Monterey Pop Festival

[Jason Penick]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

[18thofMay]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

The "so what do you think of Mike Love now?" thread may need a review.. What a Joker!!

[I. Spaceman]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

[Cabinessenceking]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

It would, but even Brian never got that apeshit stupid.

[EgoHanger1966]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

He would have received criticism, but it would have been in a different form because of his mental illnesses. Also, the thousands of dollars worth of hash....

[Jason Penick]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

It would, but even Brian never got that apeshit stupid.

It's actually quite a principled stand, albeit one that backfired tremendously.

[I. Spaceman]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

It would, but even Brian never got that apeshit stupid.

Canceling Smile was a far worse move.

[Lowbacca]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

It would, but even Brian never got that apeshit stupid.

Canceling Smile was a far worse move.

Who knows. It might have bombed badly.

And the way the whole SMiLE saga turned out it helped strongly in fortifying their artistic reputation over a couple of decades of mostly weak material. Imagine SMiLE would have been released back in the 60's - even if it had been a critical success and had sold reasonably it still might have fallen into oblivion (as so many other great concept albums of that time have). The eventual myth building has had its benefits over decades.

Just sayin'. Off topic, anyway.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

Old news: that was broken at least a decade ago, maybe longer.

[Jason Penick]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

Old news: that was broken at least a decade ago, maybe longer.

First I'd heard of it.

[Jon Stebbins]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

Its on page 153 of The Beach Boys FAQ book published 2011.

[Jason Penick]

Just caught this quote from Stephen W. Desper over on the Hoffman forum. Pretty shocking that this hasn't been brought up yet over here. (Unless it has, in which case mods feel free to delete of course.)

As you may know The Beach Boys were suppose to perform at MPF, but at the last minute pulled out because Mike Love did not wish to be associated with Coke, one of the sponsers of this event. At the time he was into health foods in a big way and did not wish the group to be a part of MPF for that reason.

So the Beach Boys pulled out of the festival not over concerns related to their set list or Brian's psychological well being, but... Coke?

Its on page 153 of The Beach Boys FAQ book published 2011.

Oh, well there you go then. Maybe it was still worthwhile bringing the topic up though. Monterey seems to get discussed ad infinitum around these parts, and like I said, I've never seen anyone proffer the "Coke defense" before.

[Generation42]

Old news: that was broken at least a decade ago, maybe longer.

Yeah, I was about to say...  In fact, I first heard SWD speak of it (or at least we speaking of SWD's speaking of it) right here at this very forum.  I've spent some time going through a bunch of Monterey topics here just using the search function.  It's fun!  

As far as the infamous "Coke defense," well, as interesting as it is, there is some part of me that doesn't like the thought that this is what kept the 'Boys from performing at the festival.

[Custom Machine]

The Beach Boys pulled out of the 1967 Monterey Pop festival at the last minute because Mike Love did not want to be associated with Coke, which was one of the sponsors of the event?  That sounds like absolute bullshit to me.  Can anyone provide evidence that Coke was even a sponsor?  And if they were, what is the logic that Mike Love, of all people, would refuse a gig due to a corporate sponsor as innocuous as Coca Cola?  Where did this nonsense first originate?

[I. Spaceman]

But if Brian had done that, he would receive no criticism at all.

It would, but even Brian never got that apeshit stupid.

Canceling Smile was a far worse move.

Who knows. It might have bombed badly.

And the way the whole SMiLE saga turned out it helped strongly in fortifying their artistic reputation over a couple of decades of mostly weak material. Imagine SMiLE would have been released back in the 60's - even if it had been a critical success and had sold reasonably it still might have fallen into oblivion (as so many other great concept albums of that time have). The eventual myth building has had its benefits over decades.

Just sayin'. Off topic, anyway.

Nah, I agree. Smile is a gift for those of us who missed the release of all those classic 60's albums. We got to witness the release of one of them.

