make.

Just because it wasn't filmed, doesn't mean it never took place.

I asked  a certain BB scholar about those Inside Pop reels and the arguments when Dan Lega posted his research. ,  I was told that the arguments happened "behind closed doors" as it were -  there was no chance that any strife was going to be captured for posterity.

Nope, can't disagree with you - but in the book, it's stated as being captured on film, something we now know to be in error. Hopefully, any further editions will correct this.

Yeah, Dom does deserve a wet noodle lash for that one!

It adds fuel to many fires that are based on distorted facts.

I think the Beatles thing would have been much less of an issue if Dom had made it more clear that this was Van Dyke's take on the situation. Clearly, it's Parks speaking, but . . .

To me, it's an interesting window on Van Dyke . . . who was around to absorb some of Brian's growing paranoia at the time. It would make sense for VDP to reflect some of that sentiment.

The Devil's always in the details (no matter what your subject is) . . . but the wider context is necessary, too . . . because nothing happens in a vacuum. The minutiae is not as powerful without proper context . . . especially when you're dealing with a mass-market kind of audience (readers who are not as well-versed as diehard fans).

In my view, Dom's SMiLE book was never intended or marketed as a SMiLE sessionography, or complete reconstruction of the original recording sequence, or anything like that . . .

Plus, that erroneous "official" label that got stuck on there at an early stage in the game (against Dom's wishes) before the book came out . . . probably helped lead people to expect something different from it.

That said, it's the littlest of errors that slip through that are always the most annoying . . . like incorrect chart positions, and things of that nature. Those can be sloppiness, or typos . . . or, worst of all, the result of errors introduced by an editor (after the fact).

I know . . . because stuff like that has happened to me . . . and truthfully, to just about anyone who has published anything. That latter scenario is a true nightmare. When it comes to publishing, there's a lot of potential for imperfection, regardless of your knowledge level.

The best thing to do is try DOUBLY hard to minimize anything that you could possibly get wrong on your own . . . because there's nothing like having someone else screw up your work for you . . .  (I'm not saying that's what happened in Dom's case, I just know it can be a reality for writers).

M.

I've enjoyed the book.  As AGD pointed out, there is some good, if not always factual, information on the context of things such as the scene in LA at the time of SMiLE.

And if DP is writing a book about the Whiskey era on Sunset Strip I'd love to read it.


There are some tidbits of information in this book that one might not read elsewhere and on that basis I woul recommend it to other BB fans....to be taken with a grain of salt.

Reading it and disapointed. I like Domenic's guts but his political and personal feelings make this a all too subjective book that lacks the factual detail he could have provided.

I thought the book was okay. Like another poster has said there are lengthy quotes from Parks which are the parts I found most enjoyable. Though I didn't notice some of those incorrect 'facts' some of you mentioned, I can totally appreciate how that could annoy people and is going to harm the integrity of the book.

The main problem I had was about half way or three quarters of the way through when the tone of the book becomes a lot more defensive and aggressive. It makes sense that Priore gives some personal experiences to Smile and how he is linked to it but maybe he does let his personal feelings get in the way of an objective review.

As flawed as the information in this book might be, I still enjoy reading it. I had never heard of some of the bands Priore mentioned in the book, such as Love, the Seeds, the Apples in Stereo, etc. etc. Reading about how Love and other LA bands actually started the psychedelic movement as opposed to the Frisco druggies made me want to get into their music. Forever Changes is now one of my top 10 favorite albums.

And I actually like Priore's bias, probably because I agree with him. No, he shouldn't be stretching the truth or misleading readers. But I do agree with him about how we should've had SMiLE back in '67 and that the world was actually ready for it. I like how he portrays himself and other SMiLE-o-philes as heroes fighting against the anti-SMiLE, anti-progressive party line of "The Beach Boys, Inc.". Whether Priore's right or not, that's arguable. But you've got to give him credit for telling a fascinating story (in my opinion, anyway).


