I agree Don, only I'd reach to Love You. Why exclude it? I know that not everybody likes it, but others consider it a bizarre "cult" gem, much like Smiley Smile. For example, if Jerry Garcia loved Smiley, Patti Smith loves Love You. In any, it's a rather bold artistic statement, like it or not.
Besides, it is both the swan song of the creative period of the Boys before the "singing jukebox" period, and a sort of introduction to Brian's solo career.
And I think there would be an elegant symmetry in bookending the history of the neglected but still artistically great 1967-1977 decade of the group with the two weird avant garde works, Smiley and Love You.

A history is a whole history not just up to this or that album.  And Dennis once said "Brian is the Beach Boys" so it also has to include his solo career.  Only an independent film maker can do this.

I know I'm carrying a considerable amount of bias and anger on Brian's behalf - you'll have to filter it if it shows -

In the Telegraph article just the other day we were told the most important thing about Leonard Bernstein presenting Brian an H&V was that he consulted some sort of clairvoyant (?)took dope and went to bed.  No, the most important thing was this young man had produced an astonishing piece of music which a very well respected composer was comparing somewhat favourably to Mozart.  
We were told the GV chorus was written by Mike - he openly admits he didn't and that he just suggested that they use the bass line Brian composed and which underlies the verse.
We had Brian on record competently and coherently producing an album, writing astonishing music using a theme which was ahead of it's time with a skilled poet and it stopped.  From the band's point of view there had to be some excuse for it stopping other than the lyricist left because the band didn't think the music would sell.
20/20 Brian comes out of his bedroom and effortlessly adds the coda to Surfs Up.
For Holland we learn that "I'm on my way to sunny California" was something Brian sang in the studio just before he went home.
Do I like other music from the band - of course - though I'd argue that Brian had more musical skill than all of them.
What we need is a documentary produced by an independent, journalist to do a thorough investigation and warts and all history in documentary form.  Ignore the steak holders in the business and the band, get footage from others who own copyright to film.  Will we get it - I doubt it - perhaps posthumously in years in the future.  Lets hope that all the evidence of the actual history isn't 'vanished' in the meantime.

My guess about why there are so many people trying to f... over Brian is simply: envy. Brian is rightly recognized as a genius, and many mediocre, talentless hacks just can't accept that. He has to be "downsized", at all costs.

People are trying to f--- over Brian? Today? 2024?

(while Zenobi was referring to artistic stuff, I think Guitarfool was spot on about his comments about "fans" and Brian Wilson)

Let's go back to the NPP days and see how many "fans" were treating Brian with kindness and respect. And yeah, no one is doing that publicly today, at least that I can tell - is the lack of snark due to Brian's age? Or that he hasn't released an album in a while? Either way, rewind a few years and the level of sh*t thrown at Brian was unreal. That atmosphere of "brain damaged Brian", or "Brian is the wheelchair bound grandpa forced to give a speech at Thanksgiving dinner", Brian didn't do any production work on Wild Honey, or that stupid Mike Love lawsuit where he claims Brian sat around collecting royalty checks for 40 years LOL, and all the rumors/gossip spread about Melinda Wilson (btw real classy the "RIP" posts after her passing from the same people who spread those rumors) that indirectly were a slap in the face to Brian and his family, and there are many more examples....Do you think all of that stuff disappears overnight?

Rewind a few years and yeah, people were trying to f*** with Brian and his family.

It's not so easily forgotten. So while this very day no one is out directly trying to f*** over Brian Wilson, I don't think those mindsets and perceptions disappear overnight, nor does the memory of how awful "fans" have treated the guy over the years.

Absolutely right.  Though I'm not totally sure of people not trying to F*** Brian over again, or at least get back into working with him again if the opportunity arose.  M&B have been here in England flogging the book and the video and saying things about writing with Brian no doubt for the publicity it generates but if that causes fans to create pressure for it, Brian sadly no longer has Melinda as a buffer.

-How many documentaries do we need on The Beach Boys?

Everyone is complaining that much of the story was missing from the new documentary.  The reason parts are missing is because much of it isn't their story, it is for publicity and to write the narrative of some of the band members.

The reason this documentary ended up the way it did is far more involved and complicated than simply parts being missing because some band members have agendas that preclude those things being mentioned. I don't think Mike Love has any problem with mentioning "Keepin' the Summer Alive", or Landy, or "15 Big Ones", or whatever.

