The Genius of Mike Love

[filledeplage]

And some challengingly abstract lyrics. There, I've said it.  Awesome vocals.  And words, that the common man did not get. But I was  blessed to be a student, and Wordsworth was on the menu (The Child is the Father of the Man.) Not so, for the rest of the world.  The world that Mike faced night after night.  And, this is the old slippery slope.  And, hopelessly debated and old.  That window is probably closed.  I hope it has run its' course.

I'm sorry but I don't buy it. Like A Rolling Stone was a #1 song and it had abstract and complex lyrics. One could say the same thing for Penny Lane, Strawberry Fields, and Come Together.

Plus, let's not forget that Brian somehow managed to tour Smile in the 2000s. Freakin' Smile, man! And the BBs played this setlist in 1972: http://members.tripod.com/~fun_fun_fun/3-8-72.html Has Mike given you all Love-induced amnesia?

But there was no choice but to have the BBs be "fun, fun, fun in the sun" forever. Remember that.

Dada - You are missing the Big Red Boat, here.  Brian toured it in 2004.  Ya, I was there.

But it was not 1967, wartime, Carl facing arrest for draft-dodging, and a hostile record company. The "boss" record company did not like the work.  So, Mike gets blamed?  For the record company's lack of support? For the need to establish a new record label? For the poor promotion of Pet Sounds, too?    

Thirty-seven (37) years had elapsed! During that time, Pet Sounds became #2 on the all-time Rock and Roll "must-have" LP's.  SMiLE evolved into a myth of sorts.

And, what Brian has said, is that he had to "chuck it (SMiLE) for a while, because he got too 'close to it.'" That is out of Brian's mouth.  Not Mike's.  

Big difference.  Apples and oranges.  During that time, Dennis was gone, Carl was gone, Murry and Audree. And, Landy, too.  

Mike did do some of the Smiley stuff, live. Please don't allege he didn't. Check out the Setlist Archive of Eric Anniversario. Mike sang beautifully on SMiLE.  And, he plugged and promoted it, incessantly and loyally.

Is Mike the scapegoat here? Is this the real issue?

I don't think he should be.  

And people often do see the Boys to "turn back the hands of time" when life was less calculated, managed by computers, and the retirees, back-in-the day, were the ones not paying rent or mortgages, not getting groceries, and their hair was flying around in the convertible.  And, they bring their grandkids!

Fun is in;  It's no sin!  

  

[Chocolate Shake Man]

But it was not 1967, wartime, Carl facing arrest for draft-dodging, and a hostile record company. The "boss" record company did not like the work.  So, Mike gets blamed?  For the record company's lack of support? For the need to establish a new record label? For the poor promotion of Pet Sounds, too?    

No. Mike Love gets blamed for the actually stuff he did do, which I mentioned in an above post. It's bad enough.

Also, not that it matters in terms of my argument, but where is it said that the record company didn't like Smile? I thought they were just upset with how long it was taking.

Thirty-seven (37) years had elapsed! During that time, Pet Sounds became #2 on the all-time Rock and Roll "must-have" LP's.

Even at the time, Pet Sounds sold just fine, as did both Sloop John B. and Wouldn't It Be Nice. It went to #10 while Surfer Girl when to #7. Not exactly the commercial underachiever that it's been made out to be.

And, what Brian has said, is that he had to "chuck it (SMiLE) for a while, because he got too 'close to it.'" That is out of Brian's mouth.  Not Mike's.

Also out of Brian's mouth is the number #1 reason Smile didn't come out was because Mike Love didn't like it. So, let's say, for your sake, we actually omit Brian's word from this particular discussion of why Smile didn't come out.

Big difference.  Apples and oranges.  During that time, Dennis was gone, Carl was gone, Murry and Audree. And, Landy, too.

But we're still talking about how audiences would receive an album or certain material live. And regardless of what time period we're talking, we know that it's proven that Smile can be received quite well by a large audience.  

Is Mike the scapegoat here? Is this the real issue?

No, the issue is reality.

I don't think he should be.  

He's not. He's being called out for behavior that should be called out, regardless of how well the current PR campaign is working.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

As I understand it, in the process of Mike testifying for Brian in Brian's suit against Irving [1991?] it came to Mike's attention that it would still be possible to recover the authorship Murry and [mostly?] Brian had cheated him out of from Irving/Brian. He had thought it wasn't something that could not be righted up until then.

Yep, Mike's squadrons of lawyers never thought of that possibility before.... or was it that Mike saw an almost incoherent Brian at the 1991 trial and realized his chance to rewrite history? I'm not saying that Mike didn't get cheated out of some songwriting credits, but a few of the songs he got credited for in the lawsuit are ridiculous.

