Mike Love: 'There are a lot of fallacies about me'

[Mikie]

Phoenix - the essential underlying fact is that Brian and Mike ARE the founding composer-lyricist members.

Maybe but I wouldn't quite put it that way. The first album is more of a Wilson/Usher affair. Mike has 3 writing credits on the second album. He has a four on the third but then the fourth is a Wilson/Christian effort. Only from the 5th studio through to the 9th does Mike have a kind of co-writer position on the album, which is significant but his role as such comes fairly late in the game.

Surfin' (the first single) November 1961, and Surfin' Safari are Brian-Mike.  June, 1962. And, 4-0-9 is Wilson, Usher, Love.
The Shift, Brian, Mike. Chug-a-Lug is Wilson, Usher, Love. Mike is on 5 of 12.  And, Mike has leads on 8 of 12.
Brian has one, Dennis has one, Dave has one, and the remaining one is an instrumental.

Album - October, 1962.

Well, technically it was 1/2 Dave and 1/2 Carl sharing lead vocals on that one. And I hear Carl more than Dave.

[relx]

"When Carl was singing Rhonda and Al was singing Brian's stuff, etc. there weren't two separate oldies acts with different members competing for the same live audiences.  There was one BEACH BOYS."

Beyond whatever everyone thinks of Mike as a person and an artist, the essential problem is that everyone in BB land wants to have their cake and eat it too. Mike wants to be the Beach Boys, but doesn't want to have anything to do with the other Beach Boys, except for Bruce obviously. And Brian and Al can make all the noises they want about Mike not wanting to tour with them, but they are unwilling to give up the money they get from Mike's BBs. If Mike wants to be a Beach Boy, he should learn to put up with the rest of the group. If he doesn't want to do that, he shouldn't be a BB. Simiarly, if Brian and Al don't like getting "fired" by Mike, they should have never let him have the BB name in the first place.

In a less greedy world, they would have agreed to retire the Beach Boy name in 1999, which would have headed off all the problems we are seeing now. However, I think that deep down, they are all happy with this arrangement, as only Mike really wants to tour steadily as The Beach Boys, and Brian and Al are happy to receive $ from Mike's touring.

[drbeachboy]

"When Carl was singing Rhonda and Al was singing Brian's stuff, etc. there weren't two separate oldies acts with different members competing for the same live audiences.  There was one BEACH BOYS."

Beyond whatever everyone thinks of Mike as a person and an artist, the essential problem is that everyone in BB land wants to have their cake and eat it too. Mike wants to be the Beach Boys, but doesn't want to have anything to do with the other Beach Boys, except for Bruce obviously. And Brian and Al can make all the noises they want about Mike not wanting to tour with them, but they are unwilling to give up the money they get from Mike's BBs. If Mike wants to be a Beach Boy, he should learn to put up with the rest of the group. If he doesn't want to do that, he shouldn't be a BB. Simiarly, if Brian and Al don't like getting "fired" by Mike, they should have never let him have the BB name in the first place.

In a less greedy world, they would have agreed to retire the Beach Boy name in 1999, which would have headed off all the problems we are seeing now. However, I think that deep down, they are all happy with this arrangement, as only Mike really wants to tour steadily as The Beach Boys, and Brian and Al are happy to receive $ from Mike's touring.

How come this was never a problem when Brian didn't want to be a Beach Boy for the previous 14 years plus? There never seems to be an issue when it comes to Brian, but Mike gets slammed? Also, nobody raised this much fuss over Al? Mentioned, but nothing like what is happening with Brian. I say let's blame all this on Carl for dying and fracturing the band.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Why should he continue to be apart of a "band" that doesn't even acknowledge his request to write with a fellow bandmember?  That doesn't even sound like a band.

He wrote several songs with Brian - just not under the conditions he wanted and it seems as a result, he publicly doesn't like the album and has suggested that the songs he was not involved him make him want to commit suicide.

He wasn't comfortable with the tour size, he wasn't comfortable with not being able to write with his cousin....there is obviously no band chemistry left. Why the hell would Mike stay in that environment?

