Would Surfs Up have been the Greatest?

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

With some of the Dennis tracks replacing the lesser ones, I think Pet Sounds and Sunflower would almost be beaten...

Side 1
1. Dont Go Near The Water
2. Long Promised Road
3. Looking at Tomorrow
4. Disney Girls
5. Feel Flows

Side 2
6. 4th of July
7. A Day In The Life of A Tree
8. Til' I Die
9. Surfs Up
10. Wouldn't it be nice? (To live again)

I think the "Dennis and Brian" suite at the end would've been Amazing.
Serously, make this playlist (with the AMCB version of WIBNTLA)
And you'll see what I mean.

[Summertime Blooz]

I would replace Disney Girls with Take A Load Off Your Feet. Still wouldn't be better than Pet Sounds though.

[Jukka]

Come on, Surf's Up deserves to be the album closer! No matter how great WIBNTLA is, nothing can follow Surf's up, at least on the same vinyl side. Disney Girls has to stay, but one of the Carl tracks might as well go. Sorry, I'm a Carl fan, but those songs are better productions than songs (especially Feel Flows). TALOYF has to stay on the tracklist, it's a stone cold classic exercise in goofiness!

[Jukka]

...and to answer your question, I don't think the album would quite rule Pet Sounds, but in my book it is already better than Sunflower, as it is.

[Quzi]

Come now, I'm not a Bruce apologist by any means, but I'm not gonna shy away from admitting that Disney Girls is one of the most solid pop songs ever. They should take away Bruce's grammy for I Write the Songs and then re-award it to him for Disney Girls imo. If there's any song on Surf's Up that's to be cut for being a bit cumbersome and  dreary, I'd have to say it's Long Promised Road. I've grown to deal with most of Rieley's lyrics, but lines like "so hard to laugh a childlike giggle" and "throw off all the shackles that are binding me down" are truly cringeworthy. Carl may have been ahead of his time with that chorus, but I can't say I admire him for so desperately attempting to cram in a wannabe anthem worthy of the 80s into a song that didn't need it. Blegh, blugh and blogh. Anyway, my ideal Surf's Up would look something like this:


Side 1
1. Dont Go Near the Water
2. Disney Girls (1957)
3. Sounds of Free
4. 4th of July
5. Wouldn't it Be Nice (To Live Again)

Side 2
6. Feel Flows
7. Lookin' at Tomorrow (A Welfare Song)
8. A Day in the Life of a Tree
9. 'Til I Die (this mix: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS34TZR3SNY)
10. Surf's Up

I think with this tracklist, Surf's Up smokes Sunflower fo' sho' and while I don't think it's even close to nipping at Pet Sounds' heels, it's still a vast improvement over anything that includes SDT + LPR. And for the record, I don't mind Feet, I just don't think it works in the context of this album.

[Jukka]

^Hey, I like that. You've got your Denny suite and Brian suite. Still missing Feet, but I admit it would stick out on that tracklist.

[Matt Bielewicz]

As usual, this is all just opinions, and I have mine too, and it jars with most of what's been said so far. I feel that Surf's Up, despite the masterful inclusion of Til I Die and the title track, is a WAAAAAAY weaker album than Sunflower, and Pet Sounds is so far ahead of it that it's not even in the same league. When you're as unimpressed by an album as I am with Surf's Up, tinkering around, removing Student Demonstration and 'Feet' and replacing them with Dennis tracks doesn't really help any, either (particularly as 99 percent of BB fans haven't actually heard '...Live Again' and don't really know what it's like, the availability of the live cover notwithstanding). Don't get me wrong, if you love Surf's Up, good for you, but for me it's a serious misfire in the quality control department, and I just can't find any love for it. If you like this album, don't read on, as I'm about to let rip on it with the true force of my feelings. Just be aware that I know that this is only what *I* feel about it, and I'm not trying to convince anybody to adopt my way of thinking, particularly if they love it.