I always loved Tony Asher's line on that:

During the trial, Mike's attorney asked me how I could be so sure Mike hadn't influenced the writing of [Wouldn't It Be Nice]. "After all, " he speculated, "wasn't Mr. Wilson out of your sight from time to time? Didn't he go to the bathroom, or leave the room periodically for one reason or another? And couldn't he have been taking a phone call from Mr. Love during one of those absences?" These guys get paid big bucks for this kind of absurdity. At any rate, I answered that, while it was true Mr. Love could have called Mr. Wilson on one of those occasions, it was doubtful it had any influence, since "Wouldn't It Be Nice" was one of the few songs I wrote the entire lyric to by myself at home. "Mr. Love did not then," I explained, "and I pray does not now, have my home phone number."

[Mr. Cohen]

But it was not 1967, wartime, Carl facing arrest for draft-dodging, and a hostile record company. The "boss" record company did not like the work.  So, Mike gets blamed?  For the record company's lack of support? For the need to establish a new record label? For the poor promotion of Pet Sounds, too?

The record company was so unhappy that they printed up 500,000 sleeves for Smile in preparation of the initial run, and gave Brian one of the largest budgets ever for a pop album. Of course, Capitol Records would've probably preferred if Brian handed in "California Girls Pt. 2 - The Sequel", but I think you'll find that a lot of record companies were divided at the time. Half were saying "I don't like this new stuff, how can we sell it?", while the other half were shrugging in the face of the rapid social changes at time and saying "Just let the kids do what they want, they know better than us."

Pet Sounds was under-promoted, but I think Brian also made a mistake thinking that fans would get the transition from "Barbara Ann" to Pet Sounds. There's a story about Brian playing "Barbara Ann" for a record exec and asking for feedback, calling it the BBs "new single." The exec told him that it was wrong for the image Brian was trying to build for the BBs, causing Brian to storm off. However, we can see by the time of "Good Vibrations" that Brian had made significant headway in his PR campaign, and hiring Derek Taylor was one of the correct moves he had made towards that goal. But then that was all lost...

[Cam Mott]

As I understand it, in the process of Mike testifying for Brian in Brian's suit against Irving [1991?] it came to Mike's attention that it would still be possible to recover the authorship Murry and [mostly?] Brian had cheated him out of from Irving/Brian. He had thought it wasn't something that could not be righted up until then.

Yep, Mike's squadrons of lawyers never thought of that possibility before.... or was it that Mike saw an almost incoherent Brian at the 1991 trial and realized his chance to rewrite history? I'm not saying that Mike didn't get cheated out of some songwriting credits, but a few of the songs he got credited for in the lawsuit are ridiculous.

Besides, didn't Mike originally ask Brian for less than a million and songwriting credits? It was only after Brian's lawyers took Mike to court that Brian got slapped around. Which, again, makes it seem like Mike was in it more for the perception of being viewed as a creative force than for anything else.

You apparently have a lot more inside information about who actually wrote what and Mike's motives than I've heard.

I believe Mike offered the defendants a low ball settlement to his own suit against Irving/Brian[?]. I'm not aware of Brian taking Mike to court over it but the eyewitness claims Mike/his lawyers were advocating for Brian against Brian's own lawyers to the judge in Mike's suit against Irving/Brian[?]. What does that seem like?

[filledeplage]

But it was not 1967, wartime, Carl facing arrest for draft-dodging, and a hostile record company. The "boss" record company did not like the work.  So, Mike gets blamed?  For the record company's lack of support? For the need to establish a new record label? For the poor promotion of Pet Sounds, too?    

No. Mike Love gets blamed for the actually stuff he did do, which I mentioned in an above post. It's bad enough.

Also, not that it matters in terms of my argument, but where is it said that the record company didn't like Smile? I thought they were just upset with how long it was taking.

Thirty-seven (37) years had elapsed! During that time, Pet Sounds became #2 on the all-time Rock and Roll "must-have" LP's.

Even at the time, Pet Sounds sold just fine, as did both Sloop John B. and Wouldn't It Be Nice. It went to #10 while Surfer Girl when to #7. Not exactly the commercial underachiever that it's been made out to be.

And, what Brian has said, is that he had to "chuck it (SMiLE) for a while, because he got too 'close to it.'" That is out of Brian's mouth.  Not Mike's.

