were they lacking in a lennon -esque figure?

[dwtherealbb]

I'm not talking about musical ability per se but more in attitude/worldview. It seemed like Lennon, especially with the circumstances he was brought up in, had a very cynical and dour worldview and really pushed his band mates with his abrasive personality. Although the Wilson brothers grew up under questionable circumstances, all five of them grew up to some degree in prototypical white bread 1950s America with hot rods, girls, drive ins, beaches etc. Lennon (or any of his three bandmates for that matter) grew up in very different circumstances/cultures. Dennis I think was the closest thing to Lennon in terms of personality. But Dennis never really seemed to want to lead and was really there for the ride in his early days. It wasn't until the band had fallen off the radar that Dennis started becoming more of a serious musician.

[puni puni]

Brian was the 'Lennon figure' for the articles that he participated in and the 15 minutes he was shown performing Surf's Up

[halblaineisgood]

.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Imagine if the Beatles had a Brian Wilson figure, who had  the talent to do everything from, keyboard to cutting room instead of relying on their producer to achieve 90% of what their reputation rests on.

[ash]

Imagine if the Beatles had a Brian Wilson figure, who had  the talent to do everything from, keyboard to cutting room instead of relying on their producer to achieve 90% of what their reputation rests on.

That's rubbish. How did you work that percentage out ? Totally unscientific.
However it is worth pointing out that one asshole per band is enough and that's a scientific fact.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

That's rubbish. How did you work that percentage out ?

Well, I multiplied 6.2 billion subjective opinions by 1.21 gigawatts of "b-b-b-but its the BEATLES!!!", and came to this number. You're welcome to check.

[ash]

That's rubbish. How did you work that percentage out ?

Well, I multiplied 6.2 billion subjective opinions by 1.21 gigawatts of "b-b-b-but its the BEATLES!!!", and came to this number. You're welcome to check.

You need to use Paul as a constant.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Lacking a Lennon-esque figure in order to do what? Be more like The Beatles? In that case, yes, they were lacking a Lennon-esque figure. And they were also lacking a McCartney-esque figure and a Harrison-esque figure and a Starr-esque figure and an Epstein-esque figure and a George Martin-esque figure.

[Kurosawa]

They lacked another creative force that was on the same level as Brian, but who knows how it would have worked if they had two brilliant guys instead of one. Most bands only have room for one leader. That's part of what sat the Beatles apart, and also part of why they broke up. You're talking about a band that was so stacked with talent that George Harrison was the #3 guy.

[NHC]

There was no need for a so-called "Lennon-esque" figure to counter-act or dilute or diversify their 50's-60's California cultural foundation.  It was the 50's-60's California culture that made the Beach Boys the Beach Boys and why fool with it. Anyway, for all their vaunted "esques", the Beatles broke up while I was still in college.

[Jon Stebbins]

I'm not talking about musical ability per se but more in attitude/worldview. It seemed like Lennon, especially with the circumstances he was brought up in, had a very cynical and dour worldview and really pushed his band mates with his abrasive personality. Although the Wilson brothers grew up under questionable circumstances, all five of them grew up to some degree in prototypical white bread 1950s America with hot rods, girls, drive ins, beaches etc. Lennon (or any of his three bandmates for that matter) grew up in very different circumstances/cultures. Dennis I think was the closest thing to Lennon in terms of personality. But Dennis never really seemed to want to lead and was really there for the ride in his early days. It wasn't until the band had fallen off the radar that Dennis started becoming more of a serious musician.

