Smile as a solo album in 1967

[Aegir]

(I think this deserves to be its own thread. if this causes a problem you can merge this with one of the 700 other threads talking about the radio spot.)


Bruce brought up an interesting idea in the BBC interview, that Smile should've been released as a Brian solo album on EMI's classical label. I completely disagree with this.

Part of what makes Smile so interesting is that it's a Beach Boys album. That the same band that sang "catch a wave and you're sitting on top of the world" is now putting out songs like Vegetables and Look and Fire, songs so un-Beach-Boys-like but at the same time, SO VERY Beach-Boys-like. All the harmonies are there, Mike's nasal 60s tough young punk voice singing "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield".

If the album was released as a Brian solo album, no one would give a sh*t. it would just be a weird album by some guy, instead of a weird album by America's Band. Smile is a deconstruction of the Beach Boys, and you need the Beach Boys to deconstruct it.

[runnersdialzero]

I used to really wonder why it wasn't altered to be a Brian solo record back in '67, but I eventually came around to your thoughts in the last two paragraphs.

Still... if Brian had finished Smile, opted to release it as a solo record, and then the band had begged him for the songs and he opted for Smiley Smile as the Beach Boys album, then I'd be flustered as all f*** as to which idea I liked better. The cake and the eating it too or whatever. Still, it deserves the Beach Boys' name on it and all that came with it.

Also, I can only imagine what would've happened with the group if Smile had been given to the Brian and Shut Down III had been the next Beach Boys record. Would've been 1974 all over again, except this time before 1974, but then what is 1974 how is iatiy4j280qw8h0g erahr08ef gbhn

[Aegir]

and another thing that occurs to me, aside from Do It Again, it's not like they ever did any other "formula" songs until post-74 when they became an oldies act. What songs did Mike have a big contribution in writing 67 - 74?

Gettin' Hungry
Let the Wind Blow
Meant for You
Anna Lee, the Healer
Do It Again
All I Wanna Do
Cool Cool Water
Don't Go Near the Water
Student Demonstration Time
He Come Down
All This is That
Big Sur
Only With You

HEY MIKE, STOP F.U.C.KING WITH THE FORMULA!!!

[Keri]

Sounds like a good idea to me, SMiLE marked a breach between Brian and the Beach Boys. In a way it marked the start of them as a more democratic band. Although the following albums Brian was still the major creative force. But never again did we have Brian forging his music with a sense of urgency and purpose, he still did some good work with them. With Pet Sounds they were starting to part company and with SMiLE something broke. It might have been better vibes between Brian and the band if they had viewed it as helping with a solo album. It might have been best if Brian had left them then, but as he had said he needed their voices.

[mammy blue]

Considering the direction the BB's career took when they didn't release Smile, it surprises me that Bruce still holds this opinion. What would a "proper" 1967 BB album have sounded like to him? This is a nice idea in retrospect, but I don't believe it was ever a viable option at the time.

[JohnMill]

If the album was released as a Brian solo album, no one would give a sh*t. it would just be a weird album by some guy, instead of a weird album by America's Band.  Smile is a deconstruction of the Beach Boys, and you need the Beach Boys to deconstruct it.

Back then yes but if it was released as a Brian Wilson solo I don't think it would be viewed today like some of Lennon's albums with Yoko Ono from the late sixties are.  I think we'd still be calling Brian a genius either way.  The SMiLE music itself is just too good. 

[LostArt]

I'm a little surprised that no one has mentioned Peter Reum's claim that there was some sort of group meeting in late '66 where the boys vetoed Brian's original concept for Smile.  You should read this thread: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,2688.0.html

Here are some key posts, with the last one going into the family dynamic, and why Brian possibly couldn't bring himself to release this material as a solo album:

 

With due respect to all of the above points, there is no original Smile. There is a series of unfinished fragments that Brian could not assemble because of untreated bipolar and amphetamine psychosis.

The only finished Smile that exists is Smile 04, and both composer and lyricist deem that the finished Smile. Smile 67 is a wonderful,jumbled series of musical ideas that form a puzzle with pieces missing.

Smile as conceived was voted down as a Beach Boy project. In my opinion, they gave up their right to call it a Beach Boy project when they voted down Brian's original project ideas with objections to Van Dyke's lyrics. Goodbye Beach Boys, hello Brian Wilson.  

