I'm getting the feeling that many people in this thread are liberals which is just a shorthand of saying hysterical people with no political understanding very little formal education and who read a couple of selected websites like moveon.org or read the guardian rag magazine and have hatred for Trump who is already doing an outstanding job in leading this country and will do more for women and more for minorities and more for the gay community than all the brain-dead Liberals combined that have tried to lead this country of late .  I don't like to get angry or unkind here but I'm so frustrated with the moral self-righteousness of snarky liberals who pay no attention to the real actions and accomplishments of the president-elect and just go with the crowd from things they have heard from other uninformed and barely educated people who live only for hate and snark. I would be thrilled if the Patriotic Beach Boys would put country first and would perform which is not a political act but an act of patriotism and unity. I thought the motto on the left was stronger together wasn't it? There is nothing more intolerant and hate-filled than a leftist American liberal.

American Liberals are an elite academic cast who are capable only in performing in a snarky way what they call social justice and I am very disappointed that the level of intellectual depth in this thread, which is equivalent to that of someone like Samantha Bee on television. I am one of the intellectuals for Trump and like him I have liberal social policies and I believe in protection and prosperity and have seen nothing but failure in the Obama years.

how far we have fallen from the days when the BB on TV meant the original BB on the Jimmy Fallen show for three songs in 2012. . .

Have the BB been asked to perform? Or is this yet another contrived and idiotic thread designed to smear either ML or the American President elect?

Sandbox please.

I think it's absolutely disgraceful that yes has not been inducted. The reasons, the official reasons I have seen from the Hall of Fame is that they turned their back on the roots of American blues music. I find that to be absolutely ridiculous and absurd. One of the many pinheads at the hall of fame must have some personal grudge against yes. I believe that a meaningless band like Rush was actually inducted which shows the abysmal level of taste at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

agree completely......never said otherwise.....100% Brian....100% real, but such a vast heart reserves the right to say and feel what he wishes when asked.....his feelings, always real, evolve.  Just try asking what his favorite album is.....as someone said, his answer always changes but is always, at that moment, "true."

my comment was not at all negative. Read more Derrida. . .

Brian conveys knowledge non-discursively; I was just remarking on the way the book expresses the diffuseness and the flow of oblique memories and reactions:  I fail at expressing it well: it's just, as you say, uniquely 100% "Brian"--no other word for it.

Yeah, it's "different" for sure. Since BW changes his stories and his emotional reactions, printing a book of what he said (and meant) is impossible. One could re-write such a book every day. So for those who were "waiting to see what BW says" to settle some issues and reveal the truth about things ML lied about, well, let that go because there is very little detailed discursive history. It's more a set of emotional reactions to things remembered in the past. . .somewhat Proustian perhaps. At one point B tells the story of the first record and , rather like a Deconstructionist, argues that he feels like the story is being told to him rather than that he is telling it. All this is delightful and very Brian, and obviously very Derridean. So all in all the books reveals how BW could very well be feeling about particular topics at some one point in time when interviewed.  One can read it for the free play of his mind at work but surely not as a historical source, which I imagine it it not really intended to be.  BW's feelings and impressions are of historical value in themselves. The history recorded here is personal, impressionistic, and perhaps ML's is the same, though that book proceeded rationally and chronologically.  What I prefer about Mike's book is the thematic coherence--how he and his co-writer weave the themes of the "switchblade and the butterfly" throughout the book.

But I like anything that makes me feel closer to what the BB think is important to know about them.

Anybody else have a chance to read it yet?

Are you serious? He may "change his story" depending on the interviewer and level of comfort, but this is 100% Brian, and this is how he really feels. Do you know otherwise? Are you actually Professor Ben Greenman?