Don't Go Near The Water has not aged well lyrically or musically for me, although it does have a lovely harmony tag. Love's simultaneously preachy and creepy delivery, and truly ghastly lyrics ('Toothpaste and soap will make our oceans a bubble bath; so let's avoid an ecological aftermath' is so-bad-it's-funny inept, as well as being so desperate in its attempt to make the eco-hippies of the day love it) make it hard for me to make it all the way through, though - only knowledge that the tag is coming does. In short, rarely have I quite literally wanted a song to reach its end so much. Moving on, although I love CW's voice, Long Promised Road is the archetypal boring 70s proggy track to me; and like Quzi, Rieley's woeful quasi-mystical mumbo-jumbo lyrics bring me out a rash, too ('So hard to drink of passion nectar; When the taste of life's holding me down' is one particularly cringe-inducing couplet, for me). 'Feet' is less-than-B-side grade material as far as I'm concerned, and feels as though it made the cut just because it was hanging around after being rejected once already from Add Some Music/Sunflower. Like a lot of people, my copy of Surf's Up is permanently set to skip the distorted, hot mess that is Student Demonstration Time, although I do have a lot of time for Disney Girls, and I'm aware people's opinions are divided on that one too, some finding it touching, others sappy. Personally, I think it's a beautifully well-realised, elegaic evocation of what must have seemed, in the troubled early 70s, like a quieter, simpler, sweeter time.

Side 2 fares a little better, but only because of the Brian tracks that should actually have been served up elsewhere, and the other stuff is, if anything, even more drecky than on side 1. Al's other song, Looking At Tomorrow, is just *there*. It's not gauche and giggly with forced, nerdy humour like 'Feet', but it's not exciting either, just competent and dull, and very much of its time. I much prefer any number of other Al songs from this period - to my way of thinking, Susie Cincinnati, Loop The Loop, or At My Window were way better, but this is just yawnsville. Feel Flows is mention-worthy only because it takes all of the aspects of Long Promised Road that I didn't like and takes them even *further* in the realm of my personal distaste. Duelling prog flute, guitar and saxophone on the boring, boring bridge with same dull old chords cycling to eternity - oh, please, kill me now, this is almost as bad as crap 70s jazz. And Rieley's lyrics - was he just mucking about, or what? 'unbending never ending tablets of time' and 'Unfolding enveloping missiles of soul; recall senses sadly'. Pardon? It would be bad enough, but for me, having this embarrassing drug-addled mierda on the same side as Van Dyke's aural poetry for Surf's Up (the track) just shows up how far the Boys had fallen in five years.

'Tree' is weird but mostly good weird - it would have made a good solid B-side. And you'll hear no complaints from me about either of the remaining Brian tracks, not just because of some unthinking Brianista-style devotion that says I have to like them because they're Brian tracks, but because I honestly believe that they stand way above most of the stuff on the rest of this turgid car-wreck. But they alone can't make me like this greasy, reheated fry-up of an album as a whole.

Surf's Up seems to be an album that excites a lot of people who got back into the band after their 'desert exile' period, when Rolling Stone started to write positively about them again, and I can see that if the album was your 'way back in' to the world of the Beach Boys, you'd probably have fond memories of it. I only came to know the catalogue in the 90s, long after all the 'hipness' wars of the late 60s and early 70s were over, and when I weighed Surf's Up against what came before and afterwards, I found it seriously wanting. I think I probably prefer Carl and the Passions overall to this, seriously (at least it rocks!), and I definitely prefer Holland. I ripped the tracks from Surf's Up to my iPod, but I broke the album up and filed the individual tracks with my non-album Beach Boys songs, just because I don't ever want to listen to the original tracks in their album order, I find it such a tedious and dispiriting listen - and Feel Flows is actually DELETED. I found it so, so boring I just never want to put it on at all*. Surf's Up is the only Beach Boys album I've done that with. To me, the cover says it all - you've got the formerly exultant native American from the optimistic Brother Records logo broken down, at the end of his rope, ready to give in, surrounded by gathering, murky, oily darkness. In my version of Beach Boys history, the album is replaced with a Surf's Up EP featuring just four tracks: Disney Girls, 'Tree', Til I Die and Surf's Up. Of course, that's pretty miserable listening too, with nothing else to leaven it, but at least the dreck is gone.

So against this, for me Sunflower seems a towering masterwork (it kind of is anyway...!), and Pet Sounds is... well, it is what it is - a once-in-a-lifetime achievement that puts most other albums in the shade. Surf's Up doesn't even register on the same scale.

Harsh, I know... but that's how I've always felt about it, right back to when I first heard it. There you go. Your mileage may (and no doubt does) vary.

MattB

* Oh, now I look, it seems that I have deleted Take A Load Of Your Feet for all time, too. If I never had to listen to that again, either, it would be too soon. (Yawns at the mere thought).