Because he's not a petulant six year old? Seriously, this mostly amounts to, "I'm not getting my way! I'm not going to play with you anymore!" If you are an emotionally mature adult you should be able to have the slightest comprehension of the concept of compromise - you know, like when Brian shelved some of the greatest music he ever made to make a more inclusive album for his band mates? Mike doesn't even seem capable of a much smaller compromise and simply behaves like the kid who runs to his room and slams the door on his or her parents who won't serve cake for dinner. We barely tolerate this behaviour in a child. And here, I'm going to flip around what has become a popular statement on this board not because I believe it's true but because I would like to illustrate how fundamentally silly the statement is to begin with: You wouldn't accept this behaviour if it was anybody other than Mike Love.

If there was "obviously no band chemistry left" it is certainly not obvious to the majority of the members who wanted to continue. But I guess what's obvious to Mike should be obvious to everyone else too.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Surfin' (the first single) November 1961, and Surfin' Safari are Brian-Mike.  June, 1962. And, 4-0-9 is Wilson, Usher, Love.
The Shift, Brian, Mike. Chug-a-Lug is Wilson, Usher, Love. Mike is on 5 of 12.  And, Mike has leads on 8 of 12.
Brian has one, Dennis has one, Dave has one, and the remaining one is an instrumental.

Album - October, 1962.

If you want to know the truth, I don't accept that Mike had anything substantial to do with 409 and Chug A Lug anymore than he added to Wouldn't It Be Nice. The fact that he was a lead singer doesn't make him a founding composer. But,. yes, he did write a few songs at the beginning but, as I've pointed out, even from the beginning, Mike was just one of several people Brian would write with and it is certainly difficult to suggest that he wrote with Mike more in the earlier days.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Why should he continue to be apart of a "band" that doesn't even acknowledge his request to write with a fellow bandmember?  That doesn't even sound like a band.

He wrote several songs with Brian - just not under the conditions he wanted and it seems as a result, he publicly doesn't like the album and has suggested that the songs he was not involved him make him want to commit suicide.

He wasn't comfortable with the tour size, he wasn't comfortable with not being able to write with his cousin....there is obviously no band chemistry left. Why the hell would Mike stay in that environment?

Because he's not a petulant six year old? Seriously, this mostly amounts to, "I'm not getting my way! I'm not going to play with you anymore!" If you are an emotionally mature adult you should be able to have the slightest comprehension of the concept of compromise - you know, like when Brian shelved some of the greatest music he ever made to make a more inclusive album for his band mates? Mike doesn't even seem capable of a much smaller compromise and simply behaves like the kid who runs to his room and slams the door on his or her parents who won't serve cake for dinner. We barely tolerate this behaviour in a child. And here, I'm going to flip around what has become a popular statement on this board not because I believe it's true but because I would like to illustrate how fundamentally silly the statement is to begin with: You wouldn't accept this behaviour if it was anybody other than Mike Love.

If there was "obviously no band chemistry left" it is certainly not obvious to the majority of the members who wanted to continue. But I guess what's obvious to Mike should be obvious to everyone else too.

are you really going to invite comparisons between Beach Boys regarding immature, childlike behavior???

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Mike is an artist too.

 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Surfin' (the first single) November 1961, and Surfin' Safari are Brian-Mike.  June, 1962. And, 4-0-9 is Wilson, Usher, Love.
The Shift, Brian, Mike. Chug-a-Lug is Wilson, Usher, Love. Mike is on 5 of 12.  And, Mike has leads on 8 of 12.
Brian has one, Dennis has one, Dave has one, and the remaining one is an instrumental.

Album - October, 1962.

If you want to know the truth, I don't accept that Mike had anything substantial to do with 409 and Chug A Lug anymore than he added to Wouldn't It Be Nice. The fact that he was a lead singer doesn't make him a founding composer. But,. yes, he did write a few songs at the beginning but, as I've pointed out, even from the beginning, Mike was just one of several people Brian would write with and it is certainly difficult to suggest that he wrote with Mike more in the earlier days.

No, but Mike is the most important of all these very talented folk because he was IN THE DAMN BAND and sung on these compositions and had input as a singer as well as lyricist. That's why he was able to get his vocal hooks on hit records that weren't part of the original lyrics.... Not insubstantial details here. And none of this means you have to like the man.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

How come this was never a problem when Brian didn't want to be a Beach Boy for the previous 14 years plus? There never seems to be an issue when it comes to Brian, but Mike gets slammed?