Yeah, it's "different" for sure. Since BW changes his stories and his emotional reactions, printing a book of what he said (and meant) is impossible. One could re-write such a book every day. So for those who were "waiting to see what BW says" to settle some issues and reveal the truth about things ML lied about, well, let that go because there is very little detailed discursive history. It's more a set of emotional reactions to things remembered in the past. . .somewhat Proustian perhaps. At one point B tells the story of the first record and , rather like a Deconstructionist, argues that he feels like the story is being told to him rather than that he is telling it. All this is delightful and very Brian, and obviously very Derridean. So all in all the books reveals how BW could very well be feeling about particular topics at some one point in time when interviewed.  One can read it for the free play of his mind at work but surely not as a historical source, which I imagine it it not really intended to be.  BW's feelings and impressions are of historical value in themselves. The history recorded here is personal, impressionistic, and perhaps ML's is the same, though that book proceeded rationally and chronologically.  What I prefer about Mike's book is the thematic coherence--how he and his co-writer weave the themes of the "switchblade and the butterfly" throughout the book.

But I like anything that makes me feel closer to what the BB think is important to know about them.

Anybody else have a chance to read it yet?

When I see them live and when I hear these songs I wonder how many different groups and types of music that this enabled. I seem to think that hundreds and hundreds of important artists and genres and albums and types of music go back to Buddy Holly. Would any of you consider that to be a correct if rather General and broad statement?

Jude, you are correct and I should not assume anything about Tony. I suppose I was just accustomed to seeing him an older documentaries. Thank you for your very gracious correction. I do very much like him and his work and hope the best for him. I watched the documentary only once but I had been anticipating wanting to see it several times but there is just nothing I really wanted to see over and over again except that wonderful moment with Brian. I must conclude that this is not one of the best Productions ironically since the subject matter was among the best in all of musical history.



ote author=HeyJude link=topic=24420.msg591416#msg591416 date=1474992191]
I don't know if we can assume anything about Tony Asher. He looked a little less "clean cut" I suppose than interviews from like 20 years ago, and certainly didn't dress up for his interview, but keep in mind he's three years *older* than Brian. He's now 77 years old.
[/quote]

I have pre ordered it on Amazon but not gotten any particular notifications or updates about the date. My sense from reading Mike's book and hearing a bit about Brian's book is that both men have so much love for each other and so much passion and poignancy for all that they have shared together. The world is not black and white and love and respect and a profound connection can coexist with all the tensions and anxieties they have had. In fact it all makes the Beach Boys music much more meaningful and much more rich. This is the sacrifice that artists make. They're pain, when it's translated into music , reaches us on the deeper level then their personal happiness ever could. Of course I hope that these books,when exchanged, will bring Brian and Mike were closer together, and I think it's sad that the relationship is non-existent, and I'm sure that they are both hurt by this. For me the most important thing is that everyday of my life I listen to at least one song that the two of them wrote, which goes directly to my heart and soul, and I could never thank each and the both of them enough for that.

Thank you John, though I'm not very clever and I can't tell whether I'm being teased or praised. And either way I take your comment in a very wonderful and affectionate spirit.




uote author=john k link=topic=24451.msg591597#msg591597 date=1475093539]

Friends, welcome to the professor's world: please don't worry yourselves about looking for substance. In the modern academy, critical analysis has been replaced with the simple binary matrices of race, class and gender. Simply to assert the existence of one matrix in any given context (here re: Pet Sounds) is, in itself, the entirety of the critical argument.  I get paid for combating this "Chinese cultural revolution" type of totalitarian thinking in real life, so pardon me if I say no more about it here, where I draw no pay. 

Believe me, professor, you are pardoned in full.
[/quote]

Friends, welcome to the professor's world: please don't worry yourselves about looking for substance. In the modern academy, critical analysis has been replaced with the simple binary matrices of race, class and gender. Simply to assert the existence of one matrix in any given context (here re: Pet Sounds) is, in itself, the entirety of the critical argument.  I get paid for combating this "Chinese cultural revolution" type of totalitarian thinking in real life, so pardon me if I say no more about it here, where I draw no pay. 

He either couldn't or simply didn't wish to defend the words he wrote and which Pop Matters published. That said it all in that case. I'd offer the same thing to this author - state your hypothesis and back it up with a summary in one or two sentences. As my English teachers used to say, give us the "main idea" of the piece. If he can't do that, it holds no water with me.

Just saw it: grade of B, and HeyJude was right in every detail. I sort of zone out when the Brits are explaining things I have known since I was 10.