[Kirk]

They should take away Bruce's grammy for I Write the Songs and then re-award it to him for Disney Girls imo.

Agree totally! Disney Girls is a classic not just in the BB canon but in 70s pop. Way better than the Manilow hit.

[filledeplage]

As usual, this is all just opinions, and I have mine too, and it jars with most of what's been said so far. I feel that Surf's Up, despite the masterful inclusion of Til I Die and the title track, is a WAAAAAAY weaker album than Sunflower, and Pet Sounds is so far ahead of it that it's not even in the same league. When you're as unimpressed by an album as I am with Surf's Up, tinkering around, removing Student Demonstration and 'Feet' and replacing them with Dennis tracks doesn't really help any, either (particularly as 99 percent of BB fans haven't actually heard '...Live Again' and don't really know what it's like, the availability of the live cover notwithstanding). Don't get me wrong, if you love Surf's Up, good for you, but for me it's a serious misfire in the quality control department, and I just can't find any love for it. If you like this album, don't read on, as I'm about to let rip on it with the true force of my feelings. Just be aware that I know that this is only what *I* feel about it, and I'm not trying to convince anybody to adopt my way of thinking, particularly if they love it.

Don't Go Near The Water has not aged well lyrically or musically for me, although it does have a lovely harmony tag. Love's simultaneously preachy and creepy delivery, and truly ghastly lyrics ('Toothpaste and soap will make our oceans a bubble bath; so let's avoid an ecological aftermath' is so-bad-it's-funny inept, as well as being so desperate in its attempt to make the eco-hippies of the day love it) make it hard for me to make it all the way through, though - only knowledge that the tag is coming does. In short, rarely have I quite literally wanted a song to reach its end so much. Moving on, although I love CW's voice, Long Promised Road is the archetypal boring 70s proggy track to me; and like Quzi, Rieley's woeful quasi-mystical mumbo-jumbo lyrics bring me out a rash, too ('So hard to drink of passion nectar; When the taste of life's holding me down' is one particularly cringe-inducing couplet, for me). 'Feet' is less-than-B-side grade material as far as I'm concerned, and feels as though it made the cut just because it was hanging around after being rejected once already from Add Some Music/Sunflower. Like a lot of people, my copy of Surf's Up is permanently set to skip the distorted, hot mess that is Student Demonstration Time, although I do have a lot of time for Disney Girls, and I'm aware people's opinions are divided on that one too, some finding it touching, others sappy. Personally, I think it's a beautifully well-realised, elegaic evocation of what must have seemed, in the troubled early 70s, like a quieter, simpler, sweeter time.

Side 2 fares a little better, but only because of the Brian tracks that should actually have been served up elsewhere, and the other stuff is, if anything, even more drecky than on side 1. Al's other song, Looking At Tomorrow, is just *there*. It's not gauche and giggly with forced, nerdy humour like 'Feet', but it's not exciting either, just competent and dull, and very much of its time. I much prefer any number of other Al songs from this period - to my way of thinking, Susie Cincinnati, Loop The Loop, or At My Window were way better, but this is just yawnsville. Feel Flows is mention-worthy only because it takes all of the aspects of Long Promised Road that I didn't like and takes them even *further* in the realm of my personal distaste. Duelling prog flute, guitar and saxophone on the boring, boring bridge with same dull old chords cycling to eternity - oh, please, kill me now, this is almost as bad as crap 70s jazz. And Rieley's lyrics - was he just mucking about, or what? 'unbending never ending tablets of time' and 'Unfolding enveloping missiles of soul; recall senses sadly'. Pardon? It would be bad enough, but for me, having this embarrassing drug-addled mierda on the same side as Van Dyke's aural poetry for Surf's Up (the track) just shows up how far the Boys had fallen in five years.

'Tree' is weird but mostly good weird - it would have made a good solid B-side. And you'll hear no complaints from me about either of the remaining Brian tracks, not just because of some unthinking Brianista-style devotion that says I have to like them because they're Brian tracks, but because I honestly believe that they stand way above most of the stuff on the rest of this turgid car-wreck. But they alone can't make me like this greasy, reheated fry-up of an album as a whole.