A complete biography of Brian with an in depth look to all of his work and Dennis and Carl's work, not just limiting it to The Beach Boys, would resolve that.

Getting more granular and focusing more on Brian doesn't get anybody a "more complete" story. The same could be said for the group as a whole. A "complete" group biography of all them would get you, well, the complete story!

I think people are focusing way too much on the "Mike's agenda" stuff when it comes to this new documentary. The problems with this documentary involve more than non-Wilsons trying to hog too much of the story. Indeed, Al clearly feels marginalized and has issues with the doc. There are more fundamental, ground-level problems with this documentary.

The "solution" would involve getting a different team and ethos in doing the doc, as opposed to, what, tossing the idea and doing a "Wilson Brothers" documentary? How does that tell the whole story? Don't get me wrong, give me all the thorough docs on all the members you want. But the problem with this new Disney doc is not that it's speaking to Mike Love's (or whomever's) agenda too much and not focusing enough on the Wilsons. The problem is the director doesn't get it at all across the board, and something fatally injured this documentary during the process such that it couldn't cover enough years. That's a Disney problem, a director problem, and possibly a myriad or beefs and arguments and politics across multiple people/organizations.

The point is if you look at the history of the group post 1980 it shows a qualitative decline and at this time Brian's involvement had reduced.  What happened at the C50 when they did another album and Brian was involved, they had more success.  I'm not sure Mike would be happy with anyone coming to that conclusion especially after having said that he could step in because he was another genius, nor would he be happy covering the disagreement over the tour not continuing.  But it isn't just Mike it is what the current owners of the catalogue think - this is a publicity vehicle for them and they want a positive, uplifting and popular video as do Disney.  Having something about a period where the group was just a touring band with no new music could be covered in 2 minutes and probably not as visually interesting as young people frolicking on a sunny beach.

My point about doing a Brian biography is that this contains the whole story.  Not just the Wilson brothers, not just Brian but the group when it was at it's most popular and Brian's subsequent solo career, finalising SMiLE and his other albums - any Beach Boy biography is not going to cover those things.

Not me, Galaxy Liz. On the contrary, thanks for highlighting these OTHER problems. In fact, the Telegraph article misses completely "the point" as abysmally as this 2024 documentary does.
Every narrative about the Beach Boys HAS to talk of phoenix Brian rising from his own ashes. Brian's current predicament is obviously very sad, but does not impair IN ANY WAY the greatness of his "redemption" arc.
That so many people DON'T GET IT HOWSOEVER boggles the mind, and I'd have the temptation to actually swear, in a bad way, about that.
Though I fear that no amount of swearing would suffice...

The good thing about the Telegraph article was this bit: ''While it wouldn’t be quite fair to accuse Beach Boys of entirely overlooking definitive and sometimes grisly details, it is right to accuse the film of seeking to place a positive spin on even the ugliest moments. Worse still, it seeks to imply that talent of the group’s members was, to some degree at least, evenly spread. But it really wasn’t.' I hope the documentary tried to emphasise the good stuff in order to do tribute to Brian but as they had so much about the publishing rights lawsuit (not the others, mind) and even Manson, it;s hard to believe that. Limiting the story to 1980 (to go along with the book but then the same question applies for that) suggests they didn't want to show how unproductive the post 1980 Beach Boys were, except for touring greatest hits. The most interesting things they had done post 1980 were as solo artists until That's Why God Made the Radio and the C50 tour. Both of those things involved Brian and the C50 ended badly. Perhaps not the narrative some in the band wanted.  But for me the real triumph wasn't Endless Summer and a return to greatest hits. It was Brian and his band playing Pet Sounds, completing and premiering SMiLE (and more). But I don't suppose that's the narrative some in the band wanted either.

I would be in favour of just doing a documentary on Brian - which could tell the story including that of his brothers and the group since they were all part of his life.  This would allow the telling of the whole story.

I Just Wasn't Made For These Times, Beautiful Dreamer, Long Promised Road, the A&E special....how many documentaries do we need about Brian? Is there an area where those are lacking?

-How many documentaries do we need on The Beach Boys?

Everyone is complaining that much of the story was missing from the new documentary.  The reason parts are missing is because much of it isn't their story, it is for publicity and to write the narrative of some of the band members.

A complete biography of Brian with an in depth look to all of his work and Dennis and Carl's work, not just limiting it to The Beach Boys, would resolve that.