The whole thing about the Beatles listening to the SMiLE tapes, I thought it was true when I first read it, but a simple re-read made me notice the quotes being Van Dyke's and that it was just speculation.

Mike has offerd his version saying that it was Brian who didn't want to put out the Redwood stuff. He says Brian felt they didn't do the vocals good enough. The Redwood stuff against Mike started in the Todd Gold book. I don't know I suppose they would have wanted to get first dibbs on Brian's new stuff, but he produced two outside records in 1968 so I think he could have produced them if he really pushed for it.

The Chuck Negron story ("remembered" from Todd Gold's book?) of Mike and the other BBs humiliating Brian in front of Redwood in the studio may indeed not have happened.  However, listening to the Redwood version of TTGA, I find it very hard to believe Mike's claim that Brian didn't think their vocals were good enough.  They're just about as strong as the vocals on most any other Three Dog Night release.  According to Peter Reum and to Danny Hutton quotes (via Peter Ames Carlin's book), Mike and the other BBs didn't want Brian producing another group using music as good - and with such obvious commercial potential - as TTGA and Darlin', so they wouldn't let him go any further with Redwood.  Brian did go on to do other outside productions after that, but they were either not with hit-bound material (like Fred Vail's unfinished country album) or they were for family (like Spring) and thus not a threat to the BBs.

It's an interesting story, but I cannot picture Carl or even Mike yelling at Brian in front of another group. Besides  the Beach Boys really made Time To Get Alone and Darlin their own and Brian did quite a bit on those versions too. I never heard Redwood's Darlin' it might be pretty interesting.  Mike was interviewed by John Tobler in 1976 on this and it is quoted in his first book on them from 1977.

i fall in the middle somewhere with this....

While the bits with Van Dyke Parks are really great (he should write memoirs. guy talks like a son of a bitch), and it gladly ignores some of the more irritating members of the Smile crew (Schwartz, for instance) and talks about Hutton and some of the more reliable ones.....

But if you're going to say something on that scale about Pet Sounds (isn't that Brian sings everything but a few parts? i forget the exact number, but he gives plenty of examples), something as basic as a qualifying statement from, say, Chuck Britz would be expected. there's nothing. Unless my Pet Sounds box and ears decieve me, thats bull-merda.  :-\

Bit tricky - Chuck died in 2000.

i didn't know that  :(

you see my point about the pet sounds thing tho... unless it's true  :-\

My biggest complaint is the fact that he wants to force things on you that he believes, as if his opinions are the only  ones we should all listen to.
For one  example, when he says 'several musician accounts of this particular cancellation suggest that this session was for the purpose of editing the SMiLE album together'. Now, if this were true, why wouldn't he quote these musicians? It sounds to me it's more like what he would like to believe, so he tossed in the 'several musicians' bit to back up his opinion. This book has too many examples of that kind writing.

Just found this, is this a re-release of the same book or is it a different book all together or is it a re-release with additions?:


http://books.google.com/books?id=9A66GgAACAAJ&dq=subject:%22Beach+Boys%22&hl=en&ei=jhzVTYjKLMXAtgeug8GCDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAzgK

same with this one:
http://books.google.com/books?id=81YIAQAAMAAJ&dq=subject%3A%22Beach%20Boys%22&source=gbs_book_other_versions

@punkinhead: asked myself the same question - that's why I haven't purchased it yet. Guess it's just different publishers and covers, though.

Yep, Dom's assertions about the Beatles caught my attention.  I even did a timeline to show his "theory" (putting it nicely) was false:
(http://www.earcandymag.com/SMILESGTPEP-TIMELINE-VISUAL.jpg)

Once I questioned him about it and he said something to the effect of "Well, it might have been George when he was in LA, which resulted in 'Blue Jay Way'" (I'm paraphrasing from memory, have the exact quote written down somewhere).  This was another case of not checking your timeline - George's visit to LA wasn't until the later part of 1967...waaaaaay after Smile.

While the book does have its flaws, I recently enjoyed re-reading it.

Diggin' the vintage photos of young Wondermints visiting Brian's old place in 1985. Awesome.