New Mike interview in HuffPost

[Mike's Beard]

I think it's got worse since the C50 breakup.

[Smilin Ed H]

Surely, both sides are just as bad... Take a look at the first page of the message board and count how many Mike bashing threads there are, and then count how many Brian bashing threads there are.

The concern is that 'sides' have been designated at all.

It's been this way since I first stepped in a Beach Boys' message board in 1996.

It has. To a tiresome extent. Mind you, I'd rather be a Brianista than a Contra!

[HeyJude]

I think it's got worse since the C50 breakup.

True. An interesting question is whether the C50 debacle caused some of this, or simply brought it to the fore.

The new thing, and a tipping point for me as far as seeing this as something more than the usual disagreements over the years has been the group of fans who have seemingly celebrated the demise of the reunion. Given the quality of the reunion, and the fact that the current state of affairs has not ended the group's career on a high note, has left me utterly perplexed as to where this Johnston-esque near giddiness about the end of the reunion comes from.

[Dancing Bear]

celebrated the demise of the reunion.

I missed this one. Did it happen in a secret section of SS?

[Mike's Beard]

I think it's got worse since the C50 breakup.

True. An interesting question is whether the C50 debacle caused some of this, or simply brought it to the fore.

I think rightly or wrongly it just reinforced many people's negative perception of Mike Love.

[HeyJude]

celebrated the demise of the reunion.

I missed this one. Did it happen in a secret section of SS?

It's sprinkled through threads from last year. Some fans directly stated they were glad the reunion did not continue on. More subjectively, I personally felt there was an undertone of contempt, condescension, and/or weird pleasure that a few seemed to get from responding to those who lamented the end of the reunion. I was especially bummed that I personally sensed this from AGD for instance. Again, that was just the feeling/sense I got, nothing more.

[Dancing Bear]

celebrated the demise of the reunion.

I missed this one. Did it happen in a secret section of SS?

It's sprinkled through threads from last year. Some fans directly stated they were glad the reunion did not continue on. More subjectively, I personally felt there was an undertone of contempt, condescension, and/or weird pleasure that a few seemed to get from responding to those who lamented the end of the reunion. I was especially bummed that I personally sensed this from AGD for instance. Again, that was just the feeling/sense I got, nothing more.

Well, you wanted to lament the end of the reunion, and some saw its demise AS PLANNED as natural and nothing earth-shaking. No one was glad or something like that, only in your head. I think you wanted everyone to join in, but you see, there are individuals here.

After you kept going on and on and on about it the tone of the respnses changed. Isn't it understandable?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I really don't think any such distinction as a Kokomaoist should exist..... All those accused of being such are doing is basically defending their favorite band and it's members. In other words, it's being a fan basically. It makes perfect sense and takes not much of an inner conversation to "defend" Mike. He wrote lots of great lyrics and fronted/sang for our favorite band! And that's it! We love The Beach Boys therefore when someone is bashing or making far too much effort to paint that guy in a negative way: we will likely disagree..... I think this really just further points out the depressing reality that there are Beach Boys fans, ....... and then there are Brian Wilson fans.

[SMiLE Brian]

I think (at least in my case) that the C50 made Mike Love likable for the first time in decades and we were starting to forgive him for events in the past.

Then he pulled the stunts he did at the end of the C50 and reminded some of us why he can be such a pain. Hence the renewed criticism since.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

But what did he realy do other than decide to not contiunue in a situation that was not satisfactory to him? Was he supposed to just suck it up for us "fans" who mostly can't freaking stand the guy and bash him endlessly?

See, you can't have it both ways in life. Treat someone like you would like to be treated and usually such kindness is repaid. Unfortunatly due to too many fan's bullshit in his direction: Mike owes us squat.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I think (at least in my case) that the C50 made Mike Love likable for the first time in decades and we were starting to forgive him for events in the past.

Then he pulled the stunts he did at the end of the C50 and reminded some of us why he can be such a pain. Hence the renewed criticism since.

Those "stunts" being to go along with what had been agreed by all parties a few months earlier, and not to compromise as he had once before, apparently. Very few people know exactly what happened between June and September: I'm guessing it's not as black and white as some would like to presume.

[Andrew G. Doe]

celebrated the demise of the reunion.

I missed this one. Did it happen in a secret section of SS?

