Mike Love's Nelson Mandela Facebook Post

[HeyJude]

It's a good thing that 1981 performance was a Mike Love SOLO performance, that no other Beach Boys made the trip, that no other Beach Boys performed, and that no other Beach Boys accepted a check for the concert. And, it's good to know that actions don't speak louder than words, that the other Beach Boys couldn't possibly feel the same way as Mike, being they didn't accept their $$$$$$$$ for the performance. We know that Brian and Dennis were touring because they loved playing those oldies but goodies....

The other Beach Boys did do the trip, play the show, and cash the checks. And personally, I don't condone that they did those things.  I personally think it was lame and wrong for them to do. All of them. And I said this in my original post.

But the über crass, despicable quote was Mike's.  The quote is a whole other level of awful.

No, the quote is NOT "a whole other level". It is on the same level as performing the concert, and you're not grasping that point. The other Beach Boys performing the concert and cashing their check is a perfect example of actions speaking louder than words. The other Beach Boys did it for the money, too, they just didn't say it, as Mike did. This is yet another, yes another, example of the other Beach Boys being at the same level on the "asshole meter" as Mike - but some fans being UNABLE to admit it.

Not the "same level" regardless of whether one agrees with Mike's comments and/or the guys playing the gigs. Mike's comments in various interviews are *especially* open to scrutiny when we're talking about some vague "a-hole meter" concept. If a guy cuts in front of me in a line and says nothing, and then another guy cuts but turns around and says "yeah, I'm cutting in front of you, and you can go f--k yourself", then they're both a-holes but guy #2 is moreso (and I'm of the type that would be really irked by the first guy too chicken to say anything). If actions mattered and comments didn't whatsoever, then nobody would ever give interviews.

Even Mike seems to semi-acknowledge that he can be perceived as a big a-hole. I'm not sure why "the other guys in the band are a-holes too" always matters when we're talking about Mike, and that's not even getting into the fact that a very compelling argument can be made that Mike is demonstrably the "biggest a-hole" in the group.

[CenturyDeprived]

Not only did the BBs notoriously play Sun City in 1981, but I read a 1981 Mike Love quote in the recently-published BBs In Concert book, where he said something to the effect of "the UN can screw themselves... it's [the gig is] good money", which may be the most crass thing ML has ever said, and almost made me ashamed to be a fan of the band when I read it.

What is the actual quote?

I don't have the book in front of me, but in the comments section of Mike's facebook post, somebody posted the 1981 quote:

"It's nice money. The U.N. can go screw themselves. They never buy tickets to Beach Boys concerts."

[guitarfool2002]

I think some deep breaths need to be taken before forming more judgements. History shows it was a bad decision in many obvious ways to play Sun City, a decision which should be called out. But also, some context needs to be considered before making a blanket assessment of those who played there.

In 1981 the Sun City resort was in operation just over a year. There were large sums of money being offered to western artists to perform there, through booking agencies and managers. Consider the list of major acts which performed there in the early 80's. Among them, Frank Sinatra according to reports was the first artist to open the venue, giving the first major show. Other acts included Tina Turner, Elton John, Dionne Warwick, Johnny Mathis, and various stars from pop, rock, and even opera/classic genres had shows booked there.

It seemed to come to a breaking point after Queen played there around 1984. They still claim ignorance of the situation surrounding the gig. To them, it was a show for their fans in South Africa, the band members ignorant of the background and situation. Take that as you will, with a grain of salt as necessary.

But after Queen's gig, it came at a time of increased awareness and activism surrounding the entire sociopolitical situation in that area, and the backlash started to become more prominent and much louder in the mainstream media. This of course led to Little Steven Van Zandt's "Sun City" project, which dovetailed with the Artists United Against Apartheid group, organized in part with Van Zandt and which was most visible in 1985 with his album and video project, inspired by "Band Aid" and calling together a few dozen prominent musicians to contribute to the project and vocally condemn both Sun City and artists who would book shows there.