In fact, the Telegraph article misses completely "the point" as abysmally as this 2024 documentary does.
... Brian's current predicament is obviously very sad, but does not impair IN ANY WAY the greatness of his "redemption" arc.
That so many people DON'T GET IT HOWSOEVER boggles the mind, and I'd have the temptation to actually swear, in a bad way, about that.
Though I fear that no amount of swearing would suffice...

Thanks, I agree with everything you said but particularly love these bits!

Not me, Galaxy Liz. On the contrary, thanks for highlighting these OTHER problems. In fact, the Telegraph article misses completely "the point" as abysmally as this 2024 documentary does.
Every narrative about the Beach Boys HAS to talk of phoenix Brian rising from his own ashes. Brian's current predicament is obviously very sad, but does not impair IN ANY WAY the greatness of his "redemption" arc.
That so many people DON'T GET IT HOWSOEVER boggles the mind, and I'd have the temptation to actually swear, in a bad way, about that.
Though I fear that no amount of swearing would suffice...

The good thing about the Telegraph article was this bit: ''While it wouldn’t be quite fair to accuse Beach Boys of entirely overlooking definitive and sometimes grisly details, it is right to accuse the film of seeking to place a positive spin on even the ugliest moments. Worse still, it seeks to imply that talent of the group’s members was, to some degree at least, evenly spread. But it really wasn’t.' I hope the documentary tried to emphasise the good stuff in order to do tribute to Brian but as they had so much about the publishing rights lawsuit (not the others, mind) and even Manson, it;s hard to believe that. Limiting the story to 1980 (to go along with the book but then the same question applies for that) suggests they didn't want to show how unproductive the post 1980 Beach Boys were, except for touring greatest hits. The most interesting things they had done post 1980 were as solo artists until That's Why God Made the Radio and the C50 tour. Both of those things involved Brian and the C50 ended badly. Perhaps not the narrative some in the band wanted.  But for me the real triumph wasn't Endless Summer and a return to greatest hits. It was Brian and his band playing Pet Sounds, completing and premiering SMiLE (and more). But I don't suppose that's the narrative some in the band wanted either.

I would be in favour of just doing a documentary on Brian - which could tell the story including that of his brothers and the group since they were all part of his life.  This would allow the telling of the whole story.
The current owners of the back catalogue wouldn't back it since they are only trying to promote the legend which sells so permissions to use copyright material might be tricky and it's difficult to know if the public would buy it but I think it's important for the actual history to be preserved instead of the fairy story.

It's a Disney movie made to plump up their list of titles and sell the channel.  It's fluff.  It's a publicity release to sell the image and the history according to certain band members.  Having the idea that it was ever going to be a proper documentary on the history and the music was naive I suppose but I lived in hope.
The Telegraph article is yet another spin on capitalising on the sad history and takes it's lead and flavour from Nick Kent whose original article was reputedly largely fiction and who in turn was trying to write something juicy to sell.  It is unnecessarily unkind.
Both miss the tragedy of Brian's life and his phoenix like rise from the flames and fail to acknowledge the complexity and beauty of the music through concentrating on chart success.  It misses the decline and fall of the band post Brian leaving and turning it into it's own tribute band but then that wouldn't fit the narative of the publicity department so huge sections of the history is missing.
I suspect you're all going to fall on me like a ton of bricks but that's just my humble opinion.

I wrote this on Ang's FB Brian Wilson Tour page

when you get old you like to see that your life had meaning and seeing people enjoying your music must do that. Giving it up because you can't physically do it any more is not 'Oh good I can have a rest' but 'Oh God my life is over'. I just hope he can get better and find a quality of life in whatever way he can.

Significantly Paul von Mertens 'liked' it. Could be his personal opinion and nothing to do with how Brian feels, could be self serving believing he's not doing any harm by touring with Brian but I think many people who retire feel this.  I loathed my job and I felt it - giving up your raison d'être must be so much worse.  It used to be that you toured to sell the music but these days it's the other way around.

THIS! I think I've mentioned this before, but my grandfather-in-law had to give up woodworking in the last few months of his life. Woodworking was his passion, his art - he had a shop with so many specialty tools, he loved making things for himself and others. And he was forced to quit due to health reasons. It was heartbreaking to witness.