I still don't understand whether this vote-down is being stated as a fact or an opinion/conjecture/deduction, did I miss where that was explained?

I still don't understand whether this vote-down is being stated as a fact or an opinion/conjecture/deduction, did I miss where that was explained?

I am assuming conjecture, until I see some definitive proof one way or another.

I don't buy it.

I don't buy it.

I want to buy it, and I have the highest degree of trust in anything Peter says...the thing that's bugging me is that if such a vote took place, why haven't we heard a single thing about it from anyone in the almost 40 years since it happened?  I really want to believe this but most substantiated proof is needed.  

History is in part the sorting of first hand evidence and anecdotal evidence. Two people have told me there was a meeting in December '66. One was there, one learned about it later.

At this point I am not ready to reveal sources. Too many people suing too many people.No one says anyone has to buy it.  As strange as it sounds, the motivation was a business decision due to needing to get an album out.

The Beach Boys did not generally take minutes of their business meetings in writing. There are a number of court records covering events from that era, but typical business meetings were not written down.

So we are going on several people's memories. They certainly are entitled to their own memories of the decisions they made together. That their memories would differ about long gone details is not surprising either.  

Peter thanks for clearing a few things up. I wasn't trying to be flippant, but it seems so odd that something so important (and less controversial then some oft repeated rumors) would go unreported so long. I remember you mentioning people telling you about Brian doing poorly in the 67-73 period who told me things totally in the other direction. So yes we do have to rely on failing or conflicting memories and also perhaps personal agendas. That's why it is so hard to sort out "truth". In my case I tend to try to make my own judgments based somewhat on what I am told, but more so on contemporary reports or archive material records, books, video, photos etc. I don't want anyone getting in trouble but I don't understand why Brian didn't stop the sessions then and there if this meeting took place the way you presented it. Of course many things that do actually happen don't make any sense. Again sorry if I came off quick to the draw but I guess I get tired of Brian having no culpability or taking no blame for decisions he made that I feel weren't the best ones. I feel I have look at both sides when it comes to the Beach Boys individual good and bad traits or actions. That said your input and info is always welcome in my eyes.

The reason Van Dyke doesn't get sued is because he's not family. This is Family Feud, and  all we need is Richard Dawson. Besides that, Van Dyke has been wise enough to sidestep the various volleys of artillery.  

With respect to Brian 67-73, Brian was essentially a man at war with himself and his family. The reason he didn't stop the sessions is because the welfare of nearly 70 people depended on HIS coming through. The reason he didn't come through is he was literally unraveling week by week.

By the end of 67, Brian was a cocaine addict with unmedicated bipolar disorder, moving toward deeper and deeper addiction and concomitant deeper and deeper depression. That's what happens to cocaine addicts with bipolar disorder. They move from manic highs and low bottoms to manic phases that feeel normal to the rest of us to lows that we can't even fathom. So as the 60s moved into the 70s, the depression got deeper and deeper.

If you don't understand that, you won't understand Brian. His illness was full blown and progressing RAPIDLY. The man had a neurochemical disorder in his brain, and addiction is a disease of the brain. The family had no clue. Marilyn did, and tried to help. Brian is a strong personality. There's a reason he is the only surviving Wilson.

The family was sunk. Their income and lifestyle was dependent on a business whose creative and business leader was deep in the throes of co-occurring unmedicated bipolar disorder and cocaine dependence. The lights were on but no one home in Brian's brain. You people are talking art, and I'm talking illness, family illness.

That Brian did what he did in the 60s in  the grip of such illness is remarkable. That he got as far as he did is a tribute to his resilience. That the family kept it all a secret for so many years is aso not surprsing. Chemical dependency is a family illness.

[JohnMill]

I'm a little surprised that no one has mentioned Peter Reum's claim that there was some sort of group meeting in late '66 where the boys vetoed Brian's original concept for Smile.  You should read this thread: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,2688.0.html

Here are some key posts, with the last one going into the family dynamic, and why Brian possibly couldn't bring himself to release this material as a solo album.

