New Mike interview in HuffPost

[clack]

Mike's personality as it comes across in interviews isn't a good advertisement for TM. He seems to lack self-awareness -- all self-congratulatory ego, little in the way of authentic humility. That said, I don't know him -- maybe his interviews give us an incomplete picture of his true character. I like the 60's lyrics that he co-wrote with Brian, and I even like some of the songs he wrote with Terry Melcher. There has to be some depth to the guy, right?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Everyone has depth, it just varies. Me ? Deep down, I'm shallow.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I notice that maybe Newcombe's response was about Paul J's post, not mine. In this case I feel left out, too. 

Yes, it was directed at Paul JB's.  In response to this continuous, dismissive "them and us" idiocy, (which is what actually what  creates the most arguments drbeachboy. I'm all for different points of view and am consistent in this matter)

To answer your point though Dancing Bear, I personally don't think the Wilson's are above criticism and your point does have some truth to it. However I can postulise  several reasons why there are multiple threads criticising Mike and hardly any on Dennis and Brian. These are not necessarily my opinions.

1) To most people Dennis and Brian (and Carl) were the main creative forces in the Beach Boys, and were very humble with it. Mike, to some, is the polar opposite.

2) Dennis and Brian lived rock n' roll lifestyles which,  rightly or wrongly is still seen as "cool". Mike is more like a conservative businessman.

3) Dennis and Brian come across as sensitive, artistic people. Mike comes across as arrogant and dismissive. He doesn't exactly make people want to nurture and protect him.

I could go on (and on and on), but I'm so fed up of this argument now.

Carl and Dennis didn't help write any hits, nor were they screwed over credit/money-wise for their contributions. Being treated fairly does wonders for one's humbleness.... Mike contributed greatly to the bands biggest commercial successes yet has been largely written off by a very persistent contingent of "fans" as being a no talent leech/asshole...... Pretty simple math to me. I know everyone is perfectly capable of a little empathy here or putting yourself in his shoes, yet so many refuse to do so simply because it's Mike Love...... Very strange.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Pinder, this is an endless circular argument which is going nowhere, and will never be resolved.

I fully accept and respect the fact you admire Mike, and think he made a major contribution to the group. I can understand that you think he is justifiably angry at being screwed over.

I don't particularly like Mike though, based on his actions throughout the years. I find it hard to empathise with his position, and as I'm not really a "lyrics" person, don't rate his contributions too highly. Nothing you say is going to change my mind.

Is this something you could possibly accept?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Pinder, this is an endless circular argument which is going nowhere, and will never be resolved.

I fully accept and respect the fact you admire Mike, and think he made a major contribution to the group. I can understand that you think he is justifiably angry at being screwed over.

I don't particularly like Mike though, based on his actions throughout the years. I find it hard to empathise with his position, and as I'm not really a "lyrics" person, don't rate his contributions too highly. Nothing you say is going to change my mind.

Is this something you could possibly accept?

I could accept it if Velvet Underground fans or Rolling Stones fans, or Big Star fans, or Who fans and on and on and on endlessly harped over all the awful things members of those bands did and said to each other and others. And I mean the really really bad things they did, and not just a couple heresay statements by 3rd or 4th parties 45 years ago, but they don't..... Does anyone ever sit there and endlessly complain about Lou Reed or Alex Chilton, or Frank Zappa's lack of humility? No, they do not. In fact, the worse those guys are/were, the more rabidly people seem to love them..... All this very articulate and scholarly trashing of Mike Love strikes me as very unique and very cruel and intellectually dishonest since it seems to only exist in order to somehow further prove what a genius another person is. A person who certainly does not need such ugly steps taken in order to prop him up...... Other people seem to do it simply because it's an example of it being "ok" to be awful and just trash someone.... Heartwarming.

I can accept disliking Mike (still weird coming from supposed fans of the band he sang for, wrote for, and fronted live) but this intellectual dissection of his person in order to draw the worst conclusions possible is just brutal and immature...... Sorry.