The way this premise is stated has some notable flaws. Lennon grew up in a very safe middle class environment with no violence in his home. Yes his dad was absent and his mother was a peripheral presence in his life (no pun)...but he had a consistent and loving aunt and uncle that virtually spoiled him. No school of hard knocks for John. He went to art school and basically did what he pleased...while Brian and Dennis were being brutalized by an abusive father from the time they were toddlers. Dennis earliest memory was being beaten by his dad, nice white bread existence. Lennon obviously felt the loss of his parents, and his mom under horrific circumstances and sure that made him bitter. I think where the Beatles and Lennon's edgy world-view really came about was their Hamburg experience. Those were the Mean Streets and they found a way to survive and grow. Lennon was up for whatever was thrown at him as far as absurdity and debauchery...and his openness towards the crazy side of things came from his mom who was his friend and mentor. But to say the Beach Boys had no Lennon type figure is unsurprising, because nobody did. Lennon was as unique as Brian...or Dennis etc... People with a vein of genius in them are really not cut from any typical mold and are rarely similar. That's why they call them geniuses. Brian absolutely pushed the Beach Boys in his own way, and at least as hard as Lennon/McCartney pushed their group, if not harder.

BTW Dennis worked his ass off in the early days, on the road, in the studio...and by being the band enforcer. The more details we learn, the more the Dennis was mostly absent meme becomes another Beach Boys myth with no basis in truth.

[Nicko1234]

But to say the Beach Boys had no Lennon type figure is unsurprising, because nobody did. Lennon was as unique as Brian...or Dennis etc... People with a vein of genius in them are really not cut from any typical mold and are rarely similar. That's why they call them geniuses.

Dennis wasn't a genius though obviously.

[the captain]

If what the Beach Boys actually accomplished were somehow short of what an ideal Beach Boys would have accomplished in a person's eyes, and John Lennon is the epitome of the shortcoming, then sure, they missed a Lennon figure. For someone else, they miss a Bob Dylan figure. For someone else, they miss a Stevie Wonder figure. For someone else, they miss a...you see where I'm going with this.

The thing that the Beach Boys were, is what the Beach Boys were. It isn't lacking in its "Beach Boyness" because it is what the Beach Boys are and were. Anything that didn't happen that a person wishes happen has more to do with the person wishing than anything else.

[Jon Stebbins]

But to say the Beach Boys had no Lennon type figure is unsurprising, because nobody did. Lennon was as unique as Brian...or Dennis etc... People with a vein of genius in them are really not cut from any typical mold and are rarely similar. That's why they call them geniuses.

Dennis wasn't a genius though obviously.

Obvious to you

http://brianwilsonfans.com/a_dw.php

http://coldbloodedclarity.co.uk/dennis-wilson-genius-crazy-man-but-genius/

http://regularrecord.blogspot.com/2011/09/no-not-brian-wilson-other-genius-wilson.html

http://www.noripcord.com/features/dennis-wilson-more-than-just-a-beach-boy

[Lowbacca]

But to say the Beach Boys had no Lennon type figure is unsurprising, because nobody did. Lennon was as unique as Brian...or Dennis etc... People with a vein of genius in them are really not cut from any typical mold and are rarely similar. That's why they call them geniuses.

Dennis wasn't a genius though obviously.

A good cup of tea and 2 hours of THIS might help make things appear more obvious to you... 

[DonnyL]

The Beach Boys were not lacking a 'John Lennon figure' any more than the Beatles were lacking a 'Dennis Wilson figure'. The implication in these kinds of topics is that the Beach Boys are somehow lacking compared to the Beatles.

Why are the Beatles such a gold standard? Didn't the Beach Boys create better records?

Personally, I'll take Pacific Ocean Blue over any Lennon record any day, hands down. The emotional punch and spirituality in Dennis' (and the Beach Boys') music just hits home in a way the fab four or Lennon just doesn't.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Why are the Beatles such a gold standard? Didn't the Beach Boys create better records?

That's subjective, but...DAMN RIGHT THEY DID. I'm with Stephen Newcombe on this...let's see how well the Beatles would've done without George Martin.

[AndrewHickey]

Why are the Beatles such a gold standard? Didn't the Beach Boys create better records?

That's subjective, but...DAMN RIGHT THEY DID. I'm with Stephen Newcombe on this...let's see how well the Beatles would've done without George Martin.

If George Martin was the only, or even the principal, reason for the Beatles' success, then why did he never, in his entire career, do anything that approached the same level of artistic quality or commercial success?

