Following this thread is a pain in the butt. I would like to actually read the discussion but the damn Voldermort setting is derailing it. Can we dispense with this, please, and discuss things with a more rational tone?

And for the record, I didn't vote for either of the mainstream candidates.

I know it was standard practice on American Bandstand, Shindig and some of the other shows, for bands to lip sync in the early days. Partly for quality control, since live performance was still a bit iffy technology wise and mic-ing a live band is always a bit difficult, and partly because these shows were bringing that scandalous rock and roll into American living rooms and they didn't want any slip ups or naughtiness to sink the ship.

I think it was also cheaper for the shows to lip sync vs live, because you have a whole different set of engineers and union rules. Ed Sullivan performances were live, however.

At any rate, it wasn't that the bands necessarily wanted to lip sync. It was just the way TV was at the time.

I can't really see how Mike gets to pick who carries on the band name. I would guess that, once Mike steps down, the license ends. Any new agreement for licensing would have to be negotiated with BRI. Can't really see Brian, Al and Carl's estate jumping on the chance to hand the band to Foskett, especially if there are actual Beach Boys who are still willing to tour the name. Once there are no living original members, I guess anything is possible. But, it's pretty creepy to think that Foskett is just waiting in the wings for everyone to die.

There is a difference between imitating or appropriating a culture thats not yours, and being influenced by another culture. The first leads to a weak parody of the original culture. The second can lead to a merging and melding of ideas that transcend both cultures to become something unique.

I think Pet Sounds represents influence rather than appropriation. And without the free flow of cultural influence, our world would be missing much of what makes it beautiful.

My question with the whole writing credits thing is this: What was keeping MIKE from standing up to Uncle Murry to get the credits he deserved? Why is it Brian's fault that Mike didn't do anything?

He also whined about how Melinda butted in on the tour stuff. Which yeah, okay, he's the guy in charge of the tour stuff. But if he has the right to complain about studio stuff, doesn't Brian (via Melinda) have the right to complain about what Mike wants for the tour stuff? So I would think.

Two words… John Stamos

Diplomatic PR does not seem to be Mike's strong point.

In my years on this board, I have attempted to avoid the outright brawls, even while not holding back with posting my own opinions. My opinions of any of the band are based solely on what I observe publicly. I don't know any of them and have never met them, even in a paid for meet-and-greet.

Having said that, I was always a fan of the Beach Boys as a band first, and Brian second (as the creator of the music and the sound).  I have stated that I like Kokomo and that Mike's earthier vocal contrast with Brian's falsetto is key to the Beach Boys sound. I have praised Mike's work ethic and willingness to keep the band afloat during a time when the Wilson's seemed to have burned out on it. I have said that I can understand Mike and the band being hesitant about SMiLE, because Brian was gambling with all of their futures. I made all of these comments here, on this board. Yet, I'm lumped in with the Brianistas.

Why? Because I have also publicly stated that Mike's interviews demonstrate a shocking lack of empathy for the psychological struggles of his cousins. Because I have suggested that someone with Brian's diagnosis might need a strong hand like Melinda's to guide him, and that fact does not make her a "handler," no matter what Mike, or certain board members, say. Because I have stated that prescription medication for a mental illness is not the same as "being medicated" or "controlled" and I've called Mike's public comments to that effect bull crap. And, because most of all, I have made a point that Mike is his own worst enemy. Brian's story is a comeback story. The public loves that and have empathy for Brian because of it. That has elevated Brian's status with the public. Meanwhile, Mike churns out interview after interview making unfeeling, snide comments about the person the public has decided to embrace. He will NOT get the public on his side using this strategy.

Ironically, he almost had them on his side with C50. Why? Because he showed some concern, some empathy, some effort at team work. Then, he blew it. He walked. Any gains he made then were thrown into the dust bin and he's been trying to build his reputation back up by saying all of the wrong things, again. A lot of the dust ups on this board would fade into the past if Mike didn't keep regurgitating the same old points. Every time he goes into an interview with yet another "The Wilson's did drugs, I didn't. I was cheated, etc, etc" it brings it all up for scrutiny again. He needs a PR guy to tell him when to zip it, and how to present his POV without tearing down other band members.