Best part is seeing Brian so happy and excited. . . . he loves his band. . .still so moving.

Poor Tony did not look so good, so I feel for him, as he must be ill, which is sad.

Al got lots of credit (which I had never seen in detail) on the piano for SLB arrangement (or its origins), which was instructive.

All the good parts of the doc were people explaining things on instruments, which I always find thrilling.

Also, I would hate for anyone to think PS was the first time Brian (and Mike and Usher) ever got introspective. It was not all car and surf songs before PS. Sometimes that transition get overstated.

The professor will be going to the Reagan Library God willing

I am still waiting for mine but I want to thank Hey Jude for the commentary and of course his analyses are always very insightful and very useful. I did wonder about that woman Helen Shapiro, and I would much rather hear Brian or any of the Beach Boys saying anything or just sitting there smiling or singing or talking or remembering or anything rather than her or someone associated with the project natttering on.

Friends, it's difficult to speak into the phone and to write because the professor is in tears in hearing that great moment when Brian Wilson asks for the vocal parts and says there they are, The Beach Boys. How many if you are we weeping at that moment at that moment of love and harmony and unity. I'm going to play it over and over again in this clip and I'm so happy that I have bought this. I consider hearing Brian Wilson say that as one of the happiest moments of my life. I think they all want to be together again despite everything and I hope that they will.

On this review and faith in the series I just ordered it but not the blue ray, since it's only an hour and I can't imagine it being that different? These shows are so much fun and so informative. Goodbye YBR by Elton is another I like, and the Sex Pistols too, if I recall correctly.

best to all

Well, as a scholar, though not a BB scholar, and as an author of peer reviewed work and commissioned book reviews for academic journals, I have to say that this pitchfork article is completely without craft and without critical value. It's conceit grows old after one paragraph, and it's simply one more piece of snarky internet hatred. It is not a book review but rather using the book (the tone and spirit of which are ignored) as an occasion to spew hatred. It holds no value except for those with the same feelings who want to hear hate trumpeted.

Just terrible from the perspective of genuine critical thought and an indication of how the current generation of critics and writers profane the important literary art of book reviews.

Best wishes to all; I have no personal beef with any of you, as I believe we all love the BB, and I respect our differences here.

Update: I see that the author writes for the Guardian. . . .no surprise, as he/she (?) appears to be channeling standard issue intolerance for Mike who is perceived as right wing in the absurd Manichean paradigm favored by the radical Left.

That series is 100% great and detailed and scholarly; I think of the Doors's LA Woman and "Dark Side" for example, so I hope we get detailed interviews with all the BB about this one. Looking forward to this; thanks Jude.

I am overdue in saying thank you for the link, but I don't have Facebook so I never did get a chance to see it.


uote author=The_Beach link=topic=24408.msg590461#msg590461 date=1474229440]

link expired......

any help?

https://www.facebook.com/OfficialMikeLove/ its about the fourth post down!Enjoy!
[/quote]

In the book mike cites prior historians in explaining what he sees as the  tendency to sanctify Brian. I find it rather singular that people here chatter on about the book without having read it. I'm not the professor who assigned it mind you , but an intelligent discussion would be based on reading the book,  not in circulating rumor and in channeling one's prefabricated and rather predictable anger.  I will make no further comment here for fear I will tax some of our members who think it worth their time to try to unravel my thinking. My time is better spent in pursuing my odd fascination with David. Can you imagine that, on a discussion board like this someone is  accused of having an odd fascination with a member of the Beach Boys.

This is my last comment in this particular threat so please leave my name out of further discussion if you would be so gracious.

link expired......

any help?

Yes, I agree. I am half way through. Mike loves and reveres Brian in every chapter, though he is keenly critical of mythologizers and hagiographers, not because they minimize Mike's role but because they never did Brian any good nor cared about him as a person. A sense of family warmth fills the book, and a sense of longing, nostalgia call it.

Many people on our board have spoken based on rumor and "what they heard" about the book rather than from reading it, and anyone committed to hating Mike is going to hate no matter what. But I do appreciate reading the comments of the open-minded critical thinkers here. For them and for me, this is a wonderful book and a way to get closer to Mikle and to the BB.