Also out of Brian's mouth is the number #1 reason Smile didn't come out was because Mike Love didn't like it. So, let's say, for your sake, we actually omit Brian's word from this particular discussion of why Smile didn't come out.

Big difference.  Apples and oranges.  During that time, Dennis was gone, Carl was gone, Murry and Audree. And, Landy, too.

But we're still talking about how audiences would receive an album or certain material live. And regardless of what time period we're talking, we know that it's proven that Smile can be received quite well by a large audience.  

Is Mike the scapegoat here? Is this the real issue?

No, the issue is reality.

I don't think he should be.  

He's not. He's being called out for behavior that should be called out, regardless of how well the current PR campaign is working.

Not having read these voluminous legal documents, or, been in the courtroom or the recording studio, makes me a poor person to ask.  I would never speculate about who did what. I was not a witness.  Or why people respond in the ways they do.  I am not a doctor.  

The bottom line for me, is that they walk on the stage together, sing together, and the most recent concert photo I saw, shows them holding hands and taking a bow together.  

I never thought it would happen.  I am surprised. No one is more surprised then they are.  

They all have similar roots.  Now they have wings.  

How it works, is something only they know.  In their BB "bubble" as David Marks says.  



  

[Mr. Cohen]

I'm not aware of Brian taking Mike to court over it but the eyewitness claims Mike/his lawyers were advocating for Brian against Brian's own lawyers to the judge in Mike's suit against Irving/Brian[?]. What does that seem like?

Well, no, Brian's lawyers didn't directly take Mike to court over any of this, but by rejecting Mike's overtures, they basically said: "See you in court, punk." And Mike's lawyers must have done a great job advocating for Brian when you look at Mike's final settlement!

[Phoenix]

Mike's done a lot over the years for fans to have something against him:  The Hall of Fame speech, the resistance to Smile and Pet Sounds, Summer In Paradise, the lawsuits, etc.  But his attitude on surrounding this reunion put it all in the distant past to me.  I'm loving the setlists and I'm loving the renewed camaraderie he and Brian seem to have.  

But then I started seeing his comments about the second half of the new album!  Brian gives us what I think is easily some of his best and best RECEIVED material in SEVERAL DECADES and even throws Mike a few bones (lyrics, plus one of his older songs) and Mike knocks this stuff too, talking about how depressing it is.  Wake up, Mike!  "Spring Vacation" is a fine song but the other two songs you contributed to are almost unanimously named as the weakest tracks on the album.  Pretty much everyone likes the stuff you're knocking.  Let it go.  Stick to running the show on stage and keep your trap shut about Brian's new songs.  

MY "demands" for the next Beach Boys' album?  More of the same.  Brian makes the album he wants and tells Mike what and where to contribute and where to sing.  I personally LOVE that Brian had Jeff involved in the album before he even told Mike about it!  That way, Brian held the cards and all Mike could do was say yes or kill the project everyone wanted.  But knowing Mike's past, he's probably planning to leverage himself into a more democratic set up next time and I for one, hope it doesn't happen.  

Both guys have their strengths.  Mike should stick to being a singer and a showman and stop trying to force his seemingly outdated opinions on Brian and the fans.


...Just my two cents.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Not having read these voluminous legal documents, or, been in the courtroom or the recording studio, makes me a poor person to ask.  I would never speculate about who did what. I was not a witness.  Or why people respond in the ways they do.  I am not a doctor.  

The bottom line for me, is that they walk on the stage together, sing together, and the most recent concert photo I saw, shows them holding hands and taking a bow together.  

I never thought it would happen.  I am surprised. No one is more surprised then they are.  

They all have similar roots.  Now they have wings.  

How it works, is something only they know.  In their BB "bubble" as David Marks says.  

I'm not speculating either. I'm working off of first hand evidence from people who were there and in a position to know.

I'm really glad that they are all getting along and I hope they continue to for the rest of their days. It wouldn't change my opinion on the matter, but I am happy if they are all happy.

[filledeplage]

Not having read these voluminous legal documents, or, been in the courtroom or the recording studio, makes me a poor person to ask.  I would never speculate about who did what. I was not a witness.  Or why people respond in the ways they do.  I am not a doctor.  

The bottom line for me, is that they walk on the stage together, sing together, and the most recent concert photo I saw, shows them holding hands and taking a bow together.  

I never thought it would happen.  I am surprised. No one is more surprised then they are.  

They all have similar roots.  Now they have wings.  

How it works, is something only they know.  In their BB "bubble" as David Marks says.  

I'm not speculating either. I'm working off of first hand evidence from people who were there and in a position to know.