Anyway, I feel that, when I comment on this board, I spell out my points fairly clearly and rationally. Yet, there were those members who would descend on my comments to "correct" my erroneous thinking. Because, you know, they know stuff I don't. This "we know stuff, so your opinion doesn't count" attitude is one of the reasons I backed off my posting. It just wasn't worth the energy.

But, hey! Maybe they do know all about it. I can't speak to any of these people's private lives. But, I do know this about recent events: PUBLICLY, it's been Brian who has taken the high road, rarely saying anything bad about Mike. Mike can't claim the same thing. And, public opinion is determined by public action. Not the behind the scenes whispers of a fan board.

I'm looking to get my friend some Beach Boys albums as a birthday/graduation present later in the year, and I'd like to have an opinion on what would be great "starter" albums.

Currently, I have Pet Sounds, Friends, 20/20, Surf's Up, Holland and Love You as my picks, as I don't know what she has at the moment.

If I was introducing someone to the Beach Boys, I get them Sounds of Summer, Warmth of the Sun and Pet Sounds.

Sounds of Summer for the early hits. Warmth of the Sun for the deep cuts and lesser hits. Pet Sounds because it's, well, Pet Sounds. Add in whatever your favorite post Pet Sounds albums are and you have a nice collection.

I think "Summer's Gone" accomplished what it intended to. accomplish. The Beach Boys didn't go out with a bang. They went out with a sigh.

Agreed.

Billy being there not only brings authenticity to the band, but spiritually, he should finish this thing as a Beach Boy.
Plays and sings his ass off every show.

Biily's the Beach Boy that Mike is trying so hard to sell Loyalty Foskett and Regis Johnston as.

LOL @ "Loyalty Foskett" and "Regis Johnston."

With headphones on, I can get lost in the tag of "Till I Die."

Debbie, I agree. And, on the creepy scale even in current culture this is fairly low.
As someone who's read a lot of history I've come to accept that almost everyone I admire has said or done or written something sexist/racist/classist, etc. because they are all humans living with and being influenced by other humans. I don't feel any need for denial nor do I think it necessarily says much about the person. As you indicate it more often says things about that person's time. Obviously if I was born in Georgia in 1840, I would have very different ideas about race than I do, not because I'm different, but because the culture I live in is different. But surely we can read a document written then, recognize the racism in the document, use it to learn about the times, but not condemn the writer.
I don't throw out all novels written before 1995 and condemn all the writers, even though just about every instance contains sexism. Most still do of course.
Brian Wilson was pressured to write along a formula of teenage boy-girl themes. Someone that age writing such a thing is at risk of creepiness. And, as you said, it was a creepy milieu. And there are worse things written then and now.
So, creepy lyrics; not creepy writer. Has happened before, will happen again.

Monotheism seems to have focused on sex - and the related desires - as being bad.  Frankly, I think due to that conditioning, we have no idea what to do with it - so we are creeped-out, etc. Because it's been so perverted in our minds over a few millennia, we all have problems thanks to that programming.  It's pretty sad, since it's fundamental to humans, but I'm as screwed up by the programming as anyone else, so I don't have the answer, other than trying to raise our kids/grandkids to be okay with their feelings.

Not so much "monotheism" in Western culture, I think, as puritanism (with a small p).  The Song of Solomon in the Old Testament is pretty much a celebration of sexual love. Even if churches prefer to think of it as allegory, the choice of imagery is definitely not prudishly uptight.

I love Pet Sounds. I grew up with the fun and sun songs, and love them too. But, I Just Wasn't Made For These Times hit a nerve. Growing up, I always felt like I was tuned in to something different than my peers, and IJWMFTT expressed that feeling better than I ever could. I bop in the car whenever I hear Wouldn't it Be Nice and Sloop John B, but IJWMFTT,  God Only Knows, and Caroline No still bring tears to my eyes.

But, in the long run, no matter what other issues came into play, it all came down to one thing: no matter what Brian, or Parks, or Capitol or Murry, or the Beach Boys, or the posers wanted Smile to be, it wasn't going to happen.