You know why. Because for years even the best Beach Boys experts simply thought that a Beach Boys reunion was as much of an impossibility as a Beatles reunion and it was not only because Brian "didn't want to be a Beach Boy." To in any way compare the two situations is to really ignore what the Beach Boys situation was like during those 14 years.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

How come this was never a problem when Brian didn't want to be a Beach Boy for the previous 14 years plus? There never seems to be an issue when it comes to Brian, but Mike gets slammed?

You know why. Because for years even the best Beach Boys experts simply thought that a Beach Boys reunion was as much of an impossibility as a Beatles reunion and it was not only because Brian "didn't want to be a Beach Boy." To in any way compare the two situations is to really ignore what the Beach Boys situation was like during those 14 years.

Very well put

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Surfin' (the first single) November 1961, and Surfin' Safari are Brian-Mike.  June, 1962. And, 4-0-9 is Wilson, Usher, Love.
The Shift, Brian, Mike. Chug-a-Lug is Wilson, Usher, Love. Mike is on 5 of 12.  And, Mike has leads on 8 of 12.
Brian has one, Dennis has one, Dave has one, and the remaining one is an instrumental.

Album - October, 1962.

If you want to know the truth, I don't accept that Mike had anything substantial to do with 409 and Chug A Lug anymore than he added to Wouldn't It Be Nice. The fact that he was a lead singer doesn't make him a founding composer. But,. yes, he did write a few songs at the beginning but, as I've pointed out, even from the beginning, Mike was just one of several people Brian would write with and it is certainly difficult to suggest that he wrote with Mike more in the earlier days.

No, but Mike is the most important of all these very talented folk because he was IN THE DAMN BAND and sung on these compositions and had input as a singer as well as lyricist. That's why he was able to get his vocal hooks on hit records that weren't part of the original lyrics.... Not insubstantial details here. And none of this means you have to like the man.

I accept all of that. In fact, I have sung Mike's praises consistently on this board which is why I don't accept many here who suggest that they are trying to have a "balanced" view. There is a point where a "balanced" view actually takes you further outside the realm of truth.

This discussion here that you are responding to just comes out of me quibbling with one particular phrase in one post that I mostly agreed with.

[guitarfool2002]

Just wanted to step in after reading something about Carl's absence fracturing the band. I don't think that's accurate nor much of a factor in what's being discussed on these recent pages. Carl was the one who apparently balked at and therefore stopped the original BB's music which would have come from the Brian and Mike writing partnership in the mid-90's when Don Was had been involved. And Carl for various reasons seemed to be taking a hands-off approach to the touring situation and basically letting Mike call the bigger shots, apart from his role as music supervisor for the live band which he held until his death, I believe. Yes, of course Carl was a voting board member but his hands-on involvement seemed to present itself most when he didn't want the "new" Wilson-Love songs to be finished and released.

If anything Carl seemed to be more on board with touring the classics than starting up something new, at least at that point in time. Hypothetically speaking anyone could make a guess or assume what he'd have done in 2012, but all we have to base that assumption is what Carl did from 1995 to 1997.

[guitarfool2002]

And let me add to that the 1995 4th of July concert in Philly when we saw Mike, Carl, Al, and Bruce on stage. The only one missing was Brian. Whatever fracturing happened after that doesn't appear to be anything much different from what had come before or what would follow, including Al and Mike butting heads. At various times each of the band members got the itch to break away and tour or record solo, as Carl did and as Al did (and as Bruce had done years prior). There doesn't seem to be much Carl would or could have done to stop that same pattern of behavior had he not passed away when he did. What did happen is that Mike got control of the brand name, and that affected Al directly.

Brian's involvement is and always will be both the trump card and the wild card whenever the hand is played.

[Sheriff John Stone]

Of all the subjects to argue, and many of them do have a RIGHT and WRONG answer behind them, this issue about Mike writing with Brian is NOT one of them. They're both right.

Mike Love collaborated with Brian Wilson on some of the greatest songs of the rock & roll era. And those songs weren't limited to surf & turf subjects. A nice list could be compiled of non-Endless Summer songs. The songs with a B.Wilson/M. Love credit will be played more than 99% of all songs as the centuries go by. They are timeless. So, it is not unreasonable for Mike Love to want to continue or resume the songwriting partnership. It is not hard to understand. Actually, it is common sense to expect Mike to feel that way.