I'm really glad that they are all getting along and I hope they continue to for the rest of their days. It wouldn't change my opinion on the matter, but I am happy if they are all happy.

It is good that you are not speculating. I hope this "re-birth" lasts.  Only they know, and can look at all the variables and find the path/s that work/s best for all parties. 

This is just the coolest thing, to be a fan for so long, and turn on the TV and see them on Leno, and Fallon, annd QVC, etc.  And, have a #1 hit.  All in the same month.   

All the negative stuff just melts away when they go onstage and rock out.  The bad stuff is unimportant at this point. Seeing Dennis and Carl being honored on the videos is just wonderfu and powerfull beyond words.  It cannot be easy for them.  And the audience has a chance to finally have a real tribute to both.  It seems to be so healing for everyone. 

I think it has been a real place for everyone to put the past behind them. And get on with life!     

 

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It is good that you are not speculating. I hope this "re-birth" lasts.  Only they know, and can look at all the variables and find the path/s that work/s best for all parties. 

This is just the coolest thing, to be a fan for so long, and turn on the TV and see them on Leno, and Fallon, annd QVC, etc.  And, have a #1 hit.  All in the same month.   

All the negative stuff just melts away when they go onstage and rock out.  The bad stuff is unimportant at this point. Seeing Dennis and Carl being honored on the videos is just wonderfu and powerfull beyond words.  It cannot be easy for them.  And the audience has a chance to finally have a real tribute to both.  It seems to be so healing for everyone. 

I think it has been a real place for everyone to put the past behind them. And get on with life!     

Eh, perhaps. But to an extent I see Van Dyke Parks's point of view which is that there is something deeply unsatisfying and unjust in seeing bad behavior being rewarded. And this should not be coded as "getting on with life." Don't get me wrong, though, I am being completely selfish in that I will be going to see a live show and will be as exuberant as anyone in the stadium.

[KittyKat]

"He's being called out for behavior that should be called out, regardless of how well the current PR campaign is working."

Some of the posters defending Mike have been around longer than many of us.  Their opinions of Mike have been the same over many years and it's not a recent PR campaign, it's just how they feel. I think Mike is a jerk myself but don't agree he's the reason Brian had mental problems or anything that harsh like some people imply.  

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Some of the posters defending Mike have been around longer than many of us.  Their opinions of Mike have been the same over many years and it's not a recent PR campaign, it's just how they feel.

I am aware of that. But a PR campaign is happening nevertheless which seems to be having material results. The consequence of this will be that these long-time posters as you say, can say, "Well, no one thinks like that anymore" or "Yeah, that used to be the common thought but now everyone knows differently."

I think Mike is a jerk myself but don't agree he's the reason Brian had mental problems or anything that harsh like some people imply.  

Who is implying that?

[filledeplage]

It is good that you are not speculating. I hope this "re-birth" lasts.  Only they know, and can look at all the variables and find the path/s that work/s best for all parties.  

This is just the coolest thing, to be a fan for so long, and turn on the TV and see them on Leno, and Fallon, annd QVC, etc.  And, have a #1 hit.  All in the same month.  

All the negative stuff just melts away when they go onstage and rock out.  The bad stuff is unimportant at this point. Seeing Dennis and Carl being honored on the videos is just wonderfu and powerfull beyond words.  It cannot be easy for them.  And the audience has a chance to finally have a real tribute to both.  It seems to be so healing for everyone.  

I think it has been a real place for everyone to put the past behind them. And get on with life!    

Eh, perhaps. But to an extent I see Van Dyke Parks's point of view which is that there is something deeply unsatisfying and unjust in seeing bad behavior being rewarded. And this should not be coded as "getting on with life." Don't get me wrong, though, I am being completely selfish in that I will be going to see a live show and will be as exuberant as anyone in the stadium.

It is hard to say. My personal knowledge is so limited.  But, that said, Van Dyke was not a stranger to the business aspect and rough-and-tumble of the entertainment business.  I've read where he was a child actor.  Business people are expected to be familiar with the rules of the road.  And someone mentioned the early artists, in Rome.  They were in business for hire from the Roman Catholic Church.  It is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.  Michelangelo and the
Medicis as sponsors. He must have been working within some parameters for his patrons. Didn't Shakespeare have sponsors and patrons?

Is it different?  Should he have worked on commercially acceptable concepts given the era, past business models?  Would it have turned out differently?  Or accepted more widely?  That is all what might have been.

He seems to have been included in the 2004 project.  I don't get what the problem is.

There are a lot of unknowns for me.  Sorry.