Which is why for the last 10 years I haven't given a hoot if Brian isn't jumping around on stage singing like he's 20 years old. I know some fans see Brian's detached performances as a sign to hang it up (and they've held this opinion for almost 10 years now). But really for the last 10 years he's been mostly always alert during performances, and he clearly wants to be there (otherwise he just wouldn't be there), and the people I've stood around and had conversations with after the shows are all blown away by how good the show was. Just irritating that these naysaying "fans" have complained and called for Brian to quit all these years, and they haven't the heart to realize that Brian is a complicated elderly dude who is out there trying to put on a show through fighting mental and physical demons...and that perhaps he is trying his hardest to keep the show alive because some part of him needs for that show to go on (both figuratively and literally).

Anyways, I am with everyone else in this thread: whatever is best for Brian's comfort and wellbeing is what should be done for the guy. Honestly he can still go on making great music, putting on a show here and there perhaps. It doesn't have to be the end of music for the guy, but perhaps a less active schedule would make Brian a bit more comfortable.

But that's for Brian and his doctor(s) to decide.

Absolutely right!

I wrote this on Ang's FB Brian Wilson Tour page

when you get old you like to see that your life had meaning and seeing people enjoying your music must do that. Giving it up because you can't physically do it any more is not 'Oh good I can have a rest' but 'Oh God my life is over'. I just hope he can get better and find a quality of life in whatever way he can.

Significantly Paul von Mertens 'liked' it. Could be his personal opinion and nothing to do with how Brian feels, could be self serving believing he's not doing any harm by touring with Brian but I think many people who retire feel this.  I loathed my job and I felt it - giving up your raison d'être must be so much worse.  It used to be that you toured to sell the music but these days it's the other way around.

I think Dennis and then Carl had talent but Dennis wasn't hungry for musical success in the way Brian was - he already had it through the group.  Carl probably was hungry but he didn't have as much skill.  Both of them came to music via Brian's interest.  Brian spent an age in his room listening and learning before he started and he carried on trying to learn.  They were just being carried along with his flow and learned some along the way enough to make them want to do their own music but not in the way Brian used chords in interesting and innovative ways (though what do I know about this stuff - it just sounds like that - nice but not blow your socks off).

I really meant Al and Mike.  Al does nice ordinary safe music.  My goose bumps never rise.  Mike couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.  His album was written by someone else and Kokomo by John Philips and others.

I remember someone talking about Jimi Hendrix and saying it wasn't just God given skill that made him good it was practice.  Whenever you saw him he was carrying a guitar and playing it.  Brian spent a lot of time listening to and studying music. 

I don't think it is just about ableism.  I think there are those, who shall remain nameless, that actually blame Brian for his own mental illness - they frame it that it was his drug taking which caused his illness and therefore his own fault when the truth is that he wanted to experiment for the creative impetus it gave him and later was self medicating. But Brian had problems from his youth due to childhood trauma and the drugs Landy prescribed didn't help either - it wasn't just the non-prescription drugs which caused the problem. The only way to be critical of someone with mental illness, who you deeply envy, is to make them bad.  As Ang said it's gaslighting.  IMHO they also did that with Smile - it wasn't put out because Brian is mad and on drugs - though well enough to produce another album for them and them arguing over the material and Brian losing his collaborator because of it, had nothing to do with it.

If they were all geniuses they would all have been able to produce successful albums. 

I like and respect you Billy and cannot abide by racism.  No one who has not been subjected to racism knows what it is really like but I have to say that the way we are dealing with it now is just tipping the scale the other way and will end in conflict.  We need to be less divisive, build bridges and take on board that we are all the same and skin colour is unimportant - we are all of mixed origin so made of the same stuff.  So far as I can tell there is no racism involved in the disgusting way some people behave in 'fandom'.  I could claim there was sexism but I won't because those who behave badly just use whatever weapon is available at the time.  Those people are just nasty.  They also cannot actually defend their stance so they just side track the argument.  I'm not sure that what was said here was intended to be racist - it seemed like frustration at the way we are dealing with things these days, making it worse instead of better but if it was intended let's not let them side track the point and just move along.

Suffice to say Brian is not a trained seal and does not need handlers.  The people who support him are there to help him with his health issues and to fend off the idiots he wants to keep away from.  I suspect that the source of this way of thinking is one of those who is being kept away and they don't like it.

 

The rest of the tour in the USA, Mexico and Canada has been cancelled.

And the fans who had tickets to the thrice-postponed Europe shows are being given refunds.

That happened a week or 2 ago.  I don't think it's related to this.

Maybe, maybe not.

It might be the same reason but Brian Wilson tickets were on sale for the other dates in the US, Canada and Mexico after the refunds for the UK were issued so it looked as if they still planned to go ahead.

The rest of the tour in the USA, Mexico and Canada has been cancelled.