On the other hand, Brian Wilson has the right to collaborate with anyone he chooses. He's Brian Wilson. Enough said. If Brian no longer wants to write with Mike, so be it. That's his choice and it must be respected - and accepted. I'm sure Brian has his reasons why he doesn't want to work with Mike (if, in fact, that's true); therefore Brian is right, too.

So, both Mike and Brian have their point of views. They are different point of views, yet, they both are right in their choices. They just don't happen to be on the same page. And, that's sad on a lot of levels; I don't have to list them all. And, obviously, Mike and Brian's differing opinions has caused a deep divide on this board. But, it really shouldn't because, again, they (Mike and Brian) are both right in their views. Hey, Mike wants this but Brian wants that. Doesn't make one right and one wrong.

The problem are these damn interviews, or, precisely, the inability of the individual Beach Boys to handle the P.R. part of their career. There are ways to address these issues in interviews - and you know they're gonna come up - but Mike and Brian consistently drop the ball. They could be honest and still not say anything, if you know what I mean. Instead of Mike laying blame on someone, or coming across as a stubborn, demanding co-songwriter, he could simply say something like, "Brian and I have a great history together and hopefully some day we'll get the opportunity to work together again." That's simple - and honest. And, for the most part, Mike has said things like that over the years. Now, the frustration has reached a new level.

Brian, when asked over the years about working with Mike could've said the same thing, instead of things like "I don't like Mike Love" or "I don't want to talk to Mike Love" or saying one thing and doing another. All they have/had to do is give the interviewer "a line", a harmless line, and move on to the next question. They don't have to necessarily lie, but they don't have to disperse information or details that are only going to inflame. It's all comes under P.R. There are certain things, like songwriting and working together, that should be discussed behind closed doors, privately, and don't have to be shared with the public - or with people like us, as much as we want to know EVERYTHING.

[rab2591]

He wrote several songs with Brian - just not under the conditions he wanted and it seems as a result, he publicly doesn't like the album and has suggested that the songs he was not involved him make him want to commit suicide.

I think we've already established that point.

Because he's not a petulant six year old? Seriously, this mostly amounts to, "I'm not getting my way! I'm not going to play with you anymore!" If you are an emotionally mature adult you should be able to have the slightest comprehension of the concept of compromise - you know, like when Brian shelved some of the greatest music he ever made to make a more inclusive album for his band mates? Mike doesn't even seem capable of a much smaller compromise and simply behaves like the kid who runs to his room and slams the door on his or her parents who won't serve cake for dinner. We barely tolerate this behaviour in a child. And here, I'm going to flip around what has become a popular statement on this board not because I believe it's true but because I would like to illustrate how fundamentally silly the statement is to begin with: You wouldn't accept this behaviour if it was anybody other than Mike Love.

If there was "obviously no band chemistry left" it is certainly not obvious to the majority of the members who wanted to continue. But I guess what's obvious to Mike should be obvious to everyone else too.

So he's the frontman for a successful tour, he records/sings/writes songs for a #3 charting album, helps promote all this, and because he doesn't want to continue this he's a child?? If I were in a band and I were refused the request to write with my fellow bandmate (and please dispense with the "he did write with them" - you know what I mean: in a room/at a piano with him), I'd quit too. They're one of the most famous writing duos in musical history, and petty band management, politics are keeping them apart - yeah, that's an atmosphere I'd want to stay in if I were a lyricist

I'm far from a Mike Love apologist...heck, I have an OSD quote as my signature. I don't like his nostalgic lyrics, I don't like how he acts, I hate he mentions Kokomo in every interview, and I'd rather he never work with Brian again. But I'll never understand why fans rag on Mike for "quitting" the C50 and "firing" his bandmates. Has never made sense to me.

[SMiLE Brian]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

Yes! But we should learn to just appreciate the moment for what it was and that mere humans were involved, in the end....

Besides, how else would we be able to enjoy great Beach Boys music along with BBQ, craft beer and Shamu? C'mon!