 Why? Because Brian Wilson was breaking down and nothing anyone could do could stop that or change it.

I humbly disagree. Never say never.  I'm not convinced the technical or emotional challenges to the project were absolutely insurmountable.

I've said it before and I've said it again. IMO... if his bandmates would have been able to have an exceptionally forward-thinking response to Brian's emotional problems affecting the SMiLE project's completion...and if they all (including Mike) banded together with the sole, selfless goal of unconditionally supporting Brian's vision, without (very human) things like jealousy, fatigue, and exasperation setting in... offering their help with the painstaking time-consuming gruntwork portions of editing and splicing tapes (thus relieving Brian of some of these duties), not ever getting in the way of Brian and VDP's work, and making absolute, Herculean efforts to be a complete and total support system to Brian (much like his modern day band seems to do)... if they would have done those things, I'm convinced there could have been a *shot* that the project could have been completed and released, and thus I think the aftereffect could have been that Brian's emotional state wouldn't have gone nearly as far off the deep end as it eventually did.

Actually, i do agree with you on this. I meant, however, that in the existing context, Smile wasn't going to happen. Not because Brian was trying to impress the hipsters, but because he was ill. Had others been supportive, we would have seen another story.

 I don't agree that "Smile sux." In fact, Smile reminds me of Aaron Copland and that kind of Americana art certainly does not Hoover anything. I also don't agree that none of it was Brian's idea. I think Brian got excited about doing something different, and went in a direction that, maybe, he wasn't quite sure of at the time. I think that direction took some detours in the creative process, but that's what creativity is like and I think it was basically Brian's direction.

I do agree that Brian surrounded himself with a bunch of pretentious "artiste" wannabes. And, that little group includes Daro and the ever (around here, anyway) idolized Van Dyke Parks. I also agree that Brian was trying to emulate, to some extent, these posers and really couldn't,  because hipsterism depends on a feigned cynicism and "irony," that Brian, a simple kid from Hawthorne, just couldn't call up. It just isn't in him. Even now, if you look at social media you can compare the veiled contempt so often tweeted out by Parks to Brian's often childlike responses in interviews. That guy would never fit in with the scoffing elitist hip set.

But, I think he did want to fit in. And, I do think Brian genuinely longed to create something more important in an artistic way. And, I do think the posers and hangers on fed him ideas and "critique."  But, it was ultimately up to Brian to sort through those ideas, reject the ones that didn't work, and pull together the ones that worked. Pet Sounds Brian was fully capable of doing that.  Maybe there was some pressure to impress the artsy set. And maybe that was one of the pressures that led to Smile's demise, along with record label pressure, band pressure, internal pressure, dad pressure, etc. The "goose that laid the golden egg" was being pulled in a lot of directions.

But, in the long run, no matter what other issues came into play, it all came down to one thing: no matter what Brian, or Parks, or Capitol or Murry, or the Beach Boys, or the posers wanted Smile to be, it wasn't going to happen.

 Why? Because Brian Wilson was breaking down and nothing anyone could do could stop that or change it.

I love this interview! Brian is on it! Sounds just like a guy who knows what he wants, knows what's going on, and is able to communicate about that.

I'll just leave it at that.

This is a prime example of how things seem to work on this board; it's almost as if people are taking sides. I'm surprised Mike's name hasn't been mentioned. Why not  knock off the amateur detective work and lawyering  and let it go . I'm sure that'll happen.

I don't see people taking sides so much as trying to sort through how they feel about this. This is a person we've taken a great deal of interest in and had a great deal of admiration for. People are trying to sort through their responses.

To compare this discussion to the Mike vs. Brian bickering is a bit unfair, I think; especially since, no matter how they feel,  everyone seems to actually be on one side: the victim's.

Wow, I just don't know what to say to this one.

Thoughts go out to the victim, though.

Im sorry, but I think these theoretical topics that have been popping up are ridiculous and a waste of time. Are we just out of pertinent things and real subjects to talk about?

You know, this really isn't pointless. It can lead to some insightful discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of both groups.