But that was most prominent around 1984 and 1985, and by prominent you could say it was an issue pushed to the forefront in the media and much more information about the situation itself was being made available.

Prior to 1984-85, could artists who were booked to play there legitimately claim ignorance, as Queen had done? That's up to those making an opinion on the matters.

But I do think context is at least worth noting, especially as a group like the Beach Boys in 1981 were booked to play Sun City along with other very notable artists...Frank Sinatra and Tina Turner, to name just two - not exactly "B-list" bookings for any venue.

So looking at it in 2013, yes there are issues to criticize and judge, no doubt. But consider too that playing there even in 1981 did not yet have the necessary stigma attached to it which it would soon rightfully earn through the efforts of those like Little Steven and the Musicians United group. They brought attention to a scene which I'd say a large majority of fans and people in the west in general did not have much knowledge about, and as an issue pretty much debated within the UN but not "mainstream" as an issue for pop culture, it wasn't on the radar of millions of people.

So how harsh should the judgement or the penance be in retrospect? Should Tina Turner receive the same assessment as the Beach Boys as Frank Sinatra as anyone else?

It was a money grab, as it most of the music business, for artists to take a heap of cash and get put up in a luxury resort to play shows. Frank Sinatra did it, the O'Jays did it...do the other acts booked there get even a sliver of benefit of the doubt that they were in fact too ignorant of the surroundings to see the gig offers as anything but another gig, a well-paid one at that?

This is just food for thought. Again, whatever quote that may be is another discussion. But i think in context there could be a different set of factors to look back and judge a gig booked in 1980 versus one booked in, say, 1987 after everyone knew exactly what was going on through the activism and the media making it a more prominent and mainstream story than it had been.

In retrospect, of course, the artists en masse could have rejected the offers outright, whether they came in 1980 or 1986, and those who played there should have a finger pointed at them, or at least a question asked "why?". But some context may also be required.

And ultimately, the music and live concert business itself is consumed by a desire to make hoards of money, and lots of it...whether it was the Beach Boys or Johnny Mathis or Sinatra, they ultimately all said "yes" and got the paycheck and perks. Apply the criticism appropriately.

[Pretty Funky]

Story from 1983

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1345&dat=19831026&id=kv1LAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ffkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7033,2009796

[HeyJude]

I think some deep breaths need to be taken before forming more judgements. History shows it was a bad decision in many obvious ways to play Sun City, a decision which should be called out. But also, some context needs to be considered before making a blanket assessment of those who played there.

In 1981 the Sun City resort was in operation just over a year. There were large sums of money being offered to western artists to perform there, through booking agencies and managers. Consider the list of major acts which performed there in the early 80's. Among them, Frank Sinatra according to reports was the first artist to open the venue, giving the first major show. Other acts included Tina Turner, Elton John, Dionne Warwick, Johnny Mathis, and various stars from pop, rock, and even opera/classic genres had shows booked there.

It seemed to come to a breaking point after Queen played there around 1984. They still claim ignorance of the situation surrounding the gig. To them, it was a show for their fans in South Africa, the band members ignorant of the background and situation. Take that as you will, with a grain of salt as necessary.

But after Queen's gig, it came at a time of increased awareness and activism surrounding the entire sociopolitical situation in that area, and the backlash started to become more prominent and much louder in the mainstream media. This of course led to Little Steven Van Zandt's "Sun City" project, which dovetailed with the Artists United Against Apartheid group, organized in part with Van Zandt and which was most visible in 1985 with his album and video project, inspired by "Band Aid" and calling together a few dozen prominent musicians to contribute to the project and vocally condemn both Sun City and artists who would book shows there.

But that was most prominent around 1984 and 1985, and by prominent you could say it was an issue pushed to the forefront in the media and much more information about the situation itself was being made available.

Prior to 1984-85, could artists who were booked to play there legitimately claim ignorance, as Queen had done? That's up to those making an opinion on the matters.