Surf's Up seems to be an album that excites a lot of people who got back into the band after their 'desert exile' period, when Rolling Stone started to write positively about them again, and I can see that if the album was your 'way back in' to the world of the Beach Boys, you'd probably have fond memories of it. I only came to know the catalogue in the 90s, long after all the 'hipness' wars of the late 60s and early 70s were over, and when I weighed Surf's Up against what came before and afterwards, I found it seriously wanting. I think I probably prefer Carl and the Passions overall to this, seriously (at least it rocks!), and I definitely prefer Holland. I ripped the tracks from Surf's Up to my iPod, but I broke the album up and filed the individual tracks with my non-album Beach Boys songs, just because I don't ever want to listen to the original tracks in their album order, I find it such a tedious and dispiriting listen - and Feel Flows is actually DELETED. I found it so, so boring I just never want to put it on at all*. Surf's Up is the only Beach Boys album I've done that with. To me, the cover says it all - you've got the formerly exultant native American from the optimistic Brother Records logo broken down, at the end of his rope, ready to give in, surrounded by gathering, murky, oily darkness. In my version of Beach Boys history, the album is replaced with a Surf's Up EP featuring just four tracks: Disney Girls, 'Tree', Til I Die and Surf's Up. Of course, that's pretty miserable listening too, with nothing else to leaven it, but at least the dreck is gone.

So against this, for me Sunflower seems a towering masterwork (it kind of is anyway...!), and Pet Sounds is... well, it is what it is - a once-in-a-lifetime achievement that puts most other albums in the shade. Surf's Up doesn't even register on the same scale.

Harsh, I know... but that's how I've always felt about it, right back to when I first heard it. There you go. Your mileage may (and no doubt does) vary.

MattB

Surf's Up made them sociological heroes in my book.  They came out of their "man cave" with the car-girly-surf (not the metaphorical) context into the real time of the 1970's with environmental, protest, and responsible themes, with more sophisticated vocals.   It is a grown-up and maturely responsible album.  And, it was probably a challenge for those who preferred the stereotypical (and they should not have been stereotyped ) I Get Around and all those other truly "fun" songs in a time that could not have been more serious and "un-fun" and almost an angry era in the States.  

If one listens to the wonderful two-part program, translated from French, I think Gaumont Palace, on YouTube, where four of the band members are interviewed on pushed together twin beds, I think one can capture the maturity and social awareness pouring through. And the notion that they did not appreciate being stifled in terms of concept music, rather than the standard Fun-in-the Sun moneymakers for the music industry, which I do love, but, that was a time of great growth and dialogue about the people being invested in public policy and activism to force an archaic structure to be responsive to people.  The White House was "cleaned out."

The Band was playing a lot of college campuses at the time, and could not be unaffected by social issues. College kids became their new market for their newer material.  I only wish that Student Demonstration Time was the side A opener.  I walked past that fabulous statue of Appeal to the Great Spirit on the way to class every day in college.  The concepts were not lost on me.  

Even if, as in some other albums, some SMiLE tracks were slipped in, somehow it fits.  It was important, at least for me, that there was a political statement of sorts, such as SDT, or Don't Go Near the Water, to know that they "got" what was going on around them and used the music as an education tool to raise awareness to environmental issues.  And SDT is harsh; they were harsh times.  No one could accuse them of being "stuck in the rut" of a post war 1950's myth.  The dreamy Disney Girls confirms that.  And a chunk of that aspiration endures, but with the reality of real life, and not the contrived black and white early TV of the 1950's and early 60's.  

It is a fantastic album.  Til I Die, so masterful, closed out with Surf's Up.  Lots of food-for-thought; a time when such a collection of music was needed.  

[Runaways]

If WIBNTLA is as good as advertised,I probably would have a tough time deciding between Sunflower and Surf's Up.  I already do to a degree.  I'd also have a hard time deciding between removing TALOYF and LAT

[EgoHanger1966]

With some of the Dennis tracks replacing the lesser ones, I think Pet Sounds and Sunflower would almost be beaten...

Side 1
1. Dont Go Near The Water
2. Long Promised Road
3. Looking at Tomorrow
4. Disney Girls
5. Feel Flows

Side 2
6. 4th of July
7. A Day In The Life of A Tree
8. Til' I Die
9. Surfs Up
10. Wouldn't it be nice? (To live again)

I think the "Dennis and Brian" suite at the end would've been Amazing.
Serously, make this playlist (with the AMCB version of WIBNTLA)
And you'll see what I mean.

Not bad, but in no way superior or equal to Pet Sounds - closer to Sunflower. I think a re-worked Surf's Up could be miles better than what was released, but I feel it would have to be more of a radical reworking.