It's sprinkled through threads from last year. Some fans directly stated they were glad the reunion did not continue on. More subjectively, I personally felt there was an undertone of contempt, condescension, and/or weird pleasure that a few seemed to get from responding to those who lamented the end of the reunion. I was especially bummed that I personally sensed this from AGD for instance. Again, that was just the feeling/sense I got, nothing more.

Well, you wanted to lament the end of the reunion, and some saw its demise AS PLANNED as natural and nothing earth-shaking. No one was glad or something like that, only in your head. I think you wanted everyone to join in, but you see, there are individuals here.

After you kept going on and on and on about it the tone of the respnses changed. Isn't it understandable?

No secret that I for one was glad that C50 ended when it did, on one almighty high note. Always leave them wanting more... for once in their checkered career, the band got it exactly right, whether by design or accident.

[SMiLE Brian]

I don't think Mike's ditching the rest of the band and its main songwriter to tour seaworld would count as a high note.

[Andrew G. Doe]

No-one ditched anyone. Brian knew about it back in late June (as has been stated here ad nauseum). Brian's people asked Mike to make it clear that he, Alan & David were not part of the shows Mike had booked post 9/28/12, and Mike did just that. I'll admit, the timing could have been better...

Wait...

Why are we going over this again, over a year after it all happened ?  Guess my father was right - you can't make someone understand something they don't want to.

[Jason]

Jackass to water, as they say.

I'm glad the reunion ended before it could get stale. It's a high point for sure.

[SMiLE Brian]

I can't believe people are happy that the band broke up again.

[hypehat]

Dude, don't you get it, it's so great we don't get to see The Beach Boys become a hollow travesty shamelessly retreading the glories of C50





See! Everything's FANTASTIC

[drbeachboy]

I can't believe people are happy that the band broke up again.

I am not happy about it. I really wish things would have worked out, but it did not. Life goes on, just as everyone in the band has gone on doing their own things.

[Wirestone]

I became a fan in 1995, and joined the old Mike Wheeler board a year later.  I became a fan during that brief time where BW was considered to be a god amongst indie rock circles. During that time Brian was the one to be admired and did no wrong, and the rest of the band was an embarrassment (this was before Jon's book made DW regain his rightful stature). That wasn't any more accurate than the flip side. As always the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Going back to this earlier post to make a more general point ...

I don't think the rest of the band is an embarrassment. Well, post-1970 Mike comes close. But Carl and Al and Bruce and (especially) Dennis are certainly talented in their own ways. But no one else in the group was ever in the same league as Brian. IMO.

And I guess that's always going to be the debate, regardless of any spirited silliness in these kind of threads. Do you genuinely believe that the other guys' contributions (including Mike's lyrics) come close to / are important as what Brian did? To my mind, Brian would have still been successful, and arguably more artistically fulfilled, without the rest of the band.

But that's what it comes down to. And I think in some cases, Mike's defenders aren't just defending Mike. They're defending an understanding of the group as a whole. And I understand that perspective, and have even flirted with it myself at times. I just have never ultimately been able to accept it as my own. Brian is uniquely gifted, and the band's best moments have always been (again, to me) when his vision was least adulterated, and he had the most control over or input into what was recorded.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I can't believe people are happy that the band broke up again.

I am not happy about it. I really wish things would have worked out, but it did not. Life goes on, just as everyone in the band has gone on doing their own things.

Agrered.

How about we just marvel at how unlikelty abnd great the C50 tour was and leave it at that?

Such great thing generally burn brightly for a wonderous moment and then burn out. No great tragedy here.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I became a fan in 1995, and joined the old Mike Wheeler board a year later.  I became a fan during that brief time where BW was considered to be a god amongst indie rock circles. During that time Brian was the one to be admired and did no wrong, and the rest of the band was an embarrassment (this was before Jon's book made DW regain his rightful stature). That wasn't any more accurate than the flip side. As always the truth is somewhere in the middle.

I don't think the rest of the band is an embarrassment. Well, post-1970 Mike is. But Carl and Al and Bruce and (especially Dennis) are certainly talented in their own ways. But no one else in the group was ever remotely in the same league as Brian. IMO.

And I guess that's always going to be the debate, regardless of any spirited silliness in these kind of threads. Do you genuinely believe that the other guys' contributions (including Mike's lyrics) come close to / are important as what Brian did? To my mind, Brian would have been as successful, and arguably more artistically fulfilled, without the rest of the band.