[MBE]

I can't fault you, Mike, for your fair minded and rational assessment. With that in mind, though, I think there is one part of your discussion that is somewhat simplistic and, I think, overlooks what certain people are really arguing or really have argued:

So Love didn't like a few lines in 1966....get over it! This is a common occurrence in groups of all sorts. The bottom line is he gave in and sang his parts with passion. It was one night at one session and again asking what something means isn't unfair for a singer to ask a songwriter. Even if Mike was an ass about it for the last time he did NOT stop Smile. He didn't have that kind of power in 1966-67 not even close.

For me, it is getting somewhat frustrating to see things like this because it's built on what is now a bit of a strawman argument. Very few people now say the Mike was directly responsible for Smile stopping and no one denies that Mike sang "over and over the crow cries." But the fact is unfortunately, that this issue goes way beyond Mike's objection to those words. According to Brian, Tony Asher, and Mike Love, there was resistance to content during the Pet Sounds sessions. Plus, there is audio evidence that the boys were giving Brian a hard time about the music beyond the Cabinessence sessions. When Brian was both creating the most interesting and complex music thus far of his career, and taking the biggest risks and therefore, because of both of these things needed all the support he could get, he didn't get it. And furthermore, while Mike's objections to those lyrics seems kind of insignificant to us, it did seem significant to the people who were there (Van Dyke Parks) and to the people who were there writing about it (Jules Siegel). Regardless of what it seems like to us, it had a serious effect on the people who experienced this "incident" first hand and, as such, I don't think it can be mere coincidence that the project as a whole really went into a chaotic tailspin at exactly this time. Is it common that band members object to lyrics? Yes. But that's not what this was. It was an ongoing resistance to an artist who, because he was taking major risks at the time, needed support.

So let's put this in a context we may actually understand. This is not like, say, John Lennon telling Paul McCartney that he doesn't like a few lines in When I'm 64. Rather, it is more like John approaching Paul, two months into the making of Sgt. Pepper and telling him that he doesn't like what they've been doing. Now that in itself might not have stopped the album from coming out (Paul was much more stable than Brian at that time anyway) but it may have seriously changed the nature of the project and could have changed the tone of sessions in general. And the fact is simply that Smile didn't come out - and to this day we still don't know what a Smile version Heroes and Villains would really sound like. We still know The Elements in track name only. We still don't know what the second half of Surf's Up would have sounded like. We still don't know what the melody to the Do You Like Worms verse would have been. We still don't have 1966/67 lyrics or a melody to Child is Father of the Man. This is why people "can't get over" the course of events from Pet Sounds through to the end of Smile and I think that's fair enough.

I hear what you are saying and I am not addressing those that have an even view like yourself. I was only touching on Smile here and just cutting to the heart of the whole Mike Love Is Evil stuff. I still say they were able to work it out on Pet Sounds, they did Smiley Smile which was even more far out and had plenty of Parks lyrics. I think the problem with Smile was the fact that the lawsuit and Brian's other quirkier projects (Jasper Daily, The Jokes session, the Smile Session Party etc.) made him loose focus. I also think Brian ultimately was somewhat unsure of the work himself. After Van Dyke left perhaps Brian second guessed him. In other words it's not so simple. I do think the fact that The Beach Boys pitched in and did their best, despite any reservations, means something. Yes there is some teasing on the tapes but it's from Brian too. But the main crux found in the general public of Mike, or Carl or Bruce or Al (we know Dennis loved it) stopping the album cold just isn't true and that's what I was briefly addressing.

[MBE]

So Love didn't like a few lines in 1966....get over it! This is a common occurrence in groups of all sorts. The bottom line is he gave in and sang his parts with passion. It was one night at one session and again asking what something means isn't unfair for a singer to ask a songwriter. Even if Mike was an ass about it for the last time he did NOT stop Smile. He didn't have that kind of power in 1966-67 not even close. Not excusing the Baywatch, SIP, or Full House garbage but Brian's made just as bad of music at times himself IE Sweet Insanity or many of his eighties demos. Even Domenic Priore will tell you that!

You're right. Mike Love really was the bomb. Dennis Wilson thought MIU should self-destruct. NONSENSE! Mike wrote "Please Let Me Wonder", so we should bask in the genius of his every accomplishment.

Mike made Brian promise that Pet Sounds would be Brian's only experimental album. He sat in on the sessions calling Brian "dog ears", telling him he's writing "ego music". He told Brian the lyrics sucked on Smile, probably over and over. Brian basically has a breakdown, so the group decides to get behind whatever he does - we get Smiley Smile, which I love, but I wish we would've gotten Smile, too.  Then Mike writes the lyrics on Wild Honey and completely cements the BBs as squares. And we know what Mike has done since the mid-70s on!