I mean, I'm a Beach Boys fan and I like basically 99.9 % of what they've done. Mike is a big part of a whole lot of the ball of wax. I personally have a hard time even considering disliking the guy at all..... Just me. So, its not so much my admiration of Mike, but rather my lack of admiration for supposed fans who've made it their calling to diss the guy. I have a problem with that sort of behavior nearly anywhere I see it.


Not a lyrics guy? Odd statement being a rock fan, but I sort of understand. I can go both ways, but since rock/pop music is primarily an art form which features lyrics: you don't HAVE to be a lyrics-person for them to still do their part on you.

[Micha]

But....I'm not wrong about Mike. You are.

Your turn. 

I'm not either. Your turn.

Kindergarten!

[Micha]

and everytime Mike is getting bashed Cam Mott Nicko Pinder show up to defend him.  

I think a lot of that comes down to the fact that some of the hatred of Mike is so extreme. As some other posters conform to the, 'Mike Love is worse than Hitler' viewpoint then it means that anyone who disagrees with that comes across as a 'Mike defender'.

Now if there were people saying, 'Mike is 100% wonderful' then, like many others, I would be listing his numerous faults including the crappy retro lyrics, the second lawsuit, the terrible clothes, nasal vocals etc.

Exactly the same with me, brother!

[Iron Horse-Apples]

my lack of admiration for supposed fans who've made it their calling to diss the guy. I have a problem with that sort of behavior nearly anywhere I see it.

So it's the extremists you have a problem with? Fair enough. If you were to look over my posts though you'd see I often try to give him the benefit of the doubt. This is hard to do sometimes.

I've been a fan a long time.

Long before I had read anything by David Leaf I witnessed the Rock'n'roll Hall Of Fame speech.

Long before the blooboard I tried to reconcile Kokomo and Summer In Paradise with the BW led music I loved.

Long before any stupid, comparing Mike-to-Hitler youtube comments I read what he said about his bandmates and came to the conclusion this was a bitter, unpleasant individual.

Of course I know that any situation involving family is a complex, volatile thing. I also know it's not black and white and the Wilson aren't saints.

I've tried to like Mike, even came pretty cose during C50. Can't do it though.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

In his praise though, and I've said this lots of times, Mike is a clever, sharp guy. He has a great sense of humour and also doesn't seem to care what anyone thinks of him. I'm extremely envious of that last one!

When you get to my age you know the sort of people you get on with, and the sort of people you don't. Mike's personality type (as it seems to me, not knowing him) is one I would find incongruous with mine. I don't hate him, and would disassociate myself from anyone who said they did.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

and everytime Mike is getting bashed Cam Mott Nicko Pinder show up to defend him.  

I think a lot of that comes down to the fact that some of the hatred of Mike is so extreme. As some other posters conform to the, 'Mike Love is worse than Hitler' viewpoint then it means that anyone who disagrees with that comes across as a 'Mike defender'.

Now if there were people saying, 'Mike is 100% wonderful' then, like many others, I would be listing his numerous faults including the crappy retro lyrics, the second lawsuit, the terrible clothes, nasal vocals etc.

Exactly the same with me, brother!

Conversely though, anyone who criticises Mike in the slightest, is often lumped in with the extremists. Then with terms like bashers and apologists being thrown around, we are all cast in the role of extremist.

God, this is like when you've had a row with your missus, and you then sit there dissecting it.

"I was wrong"

"No, I was wrong"

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Very well put, but I ask again: so, Mike is an asshole, so what? Why does it need to be repeated over and over and over and endlesssly with such passion? Is Lou Reed an asshole? From all accounts, hell yes! Yet, I can stil somehow derive endless pleasure from his music. It's not hard.

I guess it's just the different ways we all spin things in out own heads.