[Jon Stebbins]

The Beach Boys pulled out of the 1967 Monterey Pop festival at the last minute because Mike Love did not want to be associated with Coke, which was one of the sponsors of the event?  That sounds like absolute bullshit to me.  Can anyone provide evidence that Coke was even a sponsor?  And if they were, what is the logic that Mike Love, of all people, would refuse a gig due to a corporate sponsor as innocuous as Coca Cola?  Where did this nonsense first originate?

I think if you read up the the thread you will see this is the claim of Stephen Desper who was the Beach Boys live mixer during that period, and who ended up doing a bunch of the sound engineering at the Monterey Festival. The Coke anecdote is true, but to say it was THE reason is probably an exaggeration. It was one of a dozen reasons. Carl's pending draft troubles, Dennis' pending divorce, Brian wanting to concentrate on tweaking Heroes and Villains, the group being unprepared for facing that audience, lawsuits, business crisis, Brian's state of mind etc... This was a time of endless swirling problems within the band, and Mike added to the bitch-fest by taking a stand against Coke...i guess.

[Jim V.]

I know it is said that if the boys woulda played Monterrey that they woulda had more of a chance to have been part of the "hip" crowd in the late '60s, but honestly I think history may have went like this (forgive my bad writing):

"The Beach Boys, about to release the quirky Smiley Smile, started off their show with an organ dominated version of their single "Heroes And Villains", with Brian Wilson delivering a powerful vocal. The band breezed through their set, which included hits like "Wouldn't It Be Nice", "God Only Knows", and "Good Vibrations". A performance of 1965's "You're So Good To Me" was also quite punchy, although the groups decision to bring "Surfin'" out of the mothballs seemed oddly anachronistic. And honestly despite their best efforts, the group seemed out of time and out of place after barnburning performances by The Who and Jimi Hendrix."

Honestly, I don't think they woulda been blown off the stage, but if they did play it probably woulda been something like the 1967 Hawaii shows. They probably woulda still been thought of as slightly square and maybe woulda gotten Smiley Smile and Wild Honey some more sales.

[filledeplage]

The Beach Boys pulled out of the 1967 Monterey Pop festival at the last minute because Mike Love did not want to be associated with Coke, which was one of the sponsors of the event?  That sounds like absolute bullshit to me.  Can anyone provide evidence that Coke was even a sponsor?  And if they were, what is the logic that Mike Love, of all people, would refuse a gig due to a corporate sponsor as innocuous as Coca Cola?  Where did this nonsense first originate?

I think if you read up the the thread you will see this is the claim of Stephen Desper who was the Beach Boys live mixer during that period, and who ended up doing a bunch of the sound engineering at the Monterey Festival. The Coke anecdote is true, but to say it was THE reason is probably an exaggeration. It was one of a dozen reasons. Carl's pending draft troubles, Dennis' pending divorce, Brian wanting to concentrate on tweaking Heroes and Villains, the group being unprepared for facing that audience, lawsuits, business crisis, Brian's state of mind etc... This was a time of endless swirling problems within the band, and Mike added to the bitch-fest by taking a stand against Coke...i guess.

Exactly! Carl's pending draft troubles!  In an era of forced conscription into military service, with some few exceptions such as college deferment.  That is the most credible.  I think it would have been a bad move for them, especially Carl to be appearing at any event that had any antiwar or anti military overtones, given his Conscientious Objector assertion and the climate of the country, and widespread public opinion against anyone perceived as a "draft dodger" in a system run largely  by the heroes of World War II.  Almost every rock band had an anti war message.  Better to "stay under the proverbial radar." Better than "getting "in their face" while he had a draft board case pending.

Now, the military is a volunteer system.  Not back then.

[Custom Machine]

The Beach Boys pulled out of the 1967 Monterey Pop festival at the last minute because Mike Love did not want to be associated with Coke, which was one of the sponsors of the event?  That sounds like absolute bullshit to me.  Can anyone provide evidence that Coke was even a sponsor?  And if they were, what is the logic that Mike Love, of all people, would refuse a gig due to a corporate sponsor as innocuous as Coca Cola?  Where did this nonsense first originate?