I am of the opinion that "Don't Go Near The Water" is a terrible album opener, and that "Surf's Up" should open the album - I am aware no one agrees with that!

A Day In The Life Of A Tree, the Reiley vocals kill this for me. Yeah, I know, "but he makes it sound like a tree!" I think the ultimate vault find would be a Wilson brother scratch vocal on this track.

4th of July is o.k, but a little slow and draggish. I'd put "Sound of Free" in it's place - I think it would fit well on Surf's Up.

Lookin' For Tomorrow is a little too political for my taste, not sure if I'd leave that one in on a "mix".

However, I don't think "Feet" is too bad - as it progresses, it just gets better and better, I think I'd still have that one for a little variety and a Jardine vocal.

I can't really make a full fantasy line-up, because I'd have to do one with Sunflower too - there were so many strong songs from those sessions that I'd probably end up including one or two "leftovers" on my version of SU.

So, my "ultimate SU" would contain:Surf's Up/Long Promised Road/Take Good Care of Your Feet/Sound of Free/Disney Girls/Feel Flows/____/_____/'Til I Die/Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again.

[Don Malcolm]

I think we have to recognize that the Surf's Up album seems to be the first instance of actual discord within the group about what material would appear on an album. That's a significant moment in the history of the band, and while the album as released had a salutary effect on their career momentum (paving the way for a full-blown mid-70s revival) it is an album self-consciously filled with extremity. Richard Meltzer wrote a bizarre masters thesis in the late 60s that was eventually published under the title of The Aesthetics of Rock, that was littered with amphetamine-laced "concepts" which mostly ricocheted instead of resonated, but he made an offhand remark about the BBs that (IMO) remains relevant--their work is "schizoid rather than eclectic". That is, it has a tendency to push against itself and its original sonic/stylistic synthesis.

Brian's lingering malaise after Smile made this more pronounced, particularly as the rest of the band took over more of the songwriting and production. 20/20 was the first "smorgasbord" LP of their career, where a series of really diverse styles co-existed on one LP. Sunflower was more cohesive, in part due to the intervention of Warners in the song selection process. (That seems to be one of the few times that a record company has had a truly positive outcome in the fate of an LP.)

Surf's Up was part of a conscious change in strategy, but a strategy that couldn't avoid being schizoid rather than eclectic, if only for the fact that Brian's music would always stand apart from everything else. Jack Rieley is a lightning rod for good and bad in these events, pushing for more "relevant" lyrics and looking for ways to give the band a toe-hold in the modality of rock as it existed at that time. The results of that were decidedly mixed, but the best moments (most of them not on Surf's Up, actually, but on CATP and Holland) did materially assist the band in getting out from behind the 8-ball of their "credibility problem" that was "shackling" them at the time.

Internal dissension seems to first come into play here, and I think almost everyone agrees that the album is weaker than it might have been. Ultimately, however, the album did what it needed to in terms of the band's career, and while that may seem too expedient a thought when a more encompassing "aesthetic judgment" is required, that's the bottom line. As Van Dyke said at the time, "If they name the LP Surf's Up we can pre-sell 150,000 copies." The album became bound up in a tug-of-war, and creating a schizoid smorgasbord--one that took as much of its allure from the most noteworthy of the "lost" Smile tracks--was the best tactic to make the band viable in the US again. It worked, but it had consequences.

As for whether Dennis' tunes would have made Surf's Up their best LP--certainly not. Brian flew so high with Pet Sounds that it's impossible to see any combination of these songs--even with "Surf's Up" lifted from its proper context--as approaching that level. I'm as a big a fan of Dennis' music as anyone, but Dennis at his best < Brian at his best.

[Cabinessenceking]

I agree with most which has been said here, but perhaps if one does such a radical reworking of the album one might as well put Sound Of Free as the lead track instead of DGNTW.
If something like:
Side 1
1. Sound Of Free
2. Dont Go Near The Water
3. Long Promised Road
4. Looking at Tomorrow
5. Disney Girls
6. Feel Flows

Side 2
7. 4th of July
8. A Day In The Life of A Tree
9. Til' I Die
10. Surfs Up
11. Wouldn't it be nice? (To live again)


...had been released (not necessary JUST like this) then The Beach Boys might have been held in higher regard given that the real SU went into the top 40 as their reputation in the US started to recover. Obviously WIBNTLA is pure speculation, but many praise it (even the few who have heard it) so there might have been some true merit to it. In worst case just swap SU with it... After Smile this must be the biggest load the Beach Boys ever blew (if one disregards 15BO?)