Some of us think the RRHOF speech was a hilarious and great punk rock moment and rightful mockery of all the unspoken awfulness of other behavior that night (John Fogery made the other Creedence guys sit there with their wives while he played Creedence songs with a bunch of hired hands: oh but he's a great guy) and the HOF in general.

Some of us find Kokomo perfectly great and SIP loveably cheesey.

Some of us don't consider the BW led glory days of the Beach Boys to be all of what they love that the band have given us.

I could go on and on, but I think you can see where I'm coming from, even if you can't fathom it.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Pinder, this is an endless circular argument which is going nowhere, and will never be resolved.

I fully accept and respect the fact you admire Mike, and think he made a major contribution to the group. I can understand that you think he is justifiably angry at being screwed over.

I don't particularly like Mike though, based on his actions throughout the years. I find it hard to empathise with his position, and as I'm not really a "lyrics" person, don't rate his contributions too highly. Nothing you say is going to change my mind.

Is this something you could possibly accept?

Post of the Week-enjoyed your award winning post!

In Memoriam OSD  -  2005 to 2013

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I can fathom it Pinder. I have no problem with differing views, it's just the language and tactics used I find problematic. I concede this cuts both ways though.

And I'll answer your question with a great statement I read on here

"Mike is an arsehole, but he's our arsehole". (I can get behind that  )

And yes, the RRHOF was a great punk moment.



Hi Oregon, I'll PM you soon re album, I've been hard at it.

[adamghost]

I like food.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

How could anything relating to Mike criticism be escaping me? That's quite a stretch. And none of it matters to mr personally. Only the music does. I simply happen to not consider a single shred of evidence toward disliking Mike and any of his work as being convincing. And he misread the marketplace no more than Brian or any other Beach Boy. 15 Big Ones: is that some huge example of Mike misreading the marketplace or Brian? Most of the good stuff on that album is Mike's. Love You: fantastic album but most certainly an example of someone misreading the marketplace. MIU: OK, Mike and Brian are the guilty parties here, then again, both of them provide some damn good moments. LA Light Album: someone was certainly misreading the marketplace, but their names were Bruce, Carl and Dennis mainly. Is Mike somehow more responsible for this via his one contribution to the album (and a damn good one at that). KTSA: again pretty equal blame all
all around but with Brian/Mike providing some gems. BBS 85: Mike provided the one classic on the album but it's him who misread the marketplace and not Brian, Carl, Al, Bruce or Steve Levine?? SIP: OK, Mike's to blame for something pretty much all himself FINALLY, but is this really indicative of some long going fuckerupishness? Is it?

[Nicko1234]

Conversely though, anyone who criticises Mike in the slightest, is often lumped in with the extremists. Then with terms like bashers and apologists being thrown around, we are all cast in the role of extremist.

Well no, I don't think that's true. I've mentioned earlier in this thread some criticisms of Mike including the lyrics, nasal vocals, 2nd lawsuit etc. and these are things I've talked about numerous times on the board. And yet I seem to have been placed firmly in the 'Mike apologist' camp. It seems to me that 99% of people have serious criticisms of Mike and that is only natural.

I think again it all depends on what position people are choosing to take. People who dislike Mike will read an innocuous interview like this and say that Mike talking about the struggles of watching band members deal with addiction is  equivalent to Paul McCartney continually berating John Lennon for being a wife-beater?!?

Whereas there have been explosive interviews in the past given by Al or Brian which have passed without comment.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I simply happen to not consider a single shred of evidence toward disliking Mike and any of his work as being convincing.

I think this is the key here. Using the word evidence would suggest you see it as an objective thing. It's really not, it's subjective. Whether certain character traits /actions and behavoiur is seen as good / bad or excusable depends wholly on your personal moral compass

Where objectivity does come into play is recognising some of his actions MUST be questionable to SOME people, based on the simple fact he causes controversy. There is plenty of evidence for that.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Conversely though, anyone who criticises Mike in the slightest, is often lumped in with the extremists. Then with terms like bashers and apologists being thrown around, we are all cast in the role of extremist.