I think if what Peter wrote is true it's one of those "there you have it" sort of deals which really sufficiently answers most if not all the questions surrounding SMiLE.  From Brian's original concept/end game for the album (my personal feeling has always been he started out with some sort of format but then it just all unraveled like a Slinky), The Beach Boys' rejection of the project which has taken many forms over the years from Love's questioning of VDP's lyrics, the December 1966 session that apparently went "very badly" and something very interesting to me a plausible explanation as to why Brian continued the sessions after having his album squashed.

Brian to me has always seemed like the kind of guy who really does feel a sense of responsibility to those close to him.  The fact that he had all these people depending on him for what I assume to be their financial well being well it just sounds like something Brian would at least attempt to do.

The mental illness factor in this entire puzzle is just so sad and I wouldn't be surprised if that is the reason to this day why Brian is so vague when speaking about why everything fell apart.  

[onkster]

This is all very cogent.

Keep this in mind: Brian's first nervous breakdown was the result of him having to do too much--being on tour, singing/playing, writing, arranging, producing, being a young married guy, dealing with the music biz, being the leader--and feeling responsible for everybody in the process. He didn't give up, he didn't quit--he only quit the road, and shifted his energies in a better way: into writing/arranging/producing in the studio--a better way to still carry everybody without destroying himself. He was, in a very real way, looking out for his own health by doing this. He was putting on his own oxygen mask first (in airline-speak), so that he might still be able to help everybody else.

Then he flowers: he makes Pet Sounds. Some complaints from Mike (yes, there were some), and sales slightly off, but still top 10, correct?

Then acid, new friends, new books, new influences. Van Dyke Parks. SMiLE begins. Massive work, massive inspiration. The boys return, and yes, work does go on, they do sing on it. They witness it in fragments--how can they possibly see how the pieces would all assemble, especially when their leader didn't entirely have that figured out himself? The recording process goes on for months--in the 60s, this probably felt like years, as albums were normally made very, very quickly then. The additional players were bound to get nervous. A December meeting, without Christmas product to put on the market (this wouldn't have mandated a 'summer' release, as it didn't capitalize on that) would certainly find most of the bunch in a very nervous mood indeed.

A vote happens (or so we now hear). Recording continues for a while into the new year--hmmm, might the mood, the confidence, have changed after all that? I haven't checked the paperwork, but were there less group vocals recorded after that? (I'm recalling more instrumental work on Surf's Up, Mrs. O'Leary, and eventually Da-Da...not sure about vocals...somebody chime in, please.) Van Dyke leaves. The feeling gets worse. All this work, and it's becoming too much to finish, especially with a diminished feeling of support, and the beginning of psychological decline. Not to mention the physical exhaustion that must have come with all of this.

Finally, Brian cans it. He takes the responsibility for canning it, even though other influences obviously play in. The key point here: he feels the responsibility on his shoulders. And this time, he doesn't really have a new solution. He already retreated to the studio, thought that was going great, and now his pet project has met its end. And there's a lawsuit. And the dream of starting a new label, with film offshoots, other bands, etc., much like the early concept of Apple Corps, is probably feeling like even more pressure piled on--great ideas, yes, but requiring oodles more work to pull off. Another retreat was required, but this new retreat came in the form of collapse. What else could he do? This was a Herculean mountain of work, with fantastically high standards applied to all of it. I can barely stand to think of what that pressure must have felt like. And the underlying fear of letting the side down, as they say, must have been worse than terrible.

My sympathy (not pity) and empathy for the guy are total. This is a human being reaching for the heavens and getting burned, because after all, he was still human. No sin in that.

The next time some "fan" whines that they don't have "The Elements" bound together in a four-song suite, or whatever the complaint of the month is, perhaps they should consider this for a few minutes before they type again.

[Chris Brown]

Some excellent points being made here.

I too am surprised that Peter's posts about the December meeting haven't really been talked about in the months leading up to this release.  As I said back then, I'm skeptical, given that we hadn't heard anything about it until Peter told us, but what's interesting is that we see a pretty dramatic shift in Brian's focus in the first few months of 1967.  From September '66 through the end of the year, he worked on every track on the December tracklist - some more than others, of course, but he did a lot of work on a lot of different songs, very focused on the album as a whole. 