But he's a hero. We wouldn't have "Fun, Fun, Fun" without him. It is curious though, that if you really read about the early BBs songs, Brian was no slouch when it came to lyrics and concepts. Brian came to Mike with some of the lyrics of "I Get Around" and the concept, for example. It wasn't just genius Mike translating some abstract Brian composition. Mike's done a lot of myth-making over the years and it's quite a coincidence that that he finally decided to bring that songwriting issue in court when Brian was in terrible shape, reeling from the Landy fallout -  you know, when Brian was in no shape to defend himself. But Mike Love is the BBs compassionate savior and Brian's greatest cheerleader!

Old legends die hard. Too bad the truth makes this all crap. Don't believe Brian's or Leaf's old press releases if you want the truth. I've been researching this for 24 years and have spoken to most if not all the principles. Where do you get your info? Nothing personal mind you but I hate regurgitation of someones old agenda's. If you want to think it's Brian and the five assholes there's a lovely blueboard for you.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It is hard to say. My personal knowledge is so limited.  But, that said, Van Dyke was not a stranger to the business aspect and rough-and-tumble of the entertainment business.  I've read where he was a child actor.  Business people are expected to be familiar with the rules of the road.  And someone mentioned the early artists, in Rome.  They were in business for hire from the Roman Catholic Church.  It is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.  Michelangelo and the
Medicis as sponsors. He must have been working within some parameters for his patrons. Didn't Shakespeare have sponsors and patrons?

Shakespeare did but he was not a businessman and most of his material would have been way over the heads of the people who were paying his salary, otherwise he probably would have been imprisoned for treason. And the reason why is because Shakespeare was not a businessman and neither was Van Dyke Parks and neither should be any artist, really. But even business people have the right to expect basic decency and it seems to me that Van Dyke felt that he never received that.

He seems to have been included in the 2004 project.  I don't get what the problem is.

The problem is what I said, there is something unsatisfying and unjust about seeing bad behavior going rewarded which to him is what has happened with Brian returning to the Beach Boys fold.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I hear what you are saying and I am not addressing those that have an even view like yourself. I was only touching on Smile here and just cutting to the heart of the whole Mike Love Is Evil stuff. I still say they were able to work it out on Pet Sounds, they did Smiley Smile which was even more far out and had plenty of Parks lyrics. I think the problem with Smile was the fact that the lawsuit and Brian's other quirkier projects (Jasper Daily, The Jokes session, the Smile Session Party etc.) made him loose focus. I also think Brian ultimately was somewhat unsure of the work himself. After Van Dyke left perhaps Brian second guessed him. In other words it's not so simple.

I absolutely agree with you that it's not so simple though I don't quite have the same view as you as to why Smile fizzled out and why Smiley was made. Again, I think it is pretty telling that the project started to lose focus immediately after that "incident" as described by Jules Siegel and Van Dyke Parks.

Yes there is some teasing on the tapes but it's from Brian too.

It's not just teasing though. When Brian says words to the effect of, "I'm going to cancel the rest of the session if you keep giving me a hard time" we can kind of see right there what was happening with the album.

But the main crux found in the general public of Mike, or Carl or Bruce or Al (we know Dennis loved it) stopping the album cold just isn't true and that's what I was briefly addressing.

Fair enough, though I would add perhaps that no one really says this anymore.

[KittyKat]

I was looking at Beach Boys videos on YouTube yesterday and found a link to a video from the David Lynch Foundation about Mike being appointed energy czar of Fairfield, IA. where MIU is.  So, Mike is buds with David Lynch?  TM makes strange bedfellows, lol.  I didn't know Mike was still that into TM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23dxy03rxYY

[filledeplage]

It is hard to say. My personal knowledge is so limited.  But, that said, Van Dyke was not a stranger to the business aspect and rough-and-tumble of the entertainment business.  I've read where he was a child actor.  Business people are expected to be familiar with the rules of the road.  And someone mentioned the early artists, in Rome.  They were in business for hire from the Roman Catholic Church.  It is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.  Michelangelo and the
Medicis as sponsors. He must have been working within some parameters for his patrons. Didn't Shakespeare have sponsors and patrons?

Shakespeare did but he was not a businessman and most of his material would have been way over the heads of the people who were paying his salary, otherwise he probably would have been imprisoned for treason. And the reason why is because Shakespeare was not a businessman and neither was Van Dyke Parks and neither be should any artist, really. But even business people have the right to expect basic decency and it seems to me that Van Dyke felt that he never received that.