Well no, I don't think that's true. I've mentioned earlier in this thread some criticisms of Mike including the lyrics, nasal vocals, 2nd lawsuit etc. and these are things I've talked about numerous times on the board. And yet I seem to have been placed firmly in the 'Mike apologist' camp. It seems to me that 99% of people have serious criticisms of Mike and that is only natural.

I think again it all depends on what position people are choosing to take. People who dislike Mike will read an innocuous interview like this and say that Mike talking about the struggles of watching band members deal with addiction is  equivalent to Paul McCartney continually berating John Lennon for being a wife-beater?!?

Whereas there have been explosive interviews in the past given by Al or Brian which have passed without comment.

Well again, and I touched on this above, what may seem innocuous to you, may not to me. Doesn't make anyone right or wrong. To me, Mike has made too many negative comments for me to trust the motives of anything he says. So I'm using my past experiences to process information. This is how the brain works. You, who have a different view on Mike, process the information with a different bias.

We seem to be in agreement here.

My personal experience is that the slightest criticism of Mike will lead toaccusations of being a hater or basher. This is because there is a thought police contingent on here who have taken what was a fair re-assessment of Mike and turned it into a rewriting of history. That's how it seems

It all comes back to accepting the  fact that some people don't think like you. For some people this is harder than for others. I don't mean to be patronsing, but its true

Now I hope I'm open minded enough to change my mind if necessary. I read and take on board all the explanations and positive views of Mike, as I have proved countless times.

[adamghost]

How could anything relating to Mike criticism be escaping me? That's quite a stretch. And none of it matters to mr personally. Only the music does. I simply happen to not consider a single shred of evidence toward disliking Mike and any of his work as being convincing. And he misread the marketplace no more than Brian or any other Beach Boy. 15 Big Ones: is that some huge example of Mike misreading the marketplace or Brian? Most of the good stuff on that album is Mike's. Love You: fantastic album but most certainly an example of someone misreading the marketplace. MIU: OK, Mike and Brian are the guilty parties here, then again, both of them provide some damn good moments. LA Light Album: someone was certainly misreading the marketplace, but their names were Bruce, Carl and Dennis mainly. Is Mike somehow more responsible for this via his one contribution to the album (and a damn good one at that). KTSA: again pretty equal blame all
all around but with Brian/Mike providing some gems. BBS 85: Mike provided the one classic on the album but it's him who misread the marketplace and not Brian, Carl, Al, Bruce or Steve Levine?? SIP: OK, Mike's to blame for something pretty much all himself FINALLY, but is this really indicative of some long going fuckerupishness? Is it?

With all due respect, I think you make a pretty good case here that the whole Mike criticism thing DOES escape you...that's a pretty incomplete list you've assembled there, with a lot of personal tastes asserted as fact.  

I think it's pretty clear that you don't "get" a lot of the Mike criticism simply because what bugs a lot of other people doesn't bug you.  Fair enough -- but just because you hold to a different opinion doesn't make such criticism automatically invalid or "bashing".  You yourself admitted -- your tastes and reactions to Beach Boy music are in outlier territory.  For it to be "bashing" it has to be unfair criticism.  I would agree that some of it is -- but you disagreeing with the criticism by itself doesn't render it unfair.  If you think "most of the good stuff on 15 BIG ONES is Mike's," for example -- you've definitely got some unique yardsticks for quality.  Wear it well, my friend.  But if someone points out weaknesses in that material, it doesn't make that criticism a bash just because you personally happen to like it.

I love the disco "Here Comes The Night" and can defend that love congently -- but I still understand completely why people hate on it.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Oh, I completely understand the criticisms of Mike and, I think, can differentiate what is valid and what is not, but my continuing question is: were does disliking Mike get us? If I made it a point to care if rock stars are just completely wonderful people or not, I'd probably have like 3 albums in my collection.... I dunno what else to say. I think at some point it will have to be acceptable fact to actually like Mike and his work and for this fact to not be taken as a threat against Brian....