[JohnMill]

The problem are these damn interviews, or, precisely, the inability of the individual Beach Boys to handle the P.R. part of their career. There are ways to address these issues in interviews - and you know they're gonna come up - but Mike and Brian consistently drop the ball. They could be honest and still not say anything, if you know what I mean. Instead of Mike laying blame on someone, or coming across as a stubborn, demanding co-songwriter, he could simply say something like, "Brian and I have a great history together and hopefully some day we'll get the opportunity to work together again." That's simple - and honest. And, for the most part, Mike has said things like that over the years. Now, the frustration has reached a new level.

Brian, when asked over the years about working with Mike could've said the same thing, instead of things like "I don't like Mike Love" or "I don't want to talk to Mike Love" or saying one thing and doing another. All they have/had to do is give the interviewer "a line", a harmless line, and move on to the next question. They don't have to necessarily lie, but they don't have to disperse information or details that are only going to inflame. It's all comes under P.R. There are certain things, like songwriting and working together, that should be discussed behind closed doors, privately, and don't have to be shared with the public - or with people like us, as much as we want to know EVERYTHING.

BRILLIANT.

I've contended right from the start of this whole fiasco that the one constant has been the inability for The Beach Boys as an inclusive unit to cobble together a statement that can be sent to the press and relayed to the fans expressing their desires and future plans.  Ironically the one who was most on point was Al Jardine who has probably the most succinct analysis of the situation on his website thanking the fans for coming out for the C50 and saying that he hopes they have a chance to do it again sometime for the fans who didn't get a chance to attend a show.  That is really all that needs to be said on the matter period.  Instead we as a fanbase have been fed nothing but inaccuracies, half-truths, recriminations and sometimes out and out falsehoods regarding the end of the C50 and it is this information which has served as the explanation (in place of you know any real explanation) as to why the band isn't touring as an inclusive unit this summer.

On another level, it's possible that a lot of the shots fired back and forth across the field since the conclusion of the C50 may have damaged relationships between the individual members of the band where relationships are at all time low ebb.  In that scenario everyone loses as the band aside it seemed at least from the outside looking in that tensions between the individual members of The Beach Boys' had at least eased enough where they were able to do a C50 tour, record and release a new record and all the promotion involved with both tour and record.  Now one year later can anyone even fathom the individual members of the group sitting down for a round of burgers and shakes?  So here is where we are at folks for the millionth time running.  There seems to be a wedge driven between Mike Love and the rest of the band (sans Bruce).  There are certainly hard feelings coming from the members of the group not currently touring as "The Beach Boys" which is clear as day to anyone with two eyes.  The fans obviously lose out too as many of us were hoping for some more C50 related activities over the next few years and that seems to be a near impossibility now despite the fact that both Jardine and Love have expressed the opinion that the door is still open for more activities along that line.  

Whatever, the whole thing ticks me off.

[Nicko1234]

Because he's not a petulant six year old? Seriously, this mostly amounts to, "I'm not getting my way! I'm not going to play with you anymore!" If you are an emotionally mature adult you should be able to have the slightest comprehension of the concept of compromise - you know, like when Brian shelved some of the greatest music he ever made to make a more inclusive album for his band mates? Mike doesn't even seem capable of a much smaller compromise and simply behaves like the kid who runs to his room and slams the door on his or her parents who won't serve cake for dinner. We barely tolerate this behaviour in a child. And here, I'm going to flip around what has become a popular statement on this board not because I believe it's true but because I would like to illustrate how fundamentally silly the statement is to begin with: You wouldn't accept this behaviour if it was anybody other than Mike Love.

Brian only agreed to doing the tour based on him, `getting his way`. Do you think he would have agreed to tour if only 2 members of the touring band were from his group? Does that make him a petulant six year old too?

[rab2591]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

And obviously there are some major reasons for it ending. Mike and, I'm assuming, Bruce weren't happy with the way things were being run: Mike wasn't happy with the tour size, he wasn't happy with how they were writing material. He didn't want to be around that environment, so he let things go as planned. Not a clusterfuck, unless you take things way out of proportion.

[SMiLE Brian]

I am Just really frustrated that we are arguing again like its 1998-2011 after the board unity of C50.

[JohnMill]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

Yes! But we should learn to just appreciate the moment for what it was and that mere humans were involved, in the end....