But that's what it comes down to, I think. And I think in some cases, Mike's defenders aren't just defending Mike. They're defending an understanding of the group as a whole. And I understand that perspective, and have even flirted with it myself at times. I just have never ultimately been able to accept it as my own. Brian is uniquely gifted, and the band's best moments have always been (again, to me) when his vision was least adulterated, and he had the most control/input over what was recorded.

But this is an opinion! I know you're not pushing it as anything else, but this is a band who's work spans 50 years, so there will doubltesly be other opinions. My own favoriote period is Wild Honey through Holland. And that period simply cannot be chalked up to Brian Brian Brian and only unadulterated Brian..... so, it's different strokes, ya know?

By the way, "Unadelterated Brian" ..... What does that mean exactly? For a guy who utilized so many various co-writers, musicians, and had an entire band who wasn't him spreading the word to the world: what has ever been unadulterated about Brian? ....  Love You, maybe?

[Wirestone]

I became a fan in 1995, and joined the old Mike Wheeler board a year later.  I became a fan during that brief time where BW was considered to be a god amongst indie rock circles. During that time Brian was the one to be admired and did no wrong, and the rest of the band was an embarrassment (this was before Jon's book made DW regain his rightful stature). That wasn't any more accurate than the flip side. As always the truth is somewhere in the middle.

I don't think the rest of the band is an embarrassment. Well, post-1970 Mike is. But Carl and Al and Bruce and (especially Dennis) are certainly talented in their own ways. But no one else in the group was ever remotely in the same league as Brian. IMO.

And I guess that's always going to be the debate, regardless of any spirited silliness in these kind of threads. Do you genuinely believe that the other guys' contributions (including Mike's lyrics) come close to / are important as what Brian did? To my mind, Brian would have been as successful, and arguably more artistically fulfilled, without the rest of the band.

But that's what it comes down to, I think. And I think in some cases, Mike's defenders aren't just defending Mike. They're defending an understanding of the group as a whole. And I understand that perspective, and have even flirted with it myself at times. I just have never ultimately been able to accept it as my own. Brian is uniquely gifted, and the band's best moments have always been (again, to me) when his vision was least adulterated, and he had the most control/input over what was recorded.

But this is an opinion! I knowe you're not pushing it as anything else, but this is a band who's work spans 50 years, so there will doubltesly be other opinions. My own favoriote period is Wild Honey through Holland. And that period simply cannot be chalked up to Brian Brian Brian and only unadulterated Brian..... so, it's different strokes, ya know?

By the way, "Unadelterated Brian" ..... What does that mean exactly? For a giuy who utilized so many various co-writers, musicians, and had an entire band who wasn't him spreading the word to the world: what has ever been unadulterated about Brian? ....

It's complicated. And I think it's one of the reasons threads like this get out of hand. Well, the main reason they do is because fighting on the internet is fun. But the other reason is that the history and motivations of this group are complex. Being a Brian Wilson fan means different things depending on the era of his music that you like the most, you know? Even with Dennis, some people can't get into his POB stuff, but love his earlier BB tunes.

And basically, I think everyone starts arguing at cross purposes and in different universes. Even Mike's songwriting lawsuit means different things to different people here. To some, it's redressing wrongs. To others, it's opportunistic. To still others, it's the kind of thing that bands do all the time. You can also use it as a window into the band's history and Mike's curious history as a creative participant in the band.

In short, it's all a big mess, just like this band. (And yes, "unadulterated Brian" doesn't make a lot of sense on its own -- I simply meant the music in which he plays the biggest role. Sometimes that's with collaborators.)

[Jason]

I can't believe people are happy that the band broke up again.

Who said anyone was happy about it?

[SMiLE Brian]

I just mean AGD going on and on about how Mike did everything right on the C50 and its a good thing M&B are back with their shows.

[Dancing Bear]

I think Alan Jardine is the only human being on earth who believes there were 5 geniuses in the Beach Boys. Not even Mike tries to sell that one.

It's not about thinking that, for example, Mike is as good a songwriter and arranger as Brian. No way in hell. But it's tiresome when you hear for the milionth time 'if not for his cousin Mike would be still pumping gas'. Saying that Mike, Dennis, Carl, Al and Bruce had the right to have a opinion as bandmembers is the same as saying that they were as talented as Brian? I don't think so.

That said, 'Unadelterated Brian' can mean 'Pet Sounds' and 'Adult/Child'. It's not that simple. You could also make a point that Brian is purer in 'Wild Honey' than in 'Smile'. Maybe this would generate a good thread.