And when did disagreeing with majority opinion become some universal truth escaping someone? Isn't that a little frightening a concept?

[Nicko1234]

Well again, and I touched on this above, what may seem innocuous to you, may not to me. Doesn't make anyone right or wrong. To me, Mike has made too many negative comments for me to trust the motives of anything he says. So I'm using my past experiences to process information. This is how the brain works. You, who have a different view on Mike, process the information with a different bias.

We seem to be in agreement here.

My personal experience is that the slightest criticism of Mike will lead toaccusations of being a hater or basher. This is because there is a thought police contingent on here who have taken what was a fair re-assessment of Mike and turned it into a rewriting of history. That's how it seems

It all comes back to accepting the  fact that some people don't think like you. For some people this is harder than for others. I don't mean to be patronsing, but its true

Now I hope I'm open minded enough to change my mind if necessary. I read and take on board all the explanations and positive views of Mike, as I have proved countless times.

Sorry but I think comments about a, 'thought police contingent' are waaaay beyond the pail.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Do you understand the term "beyond the pale"?

Honest question.

Perhaps you meant to say the thought police comment was somewhat exaggerated?

Not really. Not when "hater / basher" terminology is routinely used to quash and silence certain opinions.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

But calling people apologists is just fine?

This is getting rediculous! Maybe all the hugely justifiable reasons to really really really not like Mike really do escape me? And so what? Wouldn't this make me the lucky one? I like The Beach Boys yet I have to justify not endlessly nitpicking one member out of five? It's The Beach Boys!!! The big tall guy plays bass and sings and writes most of their stuff, the hot guy plays drums and sings, a couple other guys with beards play and sing, a real square guy sings too, and the weird guy with the cap sings lead a lot! They have some really amazing stuff and some amazingly cheesey stuff, but it all sounds like The Beach Boys! Good enough for me. Call me crazy.

[Cam Mott]

Brian took advantage of his family and wrongly hogged all the creative credit of lots of songs and solely profited from that theft from his family.  Mike sat on his lip for thirty years without a word of ever taking credit for lots of his creativity in lots of songs while Brian was fucking him over and not only taking all of the credit for but also all of the money.  Who is the credit hog and over self promoter and selfish prick that is callous toward their family? 

I think some people are just wrong about how Mike is and how the group was and that's how interviews like this get cherry picked and made to mean something they don't. Free OSD!

[filledeplage]

Brian took advantage of his family and wrongly hogged all the creative credit of lots of songs and solely profited from that theft from his family.  Mike sat on his lip for thirty years without a word of ever taking credit for lots of his creativity in lots of songs while Brian was fucking him over and not only taking all of the credit for but also all of the money.  Who is the credit hog and over self promoter and selfish prick that is callous toward their family?  

I think some people are just wrong about how Mike is and how the group was and that's how interviews like this get cherry picked and made to mean something they don't. Free OSD!

In order to unravel this epic, one needs to go back to 1961, and look at what happened among the parties, who controlled the interests.  The likely scenario is that Murry (who did kick the door down for the band) made a deal to keep the royalties in the Wilson "household" - and no one knows exactly what happened, except when the court looked at the case, it seems that they found that Mike was defrauded.  

And it was a suit against an "entity" and that is the way I think of it.  For example if you really like your neighbor but their dog bites you, you sue their insurance company to recover for you injuries.  That is an entity. You can still like and talk to your neighbor.  

Back in those days a lot of actors and musicians were defrauded from profits that their parents took, and the companies they worked for, became partners with the parents, and as long as the children performed, everyone was happy, until the kid became an adult and realized they were defrauded.  

Suits just establish the "rights and obligations" of a party.   Can they get ugly?  Of course.  But, my guess is the old-style Hollywood and music business modus operandi took advantage of the then-existing, lack of business acumen, with musicians, of and other bands at the time.