[filledeplage]

A thing that I always found troubling was the artwork on Smiley and Surf's Up.  Not the beautiful artwork, per se.  But the relationship between the music and the LP cover, to create an identity as between the two.  I would have bought anything they released, because of the vocals.  Smiley had a record jacket (a paper sleeve to keep the LP clean and unscratched) which was an assortment of album covers for Capitol Records.  Why? Al Martino, Freddy Martin, Cannonball Adderly were doing on the sleeve cover is beyond me.  It resembled a promo for the Capitol Record Club. They could have used the space to describe the artwork on Smiley so that people knew what it was.  And it did not "pop" in the record display because it was pale green.  Red lights and stop signs grab your attention with the color.  And the music was competing with the Stones, Beatles, etc.  It may have been typical of record industry standards at the time, but, not with a fledgling Brother Records, spreading its' new wings.  They could have told us about the artwork. 

Surf's Up had liner lyrics with an inner fold out of arid earth. Maybe it was to symbolize environmental impact of no water...Beautiful as it is, there was little nexus as between the music and the artwork which would compel a music shopper to buy.  

20/20, Pet Sounds, and Sunflower, etc., had photos of the Boys.  And, concrete images to make a connection to.  People have short attention spans.  And the cover is the ticket in the door.  I wished they had used the space to talk about the choice of the artwork and motivate further inquiry into the artist who did the Native American sculpture for the nickel.  That is the job of the marketing people.  And it speaks volumes about their commitment to the Boys.  

[Wah Wah Wah Ooooo]

I don't think that to include Dennis' songs, they would have had to drop any of the others. It's a very short album as it is, and could have easily been 2-3 songs longer. Sure there are some weak moments, but I still think if DW's songs were on there, it would've been the same album + those tracks. 

My personal Surf's Up mix is the entire released album plus 4th of July and Adam Marsland's WIBNTLA and it's a fine album.

[pixletwin]

As for whether Dennis' tunes would have made Surf's Up their best LP--certainly not. Brian flew so high with Pet Sounds that it's impossible to see any combination of these songs--even with "Surf's Up" lifted from its proper context--as approaching that level. I'm as a big a fan of Dennis' music as anyone, but Dennis at his best < Brian at his best.

I absolutely agree. Dennis' music would have elevated Surf's Up to a higher standard, but no matter how good WIBNTLA is, "A Day in the Life of a Tree" and "Til' I Die" are just a completely different genus of quality.

My track order:

Side One:

1. Don't Go Near the Water
2. Long Promised Road
3. 4th of July
4. Disney Girls (1957)
5. Fallin' In Love
6. Surf's Up

Side Two

1. Feel Flows
2. Lookin' At Tomorrow (A Welfare Song)
3. A Day in the Life of a Tree
4. Til' I Die
5. Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again

[EgoHanger1966]

A thing that I always found troubling was the artwork on Smiley and Surf's Up.  Not the beautiful artwork, per se.  But the relationship between the music and the LP cover, to create an identity as between the two.  I would have bought anything they released, because of the vocals.  Smiley had a record jacket (a paper sleeve to keep the LP clean and unscratched) which was an assortment of album covers for Capitol Records.  Why? Al Martino, Freddy Martin, Cannonball Adderly were doing on the sleeve cover is beyond me.  It resembled a promo for the Capitol Record Club. They could have used the space to describe the artwork on Smiley so that people knew what it was.  And it did not "pop" in the record display because it was pale green.  Red lights and stop signs grab your attention with the color.  And the music was competing with the Stones, Beatles, etc.  It may have been typical of record industry standards at the time, but, not with a fledgling Brother Records, spreading its' new wings.  They could have told us about the artwork. 

Surf's Up had liner lyrics with an inner fold out of arid earth. Maybe it was to symbolize environmental impact of no water...Beautiful as it is, there was little nexus as between the music and the artwork which would compel a music shopper to buy.  

20/20, Pet Sounds, and Sunflower, etc., had photos of the Boys.  And, concrete images to make a connection to.  People have short attention spans.  And the cover is the ticket in the door.  I wished they had used the space to talk about the choice of the artwork and motivate further inquiry into the artist who did the Native American sculpture for the nickel.  That is the job of the marketing people.  And it speaks volumes about their commitment to the Boys.  