I think if you read up the the thread you will see this is the claim of Stephen Desper who was the Beach Boys live mixer during that period, and who ended up doing a bunch of the sound engineering at the Monterey Festival. The Coke anecdote is true, but to say it was THE reason is probably an exaggeration. It was one of a dozen reasons. Carl's pending draft troubles, Dennis' pending divorce, Brian wanting to concentrate on tweaking Heroes and Villains, the group being unprepared for facing that audience, lawsuits, business crisis, Brian's state of mind etc... This was a time of endless swirling problems within the band, and Mike added to the bitch-fest by taking a stand against Coke...i guess.

Yes, I did read this thread starting at the beginning where it is said that Stephen Desper recently made this statement on the Steve Hoffman board.  But I’m wondering where he got this info.  In your BBs FAQ book you call it a theory, a word which would indicate that someone presumes this may have been the reason, but has no conclusive evidence.  And I must admit that when I read your book I laughed out loud reading the words "Another theory is that Mike Love was leery of Monterey's Coca-Cola corporate sponsorship and cancelled to protest unhealthy beverages in principal."  And considering that you stated it's a "theory" I took that to mean it's simply speculation on someone's part, even though it would be safe to say that Coke or Pepsi, along with a variety of other sugary soft drinks, were probably sold at every single Beach Boys concert with no protest from Mike Love.  

Jon, when you say "The Coke anecdote is true" are you saying that it is true that there was in fact a Coca-Cola corporate sponsorship and Mike was upset about it, or simply that it is true that this is an anecdote has been put forth as a reason the BBs cancelled their appearance?  (Just did a web search and wasn't able to find any logo or other mention of Coca-Cola on the 1967 Monterey posters, tickets, or what I could see of the stage.)

Since Brian stated at the time that he was responsible for canceling the Beach Boys appearance at Monterey I have always assumed that to be the case, although Carl's draft issues and other factors certainly could have contributed.  I hope Stephen Desper reads this thread and will provide elaboration.  He was there working with the Beach Boys at the time, and he's been an incredible asset to this board providing us with fascinating background.  But, although I most certainly wasn't there and thus don't have any first hand info, this story of Mike being responsible for the BBs pulling out of Monterey simply because he was unhappy about a Coke corporate sponsorship just seems like nonsense to to me, although I can see Brian or Mike giving it as a flippant answer, or telling someone to give it as an answer in order to evade the real reasons the band pulled out.  Or Mike could have even said something like, "We're not going because I'm unhappy about coke," but he wasn't actually talking about Coca-Cola.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I hear that Brian also wanted to add "Chug-A-Lug" to the setlist and this only exacerbated matters.

[I. Spaceman]

Not to mention Mike's plan, if he was forced to appear, to blurt out "And you'll never drink Coca-Cola again!" at the conclusion of Surf's Up.

[Jon Stebbins]

The Beach Boys pulled out of the 1967 Monterey Pop festival at the last minute because Mike Love did not want to be associated with Coke, which was one of the sponsors of the event?  That sounds like absolute bullshit to me.  Can anyone provide evidence that Coke was even a sponsor?  And if they were, what is the logic that Mike Love, of all people, would refuse a gig due to a corporate sponsor as innocuous as Coca Cola?  Where did this nonsense first originate?

I think if you read up the the thread you will see this is the claim of Stephen Desper who was the Beach Boys live mixer during that period, and who ended up doing a bunch of the sound engineering at the Monterey Festival. The Coke anecdote is true, but to say it was THE reason is probably an exaggeration. It was one of a dozen reasons. Carl's pending draft troubles, Dennis' pending divorce, Brian wanting to concentrate on tweaking Heroes and Villains, the group being unprepared for facing that audience, lawsuits, business crisis, Brian's state of mind etc... This was a time of endless swirling problems within the band, and Mike added to the bitch-fest by taking a stand against Coke...i guess.