I would swap Paul into the Beach Boys rather than John. One of the difficulties, I think, that Brian had in the Pet Sounds/Smile era was feeling a certain intimidation from Mike. As bad a Mike was, John would be worse, ego wise. Yes, I know the story about John meeting Brian, but that's a bit of rare sensitivity on John's part, I imagine.

Paul would be capable of more insightful lyrics than Mike, but without the intimidation factor. Plus, John veered more toward political and social statement, and I'm not sure that's where Brian's head was.

I would definitely give Mike to the Beatles then sit back and watch the fireworks.

I've seen the Mike and Bruce touring band several times and enjoyed the show. Sure, it's heavy on the hits, but I happen to like the hits, so that's no problem for me. Yes, Mike's stage schtick is lame and aging poorly, but he's always been less than cool. I just took the view that he's a dork, but he's our dork.

But, that was before C50. When I went to that concert, I saw what was missing. The whole really was greater than the sum of its parts. C50 was a glimpse of what had made The Beach Boys great and what The Beach Boys could be going forward. But, it didn't go forward, and that was apparently Mike's choice.

But, even that kind of contention isn't new, and I could have re-embraced Mike's band if he had shown any class whatsoever after the break down. What has soured me on seeing them again has been Mike's passive-aggressive swipes at Brian Wilson since C50, his constant insinuations about Brian's  "condition", his Murry-like "I'm a misunderstood genius, too" mantra and his attempts to recreate the C50 formula without the very things that really made it special. Like, you know, the other Beach Boys.

So, if Mike continues to go into every interview making publicly hateful comments about the reunion, his band mates, Brian's health, family and music, all the while trying to one-up or copy him (Brian's got a new record? Well, so what. I've got this song. Brian's getting a bio? Well… me too. Nyeh!), I reserve the right to conclude that he's a bitter old man who feels threatened by his supposedly poor, incapacitated cousin. I also reserve the right to skip his concerts. And, as long as he continues to put these comments forward in the media, I reserve the right to reasonably discuss my opinions on a Beach Boys discussion forum.

He ceased to be a scholar the moment he pulled the recent stunts that got him banned here. He can co-write a book with Brad Elliot....

We have no personal knowledge of what ever these "stunts" were, unless you are claiming to be privy to PM's on this forum.  That, I doubt. 

Whatever went on, did not impede his ability to do research, anymore than partying all weekend would prevent one from going to work on Monday and functioning in a job. 

For me, however, it does impact his future credibility as a source of factual information, if he is willing to knowingly spread falsehoods, as alleged.

It just seems to me that the subjects of these movies too often don't get the fact that movies always have to take  shortcuts to tell the story. If they didn't, the movie would run for ages and be as boring as heck. The fact that Ms Kayes character got lines was an attempt to highlight her role in the music game, if in a minor way. The point of the line was to show that Brian was doing things that the music professionals found innovative. It accomplished those things.

Ms. Kaye hates the 'Wrecking Crew' name because they were never called that. She hates 'Love and Mercy' because she never wore a fire hat and never said that to Brian. She's a stickler for accuracy, except where her own credits are concerned.

I have been very vocal about objecting to the "Wifeandmanagers"  and "Me-Landy" labels that several members here continue to use as an insult to Melinda and to imply Landy-like manipulation. I'm not an insider, and I don't know any of these people personally, but I find it insulting and borderline slanderous to compare the man's wife to someone who abused, manipulated and almost killed him, and I've said so in several threads.

Several times I've gotten PM's from Andrew telling me how wrong I was about Melinda. Terse. Not particularly bullying., but definitely in the "I know stuff you don't" category.   I'm wise enough to know not to engage in that kind of bait, so I ignored the PM's; but I have no doubt that, had I responded, I would have gotten the AGD version of just how vile Melinda is. As a result, I don't have any difficulty believing that things could have gotten out of hand with other board members.

It's too bad. I often disagreed with AGD's anti-Melinda agenda and his Mike Love pushing, but he was quick to call BS on some areas that needed it: the Loren and Rocky threads come to mind, in particular.

I won't miss his condescending attitude. But, I will miss his actual (not agenda fueled) knowledge.

I had NPP in my car player all summer long. It went by the wayside a bit this winter, but I still really like the album.