But then the new year comes, and his new mantra is essentially "all Heroes, all the time."  Suddenly the album takes a back seat to just getting a single out.  Sure, there are a few random sessions for other tracks here and there, including the "Wonderful" remake and the Jasper sessions (which to me suggest either distraction or procrastination).  But when you look at the sessionography, Brian really only seriously worked on 2 songs in the first 4 months of 1967, both of them possible singles - "Heroes" and "Vega-Tables." 

So why the sudden change?  It would seem that something happened in the waning days of 1966 that caused Brian's focus to rapidly shift from finishing the album to finishing the single.  A meeting where the Beach Boys shot down his album concept is as good a candidate as any to have such an effect.

[mammy blue]

Great points all. The studio shift in focus from 1966 to 1967 has always plagued me. Some tracks were so close to completion, like Worms. The lack of vocals just doesn't make sense. There's also a Durrie Parks comment in the BWPS Doc about secretive group meetings being held. It does seem to add up to something.

[OneEar/OneEye]

What exactly were they shooting down though?  The songs themselves?  Wasn't there some upset later in '67 because Brian refused to use the Smile recordings on Smiley Smile?   They didn't want the music, then they changed their minds and did want it?

[runnersdialzero]

Also, it's strange to think of the collective group shooting it down. Dennis loved it, Brian loved it, Bruce was behind it, Carl was being diplomatic but seemingly still behind the project. Al we don't know, we know Mike didn't think it fit the Beach Boys, but there they both there, singin' their ballz off about vegetables and corn fields. These folks putting their foot down with Smile but then going along with Smiley Smile doesn't make much sense.

These were the same kids who overall didn't feel "'Til I Die" was appropriate for the Beach Boys but went along with it because, I guess, they trusted his judgement and knew how skilled the guy was as a songwriter. Mike especially, supposedly, but again, there 'e is on the tag, singing about death on a Beach Boys record.

[onkster]

The fact that we never heard about a December 1966 meeting about Smile doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. It could have happened, and nobody happened to talk about it.

Sound like BS? Well: what would you say if somebody swore to you that there were 5 solo takes of "Surf's Up", with a new key change in them yet, from the Wild Honey sessions?

My point: we weren't there, and history is complex. Strange things can happen, and hidden (and true) things sometimes seem to come out of nowhere.

[Chris Brown]

The fact that we never heard about a December 1966 meeting about Smile doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. It could have happened, and nobody happened to talk about it.

Sound like BS? Well: what would you say if somebody swore to you that there were 5 solo takes of "Surf's Up", with a new key change in them yet, from the Wild Honey sessions?

My point: we weren't there, and history is complex. Strange things can happen, and hidden (and true) things sometimes seem to come out of nowhere.

Good point, and I pretty much agree.  The fact that it's Peter Reum conveying the story certainly gives it a lot more credibility. 

[18thofMay]

It is interesting to read this thread with particular reference to Peter's comments around Brian his dependence and his illness. Brian almost died for his Art, for our joy and we should be very thankfull that he is still with us.

[Mark H.]

What I can't get my head around is how does anyone other than Mike have the audacity to veto the album in December '66?  Was Al even a voting member of the band at that point?  Bruce?  Dennis wouldn't vote against Brian and I'd be very surprised if Carl did - Good Vibrations is still on the charts.  Mike was pissed about the Van Dyke thing - my guess is that any meeting had less to do with the music than Mike, and maybe the others collectively, bitching about the lyrics to the point of refusing to sing some of them, ie "Hang on to Your Ego".

This may have taken place after or around the session that went "badly" in December and "almost broke the band up".  Shortly thereafter VDP leaves.  It appears, however, that Brian didn't give up without a fight.  He directs his attention to a single to buy some time and gets Parks to come back for a short period of time.  It would explain why so many songs are so close to being finished waiting for the lead vocals - they were arguing over the words.

Ultimately Brian's deteriorating psychological status, loss of confidence, and ultimately the final departure of VDP signal the end.  Brian shelves SMiLE and to extent that he can leaves it buried.

I'll bet you that if Brian had caved to some degree - let Mike write lyrics for several of the songs - SMiLE would have been completed.