Yes, I did read this thread starting at the beginning where it is said that Stephen Desper recently made this statement on the Steve Hoffman board.  But I’m wondering where he got this info.  In your BBs FAQ book you call it a theory, a word which would indicate that someone presumes this may have been the reason, but has no conclusive evidence.  And I must admit that when I read your book I laughed out loud reading the words "Another theory is that Mike Love was leery of Monterey's Coca-Cola corporate sponsorship and cancelled to protest unhealthy beverages in principal."  And considering that you stated it's a "theory" I took that to mean it's simply speculation on someone's part, even though it would be safe to say that Coke or Pepsi, along with a variety of other sugary soft drinks, were probably sold at every single Beach Boys concert with no protest from Mike Love.  

Jon, when you say "The Coke anecdote is true" are you saying that it is true that there was in fact a Coca-Cola corporate sponsorship and Mike was upset about it, or simply that it is true that this is an anecdote has been put forth as a reason the BBs cancelled their appearance?  (Just did a web search and wasn't able to find any logo or other mention of Coca-Cola on the 1967 Monterey posters, tickets, or what I could see of the stage.)

Since Brian stated at the time that he was responsible for canceling the Beach Boys appearance at Monterey I have always assumed that to be the case, although Carl's draft issues and other factors certainly could have contributed.  I hope Stephen Desper reads this thread and will provide elaboration.  He was there working with the Beach Boys at the time, and he's been an incredible asset to this board providing us with fascinating background.  But, although I most certainly wasn't there and thus don't have any first hand info, this story of Mike being responsible for the BBs pulling out of Monterey simply because he was unhappy about a Coke corporate sponsorship just seems like nonsense to to me, although I can see Brian or Mike giving it as a flippant answer, or telling someone to give it as an answer in order to evade the real reasons the band pulled out.  Or Mike could have even said something like, "We're not going because I'm unhappy about coke," but he wasn't actually talking about Coca-Cola.

I'd say as with most significant Beach Boys mystery/controversies there is never one clear answer. Why was Smile scrapped? Why is Brian mentally troubled? Why was Dennis self destructive? Why was Murry such an A-hole? Etc... Monterey came at a bad time for the Beach Boys. That period in '67 is filled with festering problems. Carl's draft issues were extremely serious and he was a whisker away from going to jail. Dennis had a marriage that was imploding. Brian's whole world was melting down. Demand for the group as a live act was suddenly in free fall, and record sales were about to plummet. There were lawsuits and suspicious business issues. I totally believe Desper's claim that Mike added to the mess by taking a ridiculous stand against an unhealthy beverage at that exact moment. It just sounds about right to me. The Beach Boys are the kings of...when everything is falling apart and becoming a giant mess, one of them pulls even more ridiculous sh*t just to add to the pile of poop. Being that Desper was so deeply involved in Monterey, more so than the Beach Boys, he seems like a credible source for what went on. But i agree the Coke story is weird, and that's why i wrote it up that way in the FAQ book. My use of the word true in my previous post was to emphasize that Desper has told this story for a decade (as AGD mentioned), its nothing new. We have a lot of new info about Monterey, Carl's draft problems, and what a mess the BB's were at this time in the Beach Boys In Concert book coming in June. It will give added perspective and context to the whole matter of that time, but no real smoking gun as far as the Coke theory goes.

[Rocker]

the group being unprepared for facing that audience, lawsuits, business crisis, Brian's state of mind etc... This was a time of endless swirling problems within the band, and Mike added to the bitch-fest

This kinda reads like a summary of the Beach Boys' career   

[Cam Mott]

I wonder if Mike or someone was misinformed. Can anybody find any evidence that Coca Cola was a sponsor of the 1967 MPF? The poster and other mailers, ads etc. say "sponsored by "The Foundation", a non-profit organization".

[I. Spaceman]

Coca-Cola was a licensed vendor, so if that counts as sponsorship, I guess.