And the fans who had tickets to the thrice-postponed Europe shows are being given refunds.

That happened a week or 2 ago.  I don't think it's related to this.

The rest of the tour in the USA, Mexico and Canada has been cancelled.

Thanks for the link! It's a really nice interview with some really wise advice from David. I love Giggens, been subscribed to his channel quite a while.
Am I the only one who thinks David is actually a Star Trek Vulcan?

David is very human and there is nothing Vulcan about him.  He is a lovely, kind man 

I’m not sure where the assertion that the water chant was to be used as the fade of the Wild Honey Cool Cool Water comes from.  Is that on a tape box or on a session slate?

The chant where they all sing "water, water" over a drone is not a recording that was made for a song called Love to Say Da Da. As we said earlier, it is labeled as "Cool Cool Water - Fade" on the tape box, and was recorded in Brian's home studio using his Baldwin organ during either the Smiley Smile era or the Wild Honey era. It is a section of Cool Cool Water that was recorded under that name.

Brian merged CCW with LTSDD, I believe in June 67 and worked on it later in October 67.  I don't really understand why you are all so blinkered about Brian's creative process.  LTSDD came from All Day which came from H&V.  Mama Says came from Vegetables which came from Vega-Tables.  The WW Symphony came from Fire.  The titles of the themes are just working titles which change and the themes are movable or it is possible to overlay them.  Being fixed about what they are may be relevant if you are talking about the finished piece, in which case LTSDD doesn't exist but In Blue Hawaii does.  It's possible Brian may have intended to use LTSDD on its own and then merge it with CCW given his ideas about birth and water.  It didn't happen, it wasn't finished, he may not remember now and the only version of Smile we have is BWPS.  LTSDD was a theme which only had a temporary existence before it became something else.

Ang and I were going to post something else on Vega-tables, given the interest in Smile, but as it's speculative ...

[This is a place where the stuff Liz and Angela are saying is actually I think even *more* interesting than they’ve realized.]

The question on the push back against Da Da being used within water is one I'd like to understand the answer to.  

At risk of beating a dead horse, I’m going to take the bait here and restate what I think has been said in this thread so far about Love to Say Da Da. Frankly, I continue to find this conversation *incredibly* compelling.

In this thread, we learned two dramatic new (to me, anyway!) *facts* about Love to Say Da Da. We learned these fact from tape boxes and the tapes inside of them. No, tape boxes are not the be all and end all of historical information, but, at the same time, they can be a very useful source of *certain kinds* of facts.

Those two facts are, first, that the first version of Love to Say Da Da, recorded in December, was edited onto a tape with the verse of Do You Like Worms, shortly after Brian Wilson had cut the chorus of Do You Like Worms out of the song to use in Heroes and Villains. There ends the fact itself. However, this fact *strongly* suggests that Love to Say Da Da was originally conceived as a discrete song of its own, not as the water section of the Elements.

Now, this fact has led us, collectively, in this thread, to some very interesting new ideas about this song. First, that Love to Say Da Da was probably not conceived as the water section of the elements (and no, we cannot know for sure!), does *not* mean that the song is not associated with water as a theme, but given that I, and many other people, had long assumed that Love to Say Da Da was almost *certainly* explicitly the water section of the elements, it is very, very interesting information.

Secondly, the quotes and ideas that a variety of members have assembled on this board strongly suggest three sets of associations for Love to Say Da Da in December: first, with babies, the “cycle of life” idea, second with water, and third with *Hawaii!* This is a place where the stuff Liz and Angela are saying is actually I think even *more* interesting than they’ve realized. Because, yes, Marilyn’s quote definitely implies a strong connection to babies, and the Hawaiian chant sounds like baby talk. *But* Do You Like Worms is, of course, strongly associated with Hawaii, and if Love to Say Da Da was originally connected to Do You Like Worms, than the Hawaii connection—and the water connection—are incredibly compelling!

The second fact, which, again, was very, very surprising to me, was that the “Water” chant which has been edited onto the beginning of Love to Say Da Da since at least the 90s, was actually not a Smile recording at all. It was recorded in Brian’s home studio to be the *fade* to Cool Cool Water either during the Smiley Smile or Wild Honey sessions. This is a *mind-blowing* discovery to me. Again, this doesn’t mean that there is no association at all between Love to Say Da Da and the idea of water. But it just changes the relationship of those last Smile sessions to the themes and ideas Brian was working with in 1967. It opens up a lot of room for conversation, speculation, theorizing, and wondering.