Perhaps.  Can't really argue with that.  But there is a possibility that for the entire duration of the C50 that the majority of us were sucked into believing that the feuding and issues that had plagued The Beach Boys essentially since Carl Wilson's death were in the past and the band was going to move forward with a bright outlook towards the future.  That was the bill of goods that many of us (certainly myself) felt we were being sold last year with the C50 and what happened at the end of the tour?  We were left holding the bag.  That doesn't make you feel too good as a fan.  In fact it makes you question whether or not the members of the group were just playing "happy families" in order to move tickets and a record.  Now believe me I'm not naive enough to not understand that that sort of thing doesn't happen but I'm also not a "fool me twice" sort of person.  If The Beach Boys ever do reform again as an inclusive unit, I'll be dead set pleased as I'm sure many on here will be but personally I'm finished believing a word any of them say in terms of their personal feelings towards one another.  Because after the conclusion of the C50 last year those words would just ring hollow to me.

[JohnMill]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

And obviously there are some major reasons for it ending. Mike and, I'm assuming, Bruce weren't happy with the way things were being run: Mike wasn't happy with the tour size, he wasn't happy with how they were writing material. He didn't want to be around that environment, so he let things go as planned. Not a clusterfuck, unless you take things way out of proportion.

It was a total clusterfuck in how it was handled in the press post conclusion of the C50.  "Brian Wilson Fired From Beach Boys" trended on google for heaven's sake. 

[guitarfool2002]

Because for a brief moment last year, the BBs were a functioning and active band again. They did awesome shows with a number 3 album on billboard. Then it all ended and we are back to the M&B vs. BW band clusterfuck of 1998-2011.

Yes! But we should learn to just appreciate the moment for what it was and that mere humans were involved, in the end....

Perhaps.  Can't really argue with that.  But there is a possibility that for the entire duration of the C50 that the majority of us were sucked into believing that the feuding and issues that had plagued The Beach Boys essentially since Carl Wilson's death were in the past and the band was going to move forward with a bright outlook towards the future.  That was the bill of goods that many of us (certainly myself) felt we were being sold last year with the C50 and what happened at the end of the tour?  We were left holding the bag.  That doesn't make you feel too good as a fan.  In fact it makes you question whether or not the members of the group were just playing "happy families" in order to move tickets and a record.  Now believe me I'm not naive enough to not understand that that sort of thing doesn't happen but I'm also not a "fool me twice" sort of person.  If The Beach Boys ever do reform again as an inclusive unit, I'll be dead set pleased as I'm sure many on here will be but personally I'm finished believing a word any of them say in terms of their personal feelings towards one another.  Because after the conclusion of the C50 last year those words would just ring hollow to me.

But again the only real feuding that happened after Carl's death was in reality between Al and Mike. Correct? Brian wasn't involved much if at all with the Beach Boys after Carl nixed the new Wilson-Love material, he went out and did his own thing, and the real feuding happened prior to Carl's death with the songwriting credit lawsuit in the early 90s, settled before Don Was watched them writing together again. The Smile bonus CD nonsense was a footnote if that, and it got tossed out of court.

Again it seems to come back to issues between Al and Mike after Carl's passing. Unless I'm forgetting a feud somewhere in between.

[guitarfool2002]

Has anyone ever longed to return to a special place from their younger years, some place that holds great memories and this ideal in your mind of how things were, how great it would be to go back, etc.? Then does it sometimes happen where you do actually go back and find it's not the place you left, and the idea and memory of the past was better than reality?

I just can't help seeing Mike holding onto this ideal or this memory of some halcyon days when he and his cousin would sit at the piano and write tunes. If you want the actual imagery, look at that Beach Boys TV movie scene when Mike clears out all the druggies and interlopers Brian had around him and proceeds to write Good Vibrations with his cousin at the piano. Pure hokum and pure fantasy, but doesn't it make a little more sense now?

He wants to go back to a place in his mind that held great memories from years ago, and the description for it is "writing songs with my cousin". That's fine, but does an ideal that strong ever live up to the reality of what is possible and what isn't in the present? I just don't think Brian works that way anymore, though of course I have no way of knowing as a fan and observer from afar.

And we can list a few classic songs which came from collaborations where the co-writers were not on the same continent while collaborating, never mind sharing a piano bench.