The Beatles' commercial peak, in 64 and 65, was at the time when there was fairly little production or arrangement work to be done on their records -- not none, of course, but relatively little. Any competent producer could have produced She Loves You,  Help, I Feel Fine and so on. And while George Martin did great work on in the mid-60s with them, he was largely absent from the White album and Let It Be sessions, and they seemed to do all right without him.

George Martin was the best possible producer the Beatles could have had, but if he'd been the reason they were as good and as successful as they were, then Shane Fenton or Gerry & The Pacemakers would have been just as successful.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

If George Martin was the only, or even the principal, reason for the Beatles' success, then why did he never, in his entire career, do anything that approached the same level of artistic quality or commercial success?

The Beatles' commercial peak, in 64 and 65, was at the time when there was fairly little production or arrangement work to be done on their records -- not none, of course, but relatively little. Any competent producer could have produced She Loves You,  Help, I Feel Fine and so on. And while George Martin did great work on in the mid-60s with them, he was largely absent from the White album and Let It Be sessions, and they seemed to do all right without him.

His production of Jeff Beck's Blow By Blow  and  Wired  albums were pretty spiffy. But, and again this is just my opinion, it was the right place, right time in the mid-60s. Just speaking artistically, as commercially the Beatles could've recorded a record of Ringo beating off and it would have sold, just because. 

[hypehat]

Why are the Beatles such a gold standard? Didn't the Beach Boys create better records?

That's subjective, but...DAMN RIGHT THEY DID. I'm with Stephen Newcombe on this...let's see how well the Beatles would've done without George Martin.

If George Martin was the only, or even the principal, reason for the Beatles' success, then why did he never, in his entire career, do anything that approached the same level of artistic quality or commercial success?

The Beatles' commercial peak, in 64 and 65, was at the time when there was fairly little production or arrangement work to be done on their records -- not none, of course, but relatively little. Any competent producer could have produced She Loves You,  Help, I Feel Fine and so on. And while George Martin did great work on in the mid-60s with them, he was largely absent from the White album and Let It Be sessions, and they seemed to do all right without him.

George Martin was the best possible producer the Beatles could have had, but if he'd been the reason they were as good and as successful as they were, then Shane Fenton or Gerry & The Pacemakers would have been just as successful.

'Commercial peak in 1964/1965'? Like, nearly every Beatles single and album went to number #1? Not sure where you're getting that from, unless you're thinking of Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane not making #1 the following year.

Let It Be is 'produced', as such - Glyn Johns was instructed to essentially not produce it at all, but then again have you ever heard his 'Get Back' mixes that were supposed to be the finished product? Ye Gods. Spector managed a minor miracle.

Essentially, I don't think a lot of this is true - I don't think 'anybody' could have produced those early cuts in the same way you wouldn't say 'well anyone could have produced Surfin' USA' because you're a Beach Boys fan. It's harder to produce that sort of thing than you think, I reckon.

[puni puni]

It is about a hundred years too early for anyone to determine whether or not they needed a 'Lennon figure'

The only purpose he served in The Beatles was to give the band social credibility. Hadn't he have done that, there would not be millions of American schoolgirls walking into malls and buying t-shirts with his face on them in the year 2013.

We will have to wait and see over the next several decades if the BB corp shift their marketing strategies from 'Hey remember the surf band John Stamos that was in?' to 'Hey remember the avant-garde group that happened to record several remarkable pop albums?'.

[RubberSoul13]

I hate when people on here try and compare their personalities...because you can't. Every human is their own thing, regardless of if they were in the two greatest bands of all time.

The closest to Lennon is probably Dennis, in personality.

[runnersdialzero]

More threads about the band lacking in comparison to the Beatles, please.

Many things about Lennon as a musician annoyed me. I would not want a Lennon-esque figure in the Beach Boys.

[pixletwin]

I dunno. I think had history played out Brian Wilson and VDP could have formed a songwriting partnership to  rival Lennon/MCCartney.

[Nicko1234]

A good cup of tea and 2 hours of THIS might help make things appear more obvious to you... 

One good album doesn't make somebody a genius. Brian was a genius. Dennis wasn't.