I agree with guitarfool and others that there are some moments in this thread where the individuals pointing out these new facts were a bit overbearing. But at the same time, these two new facts, learned from tape boxes, have opened up a fascinating conversation. And when that quote about birth and the swimming pool being at body temperature was brought into the thread, explicitly connecting the idea of birth and babies with the idea of water, in an authentic quote from 1966 just days away from the Love to Say Da Da sessions - I mean, that’s the kind of stuff I live for! That is incredible! New information, new facts, lead to new ways of looking at the evidence, new theories, and new ideas. That’s what I see happening in this thread and I love it!!!

No, we did realise it. 

As Ang said she thinks it is a fractal thing where each piece contains the whole and I mention using and layering the different themes in different places - as a classical composer would do - Wager used theme for each person in the Ring, Motzart had 5 themes in the Jupiter etc.  So it seems likely that they would appear in more than one place, perhaps as  vocal in one place or a back ground in others. 

BWPS is Smile though it was magnificent on stage much more so than on the album or the DVD where instead of showing one night they lost atmosphere by flitting about.  And it does have total credibility but I also can't help but wonder what it would have been like had Brian completed it at the hight of his powers and while his voice was still beautiful. 

Yes

And speaking of zonked out on drugs - listen to them all giggling senselessly, high as kites on Little Pad - a track from Smiley Smile which they released...pot/kettle/black.  It was just gaslighting blaming him for the none release in that way.

The question on the push back against Da Da being used within water is one I'd like to understand the answer to.  

As I said earlier documentation has it's limitations, you can only extract from it what was put into it and it is vulnerable in lots of ways including error.  To understand someone's thought we have to rely on the things they have said and in the case of a composer, the music they have written and the clues are there.  I also understand that when you feel you are contributing to a history that you must be careful about being correct but when it is an art history speculation on what it may be trying to convey, meaning, concept and interpretation are standard and sometimes vital to understanding of it when some aspects may be lost in the future due to loss of information over time and our changing way of life.  (For example Leonardo's Lady with Ermine - we know she is carrying the ermine because it was the emblem of her lover - common knowledge at the time, but no longer.) And I really do think and hope that Smile will survive a long way into the future.

Thanks again JakeH.

I think that one of the reasons the "Elements" track was abandoned is that the whole "elements" idea grew to the point it could no more be represented by a single track. And, so, in BWPS, it became the whole Third Movement.

Was it abandoned?  Fire exists.  According to Frank Holmes Vega-tables is Earth.  I always understood that Wind chimes was air.  CCW and LTSDD may have been water.  Since it seems that the album was never completed to Brian's satisfaction it may only be as abandoned as the rest of the album.

I've had some difficulty following this thread, but I gather that there has been some dispute over what "Love to Say Da Da" is, or was, supposed to be.

It seems that Brian is working on the song in some form in late December 1966. Dates of December 22-23 have ( I thought) been out there, and sloopjohnb72 here in this thread has mentioend December 27-28.  I certainly am not one to know whether or not it was just instrumental/piano in these days, or if Brian had already come up with the wah-wah-whoa-ah vocal pattern at this point in December.

In any case, these late December days constitute the time period during which Paul Williams of Crawdaddy magazine visited Brian at his house. Williams recounted time spent in Brian's swimming pool early in the morning of Dec. 24, 1966:

“So at the end of the night we went to the pool, watched by the dogs. I kept my glasses on, because standing in that pool we could see the lights of Los Angeles (or the Valley) twinkling below us like a natural wonder. The water was warm.  Brian told me enthusiastically the it was heated to exactly 98.6, body temperature. ‘So if you get down in the water like this’ (he demonstrated) ‘and stand up, it’s like being born, like the feeling of being born.’"

This suggests that to Brian's way of thinking at the time, "water" and baby" and "rebirth" go together - each are components of one whole conceptual piece; it's not either-or.  The fact that a "baby" song could morph into a "water" song would then seem to be natural and understandable . And in Brian Wilson Presents Smile, the concept is fully realized. The idea comes to full fruition in the third movement, which in my opinion is perfect, as (among other things) it makes perfect use of the "Da Da" concept and music. In those passages, BWPS fully actualizes the idea that Brian was talking to Paul Williams about that night in the swimming pool.

Wow - wonderful!  Thank you!  My thoughts completely, though I hadn't read the Crawdaddy piece in years - I have upstairs, I must go and dig it out!