He seems to have been included in the 2004 project.  I don't get what the problem is.

The problem is what I said, there is something unsatisfying and unjust about seeing bad behavior going rewarded which to him is what has happened with Brian returning to the Beach Boys fold.

In the continuum, the 2004 project was a Brian project and the newer release is the Sessions project.  One, Van Dyke seemed to very involved in, appeared at the galas, etc.  It appeared that the Boys were excluded.  I don't know.  It is 8 years later.  50th anniversary.  A career milestone.  It is not a "one-size-fits-all" situation.

People on this, and other interest boards clamored for a reunion.  They are reunited. They clamored for the  Smile sessions to be released.  They are released.  And still people are unhappy.  Everyone can't be pleased.  This is not a perfect world.  

Didn't Van Dyke sue some young artist and get an injunction to cancel an art show where there were some extrapolations/re-interpretations of his verse which were reconstituted  into a new art form?  Pot meet Kettle.  Even the Beach Boys made some nice statement about Katie Perry's California Girls, after some crazy story emerged.  It seems analogous but the responses were different.  They didn't try to get the recording pulled.  Van Dyke, it seemed, got the art show cancelled.  And Van Dyke is calling out someone else?  Sorry.  As my mother used to say, " 'Sympathy' is in the dictionary."  

Brian Wilson is a big boy. He decided.  Or, initiated the process. I would not know. And it is of no consequence. "Brian is back" but I never knew that he was 'really' gone.  

In the three shows I have seen, Brian appears not to miss one thing on stage.  His "wheels" appear to be very much in sync with the band.  And, each time I see him, he is walking better and he seems more relaxed.  His google interview was hilarious.  The interviewer asked a question, expecting a "deep answer" as to how he felt about singing I Just Wasn't Made for These Times, and Brian says something about the sound coming out of his throat through his mouth and out to the audience.  His wit is still dead-on, even with his poker-player expression.   He comes out with some really funny stuff.  

Brian, as an individual performer was right in the flow of things in his performances, including Pet Sounds Live, TLOS and SMiLE.  Unfortunately, I did not catch Gershwin.   Even the "hot and dirty hits" shows - he was relaxed and would tell some little story connected to a lot of the songs.  I love Brian.  He embodies hope, recovery and the concept that miracles really do happen.  Every night he gets behind that piano, with his Boys, the audience can witness it all. When Brian is said to have told Carl at his end, that, he was "gonna stay around for awhile," he meant it. Maybe he is doing this for his brothers as well as his bandmate "brothers."        

JMHO  

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Didn't Van Dyke sue some young artist and get an injunction to cancel an art show where there were some extrapolations/re-interpretations of his verse which were reconstituted  into a new art form?  Pot meet Kettle.  Even the Beach Boys made some nice statement about Katie Perry's California Girls, after some crazy story emerged.  It seems analogous but the responses were different.  They didn't try to get the recording pulled.  Van Dyke, it seemed, got the art show cancelled.  And Van Dyke is calling out someone else?  Sorry.  As my mother used to say, " 'Sympathy' is in the dictionary."

I'm sorry. I'm really confused. Do you think Van Dyke is upset because Mike Love cancelled his art show? 

In the three shows I have seen, Brian appears not to miss one thing on stage.  His "wheels" appear to be very much in sync with the band.  And, each time I see him, he is walking better and he seems more relaxed.  His google interview was hilarious.  The interviewer asked a question, expecting a "deep answer" as to how he felt about singing I Just Wasn't Made for These Times, and Brian says something about the sound coming out of his throat through his mouth and out to the audience.  His wit is still dead-on, even with his poker-player expression.   He comes out with some really funny stuff.  

Erm, I'm not so certain it was a joke. That interview was okay I guess. Brian didn't utter a single word unless he was directly asked a question but that's fine. That's what makes him comfortable - no different than he has been at all over the last ten or twelve years.

[filledeplage]

Didn't Van Dyke sue some young artist and get an injunction to cancel an art show where there were some extrapolations/re-interpretations of his verse which were reconstituted  into a new art form?  Pot meet Kettle.  Even the Beach Boys made some nice statement about Katie Perry's California Girls, after some crazy story emerged.  It seems analogous but the responses were different.  They didn't try to get the recording pulled.  Van Dyke, it seemed, got the art show cancelled.  And Van Dyke is calling out someone else?  Sorry.  As my mother used to say, " 'Sympathy' is in the dictionary."