It's easy to look back 40 years and view Brian as a martyr for his art - remember that Mike wrote the lyrics for GV and contributed to the hook.  These guys weren't obligated to be Brian's robots and just do what he told them - Mike has co-responsibility for several hits that made a lot of money.  If Brian wanted to be in The Beach Boys then to some degree he was obligated to consider their desires, needs, and tastes - otherwise he should have made a solo LP, left the band, or both.

[SMiLE Brian]

I think what Brian said to Mike during the sessions is really profound, "if you don't want to grow, you should stop living."

[Chris Brown]

It's easy to look back 40 years and view Brian as a martyr for his art - remember that Mike wrote the lyrics for GV and contributed to the hook.  These guys weren't obligated to be Brian's robots and just do what he told them - Mike has co-responsibility for several hits that made a lot of money.  If Brian wanted to be in The Beach Boys then to some degree he was obligated to consider their desires, needs, and tastes - otherwise he should have made a solo LP, left the band, or both.

Not to diminish the significance of Mike's contributions in any way, but when you have a guy writing material like "Surf's Up," Wonderful," etc., why wouldn't you want to be his "robot"?  Of course everyone wants to be heard, but I can't imagine hearing music like that and then having the audacity to question the man who is responsible for its creation.  Brian earned the right to do things his way without being questioned.

[Cam Mott]

Reading that whole thread instead of just a few excerpts might give some perspective, maybe not.

[JohnMill]

What I can't get my head around is how does anyone other than Mike have the audacity to veto the album in December '66?  Was Al even a voting member of the band at that point?  Bruce?  Dennis wouldn't vote against Brian and I'd be very surprised if Carl did - Good Vibrations is still on the charts.  Mike was pissed about the Van Dyke thing - my guess is that any meeting had less to do with the music than Mike, and maybe the others collectively, bitching about the lyrics to the point of refusing to sing some of them, ie "Hang on to Your Ego".

It would explain why so many songs are so close to being finished waiting for the lead vocals - they were arguing over the words.

It's easy to look back 40 years and view Brian as a martyr for his art - remember that Mike wrote the lyrics for GV and contributed to the hook.  These guys weren't obligated to be Brian's robots and just do what he told them - Mike has co-responsibility for several hits that made a lot of money.  If Brian wanted to be in The Beach Boys then to some degree he was obligated to consider their desires, needs, and tastes - otherwise he should have made a solo LP, left the band, or both.

I've always defended Mike Love's standpoint about being a bit wary of Van Dyke's lyrics from a commercial standpoint.  You have Mike Love who is going to be one of faces if you will bringing Parks' lyrics to the masses and perhaps he felt that if I can't understand these lyrics and I'm the guy who is going to be delivering them to the general public, how can I expect the public to understand them?

To me that is all fair game.  However, if The Beach Boys' issues with Parks lyrics were anything other than comprehension then that opens up a whole other can of worms (no pun intended) and looking at it from that perspective I guess wonder why is it that these guys had so little faith in what Brian was trying to accomplish?  I mean were they really that afraid of failure?  Were they that gun shy about taking risks? Were they that unwilling or unreceptive to change in general?  Was an issue where money talked and creativity walked?  

There is an old adage about the record industry (which I've heard repeated in many different venues) where when an artist has a hit record, the artist usually strives to make his next record an advancement of the hit record while his record company on the other hand wants him to duplicate the record he just made.  This is one of the constant struggles between artists and labels which probably exists to this day.  In the case of "SMiLE" it's almost as if Brian had to not only deal with this dilemma from the perspective of his record company but his band mates.  If true, it really does get to the point of being absurd what this man had to go through just to get his music to the public in the sixties.

[JohnMill]

It's easy to look back 40 years and view Brian as a martyr for his art - remember that Mike wrote the lyrics for GV and contributed to the hook.  These guys weren't obligated to be Brian's robots and just do what he told them - Mike has co-responsibility for several hits that made a lot of money.  If Brian wanted to be in The Beach Boys then to some degree he was obligated to consider their desires, needs, and tastes - otherwise he should have made a solo LP, left the band, or both.

Not to diminish the significance of Mike's contributions in any way, but when you have a guy writing material like "Surf's Up," Wonderful," etc., why wouldn't you want to be his "robot"?  Of course everyone wants to be heard, but I can't imagine hearing music like that and then having the audacity to question the man who is responsible for its creation.  Brian earned the right to do things his way without being questioned.