Nothing to do with SU....but pretty much ALL Capitol albums up to that point came with the Capitol sleeve depicting other albums from the catalog.

Surf's Up is one of my least favorite BB album covers - too dark and sinister for my taste.

[I. Spaceman]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

[EgoHanger1966]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

I agree with you in that sense about the Smiley cover, which is perfect for that album!

[Banana]

I've always struggled with the inclusion of "Surf's Up" on the LP.  I understand where they were coming from when they included it..."Sunflower" had bombed and the cult of "Smile" was growing.  Why not dust off on the cornerstones of that LP and tack it onto the new album.  I think it made sense from a marketing standpoint...and it gave the song to the world way earlier than we may otherwise have heard it.  I think Carl and Desper did a heckuva job piecing together the song.

That said...it's a song that came from a different time and place.  I've always questioned whether the "sound" of the song actually fits the LP and the era in which it was created.  I don't know.  Maybe I've heard the LP so many times that I cannot think of it without it.  Maybe if "Sunflower" had been a hit...they never would have felt the need to bring the song back from the dead.

Honestly, until I actually hear "Wouldn't It Be Nice..." I can't make a qualified determination...though I like some of the tracklistings I've read on this thread.

[filledeplage]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

Sorry, I explained that badly.  I did not mean to interpret the art, any more than a music critic tries to sway a readership, but to note the artist, and the name of the work.  Reflective and serious work, is not necessarily "dark" in my opinion.  

Now, the Sunflower photo is a treasure, I think with Christian in the Touring Band.  It is sort of a connector.  And, at least, as among LP's, there was name and photo recognition, no less than the observation that using Surf's Up as a title cover name.  When you are a merchant selling records, the album artwork, has value in whether or not one buys the record.  I think it humanised the band, with their young families.  It showed a certain maturity in a continuum.  Not a Shut Down moment.  

[I. Spaceman]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

I agree with you in that sense about the Smiley cover, which is perfect for that album!

But do you see there is a defeated quality to Surf's Up, a type of wounded resignation, that is well illustrated by the hanged head of the rider on the cover?

[I. Spaceman]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

Sorry, I explained that badly.  I did not mean to interpret the art, any more than a music critic tries to sway a readership, but to note the artist, and the name of the work.  Reflective and serious work, is not necessarily "dark" in my opinion.  

Now, the Sunflower photo is a treasure, I think with Christian in the Touring Band.  It is sort of a connector.  And, at least, as among LP's, there was name and photo recognition, no less than the observation that using Surf's Up as a title cover name.  When you are a merchant selling records, the album artwork, has value in whether or not one buys the record.  I think it humanised the band, with their young families.  It showed a certain maturity in a continuum.  Not a Shut Down moment.  

Yeah, I do realize my thoughts on the Sunflower enterprise as a whole aren't shared by anyone else, for sure.

[EgoHanger1966]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

I agree with you in that sense about the Smiley cover, which is perfect for that album!

But do you see there is a defeated quality to Surf's Up, a type of wounded resignation, that is well illustrated by the hanged head of the rider on the cover?

Kinda, but not really. I think a lot of times an album cover influences what you're listening to. Ever wonder about that? Like, what is Sunflower had the cover of Wild Honey, would you think of certain songs differently? Anyway, I think the cover projects a darker image of the songs and vibe of the album than there actually is. Tree and Til I Die, those are certainly dark tunes, but I don't think most of them fit that mold. Surf's Up (the song) isn't so dark when it's on SMiLE, why should it be so depressing on another album?

[filledeplage]

Personally, I love the dark nature of the Smiley and Surf's covers, I think they accurately summarise the overall mood of the records, and I don't think they should be "explained", no more than any other art should be. Look at the cover, listen to the album, it will be understood as well as it was meant to be. I do think the Surf's cover accurately reflects that era of the band much more than the utterly forced Sunflower jacket, which might as well be a Peter Paul and Mary cover, and was probably designed by the same person.

I agree with you in that sense about the Smiley cover, which is perfect for that album!

But do you see there is a defeated quality to Surf's Up, a type of wounded resignation, that is well illustrated by the hanged head of the rider on the cover?

The rider is bowed but not broken, with armament of war, under his tired arm.  He is alive, not lifelessly carried by the horse.  He is weary, but not broken, as is his horse.  The return from war, is the triumph.  The survival.  This is music of survival, not defeat.  JMHO