I'm sorry. I'm really confused. Do you think Van Dyke is upset because Mike Love cancelled his art show? 

In the three shows I have seen, Brian appears not to miss one thing on stage.  His "wheels" appear to be very much in sync with the band.  And, each time I see him, he is walking better and he seems more relaxed.  His google interview was hilarious.  The interviewer asked a question, expecting a "deep answer" as to how he felt about singing I Just Wasn't Made for These Times, and Brian says something about the sound coming out of his throat through his mouth and out to the audience.  His wit is still dead-on, even with his poker-player expression.   He comes out with some really funny stuff.  

Erm, I'm not so certain it was a joke. That interview was okay I guess. Brian didn't utter a single word unless he was directly asked a question but that's fine. That's what makes him comfortable - no different than he has been at all over the last ten or twelve years.

Rockandroll - There is probably a thread, on this board, which contains the story of the art show.  I think it was this past winter.

And, my take on the interview was that it was less spontaneous and particular questions had been formulated for each participant.  The question was particularized toward Brian.  Brian seems to be a listener.  It may be a lost art.

How would you know what makes Brian uncomfortable?  Isn't that a question for Brian?   

[Mr. Cohen]

Brian Wilson is a big boy. He decided.  Or, initiated the process. I would not know. And it is of no consequence. "Brian is back" but I never knew that he was 'really' gone.  

Well, sure... these guys are getting up there, and they decided to put their differences aside to have one last go of it. Part of that means patting everyone on the back constantly and giving them tons of credit in group interviews: "Bruce wrote 'I Write the Songs' and won a Grammy, you know.  Plus, we always do 'Disney Girls', which the Mamas and Papas dug." "Mike was a great lead vocalist and had unbelievable synergy with Brian - he was such a brilliant, genius lyrical talent, whether it was 'Fun, Fun, Fun' or 'Kokomo'. And he got great grades in high school." "It was Al's idea that we do 'Sloop John B', and he sang a great lead on one of our #1 hits, 'Help Me Rhonda'. He always brought a great folksy vibe to the band." "Brian, too, was just a such a genius in the studio and with his songwriting and harmonies. We all looked up to him. He was a pop Rachmaninoff."


And, of course, the revisionists are using all of this back-patting to support their view that Mike was great and how Brian was just one slice of the BB's pie. The group has largely accomplished what they always sought to do - to be looked upon as more or less Brian's equals, and to square away the artistry of Pet Sounds and Smile as a drugged up aberration. It was PR campaign that took them decades, but it's finally paid off. Strangely enough, Brian even seems to support this new viewpoint, telling every interviewer how much "hashish" he smoked while recording Smile, as if he should somehow need to excuse some of his best work.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Rockandroll - There is probably a thread, on this board, which contains the story of the art show.  I think it was this past winter.

My question though is what does it have to do with what we're talking about?

And, my take on the interview was that it was less spontaneous and particular questions had been formulated for each participant.  The question was particularized toward Brian.  Brian seems to be a listener.  It may be a lost art.

But there was a part where he was caught not listening.

How would you know what makes Brian uncomfortable?  Isn't that a question for Brian?   

Because it has been a consistent behavioral pattern. And yes, sometimes (in fact, very often) people don't know what is the source of their comfort or discomfort and it takes an outsider to figure it out. So in answer to your question: no, definitely not.

[filledeplage]

Rockandroll - There is probably a thread, on this board, which contains the story of the art show.  I think it was this past winter.

My question though is what does it have to do with what we're talking about?

And, my take on the interview was that it was less spontaneous and particular questions had been formulated for each participant.  The question was particularized toward Brian.  Brian seems to be a listener.  It may be a lost art.

But there was a part where he was caught not listening.

How would you know what makes Brian uncomfortable?  Isn't that a question for Brian?   

Because it has been a consistent behavioral pattern. And yes, sometimes (in fact, very often) people don't know what is the source of their comfort or discomfort and it takes an outsider to figure it out. So in answer to your question: no, definitely not.

The issue raised is bad behavior and a feeling of injustice.  Did I miss something?  I found the situation somewhat hypocritical.  And, I always supported his work until I read that he shut down the young artist's show.  After the Beach Boys showed Katy Perry support. 

And, newsflash. Some of our best creators were daydreamers, who appeared to "stare into space" and appear to be inattentive.  Some of my highest and creative student acheivers were those daydreamers.  It can be an indicator of ADD or ADHD.  Those people are the real creative people for they think outside-the-box.   

And, making an outsider observation about "discomfort" appears to be practicing medicine.