If we accept that Mike's reasons for questioning VDP's lyrics were commercially driven, you need to put yourself back in 1966 and the situation The Beach Boys were in at the time.  You are a member of one of the most popular and successful bands in the world.  You are making more money that you could probably ever imagined from an art form which at the time was being viewed as still a "fly by night" operation.  In 1966, there was still no real inkling that a band like The Beach Boys would be able to transcend their generation to become one of the most beloved bands in the history of music period.

So you are in this essentially to make as much money as you possibly can and as quickly as you can.  You see your cousin beginning to write these strange, complex songs with a new lyricist with whom you have little to no relationship with.  You realize that the music they are composing sounds nothing like what you are hearing from your contemporaries on the radio.  At this point you have two choices, embrace what they are doing and support them in the new direction they are taking your band or play it safe hoping that by rejecting these strange, complex songs your cousin will get back to writing songs that are more in line with what has brought you all the success you currently have.  

It's a difficult dilemma and without the benefit of hindsight, it's really hard to say that Mike Love made the wrong decision in airing his concerns regarding the direction Brian and VDP were taking the band.  It's obviously very possible that Mike thought that if "SMiLE" was released and didn't find an audience that the group would be sunk and with that would go any future opportunities to maximize earning potential.  Those are some pretty heavy things to have weighing on your mind any way you slice it.

[Bicyclerider]

What Peter says was voted down was Brian's concept of Smile as a three movement suite.  After the meeting it went back to a 12 track album. 

I find this difficult to accept since the first time we hear about movements is from Peter speaking with Brian in the late 70s/ early 80 s.  Van Dyke, Brian's collaborator for the project, never heard anything about movements - there were to be 12 tracks, no link tracks or movements.  Why would Brian keep this concept from Van Dyke but share it with mike, Carl et al?  And let's assume he did tell Mike and Carl he wanted to do the album in movements - what would be their objection?  If they liked the songs, do you think Mike would say, OK, cabin essence and Surf's up are great songs, but you can't put them together in a movement, that's too weird?

Color me skeptical.

[Mark H.]

What Peter says was voted down was Brian's concept of Smile as a three movement suite.  After the meeting it went back to a 12 track album. 

I find this difficult to accept since the first time we hear about movements is from Peter speaking with Brian in the late 70s/ early 80 s.  Van Dyke, Brian's collaborator for the project, never heard anything about movements - there were to be 12 tracks, no link tracks or movements.  Why would Brian keep this concept from Van Dyke but share it with mike, Carl et al?  And let's assume he did tell Mike and Carl he wanted to do the album in movements - what would be their objection?  If they liked the songs, do you think Mike would say, OK, cabin essence and Surf's up are great songs, but you can't put them together in a movement, that's too weird?

Color me skeptical.

I don't buy this - I don't think there's much evidence to support the 3 movement paradigm in 66-67.   I would expect to see evidence in Frank Holmes art - which I don't.  Maybe "The Elements" as a 3 movement suite - but not the LP in total.

[Mark H.]

It's easy to look back 40 years and view Brian as a martyr for his art - remember that Mike wrote the lyrics for GV and contributed to the hook.  These guys weren't obligated to be Brian's robots and just do what he told them - Mike has co-responsibility for several hits that made a lot of money.  If Brian wanted to be in The Beach Boys then to some degree he was obligated to consider their desires, needs, and tastes - otherwise he should have made a solo LP, left the band, or both.

Not to diminish the significance of Mike's contributions in any way, but when you have a guy writing material like "Surf's Up," Wonderful," etc., why wouldn't you want to be his "robot"?  Of course everyone wants to be heard, but I can't imagine hearing music like that and then having the audacity to question the man who is responsible for its creation.  Brian earned the right to do things his way without being questioned.

I would - but I can certainly imagine Mike not wanting to go that "artistic" direction.  He's never been much of an experimenter since - especially in terms of lyrical content.  Bands directed with an authoritarian artistic style rarely survive the long haul - ask John Fogerty.  For all practical purposes Pet Sounds was a solo record with the Beach Boys as session singers - so was SMiLE. 

I can imagine Carl having concerns that the music could not be reproduced in concert.