Bruce has the unfortunate fate of being with Mike every day, which makes him less likely the subject for exposition in the book. But all the BB are praised for their art--Carl deemed the most musically talented after Brian.
I still expect the boys to play together again, and this book will actually help that process.

Some random thoughts as I finish up the book....
I do feel that I walk away with a better understanding of Mike. To me, the book doesn't come across as 'just sour grapes'. Mike has some legitimate beefs, and I don't think he goes over the top in trying to address them. Yes there are times in the book when stories are self serving, but that's part of the package.

A few passages changed my way of thinking on something of relatively small consequence. That is bringing family members on stage to sing. It's not my preference, and caused an issue as discussed in another thread. But the Beach Boys ARE a family band, and that is in its roots. Makes me appreciate the contributions from the Matts and the Christians a little more.

Puzzled as to the amount of space or lack thereof, dedicated to Bruce. Something is telling there. A few sentences here and there, the most interesting being Bruce's method of avoiding the war. More time spend talking about Terry ( which is cool). More time devoted to David (I get that as Mike uses David to set up how he was also a Murry victim) For the last 2 decades Bruce has been Mikes guy...thought there would be more on him.

Jacqueline has had a tremendous influence on Mike. Good for her.

I think he means that he can't just "come over" or call and say "Hi, Bri, whatcha doing." In his book he speaks lovingly of their writing all night and collapsing at 2 am, emotionally drained. I think he simply means that Melinda just won't permit anything like that from happening. So "managers, etc" is code, as it has been since the Capital roof reunion, for "Melinda."

And we all react to this differently: many defend her as a noble lioness. I rather would think she could see beyond and work actively to get the cousins together for the sake of world artistic history--the cosmic history that the 2 men participate in and in which she has no rights nor role.

BTW: guitarfool is a brilliant writer--best critical prose on this board

What I noticed after watching a bunch of video interviews of Mike promoting his book is that he's talking about Brian having an agent and manager and other staff working with him as if it's either a negative thing or like it's something no other successful or celebrity musician or artist has...including Mike. Mike has an agent, a manager, a PR staff, tour staff, a producer who works on his records, a legal team...so is Mike being 'controlled'? Maybe I'm seeing a negativity by mistake, but a lot of it comes down to the questions of whether Mike and Brian would work together again, or of them working together period. And Mike comes back to saying "if we could go into a room together with a piano, we'd write a song...", then suggests that can't happen due to reasons including agents, managers, and other outside influences depending on what interview it is.

It just feels like an unusual point to keep making, considering Brian has been married for 21 years and has a family, and if that's what Mike is hinting at via keeping the two of them out of the proverbial room with a piano, that won't be changing anytime soon as a marriage and family would tend to outweigh collaborating on songs. And bringing up managers, agents, etc as possible reasons why they're not in that room with a piano is as odd of a reason as it has been for years considering it's the way the entertainment business works. Artists have lawyers, agents, and managers, and Mike is no different. So how is Brian different by having the same kind of setup as Mike and tens of thousands of other artists? I just don't get it.

I have read closely the first 106 pages of the book, in addition to the 50th Anniversary section which I had read as well. So far I do not see an unkind word in this book about anybody except Mike's own strong often brutal critique of his own behavior and a very strong critique of his Uncle Murray. Mike is very kind to Dave and giving him some very good credit for his contribution. So far there is very little about L and Carl artistically other than to praise their singing and generally speak of them warmly and there are some wonderful very warm very intimate portraits of Mike and Dennis. For Brian mike reserves his greatest affection end artistic admiration. The only anxiety and bitterness is when Mike explains how either through Brian being kind of oblivious and Murry being mean and vindictive, his name was left off various songs. So far the book is very wonderful, very humane and very intelligent and I feel like Mike is speaking to you very directly and it's a pleasure to hear his  contemplatively recounting what are in many cases well-known events. His story of the warmth of the sun is particularly moving.

heavens, the "story" is the one in the book; likely the version cobbled together in the interview news item (unless there is video) ran into pronoun trouble.

The point is that a band had tention over wives. . . . .radical