But I do think context is at least worth noting, especially as a group like the Beach Boys in 1981 were booked to play Sun City along with other very notable artists...Frank Sinatra and Tina Turner, to name just two - not exactly "B-list" bookings for any venue.

So looking at it in 2013, yes there are issues to criticize and judge, no doubt. But consider too that playing there even in 1981 did not yet have the necessary stigma attached to it which it would soon rightfully earn through the efforts of those like Little Steven and the Musicians United group. They brought attention to a scene which I'd say a large majority of fans and people in the west in general did not have much knowledge about, and as an issue pretty much debated within the UN but not "mainstream" as an issue for pop culture, it wasn't on the radar of millions of people.

So how harsh should the judgement or the penance be in retrospect? Should Tina Turner receive the same assessment as the Beach Boys as Frank Sinatra as anyone else?

It was a money grab, as it most of the music business, for artists to take a heap of cash and get put up in a luxury resort to play shows. Frank Sinatra did it, the O'Jays did it...do the other acts booked there get even a sliver of benefit of the doubt that they were in fact too ignorant of the surroundings to see the gig offers as anything but another gig, a well-paid one at that?

This is just food for thought. Again, whatever quote that may be is another discussion. But i think in context there could be a different set of factors to look back and judge a gig booked in 1980 versus one booked in, say, 1987 after everyone knew exactly what was going on through the activism and the media making it a more prominent and mainstream story than it had been.

In retrospect, of course, the artists en masse could have rejected the offers outright, whether they came in 1980 or 1986, and those who played there should have a finger pointed at them, or at least a question asked "why?". But some context may also be required.

And ultimately, the music and live concert business itself is consumed by a desire to make hoards of money, and lots of it...whether it was the Beach Boys or Johnny Mathis or Sinatra, they ultimately all said "yes" and got the paycheck and perks. Apply the criticism appropriately.

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumbing his nose.

[guitarfool2002]

Story from 1983

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1345&dat=19831026&id=kv1LAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ffkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7033,2009796

Exactly - almost two years after the artists started booking there, but again was this as mainstream of an issue as it would be a year later with Little Steven? Meaning, in retrospect would the average non-politically-aware fan listening to top 40 radio in 1983 be aware of what Sun City even was if they didn't read the newspaper? Note in that article perhaps the most complete list of performers who had been paid to perform there up to the date of that news report, and consider that as part of the context.

Again, it's not right or wrong at this point in 2013 because that's been established over the past three decades. History says what's right or wrong in that fashion. History says Queen claiming ignorance when playing there in 1984 just doesn't wash with the history.

But add the Beach Boys to a long and diverse list of performers who made a shitload of money for similar gigs, some of those artists who we could argue should have known better...it's still wrong in retrospect but consider how many major artists after the Beach Boys did the same thing with even more knowledge of the place at their disposal.

[Mikie]

And yet another Mike Love thread where people come out of the woodwork with an excuse to rag on Mike. You can tell it's real slow in the Beach Boys world when guys who haven't posted on the board in weeks to check in to see if there's a subject that they can contribute to. Sure enough. Same ol', same ol.

It's about time for Mike to say something REALLY controversial to get your hair on end.....

[guitarfool2002]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

[Autotune]

1- actual quote needed

2- performing in a country is not equal to endorsing its politics. There's nothing asshole-like about it

[bgas]

And yet another Mike Love thread where people come out of the woodwork with an excuse to rag on Mike. You can tell it's real slow in the Beach Boys world when guys who haven't posted on the board in weeks to check in to see if there's a subject that they can contribute to. Sure enough. Same ol', same ol.

It's about time for Mike to say something REALLY controversial to get your hair on end.....

YES, Mr Skin Flute, YES!!

[guitarfool2002]

To further put this into context, money-wise, that article reported Sinatra was paid 1.79 million dollars to play Sun City in 1981.

Today that would be the equivalent of paying an artist over 4.6 million dollars for a show.

That's a staggering sum of money. And the article also says Roberta Flack turned down a Sun City offer of 1.5 million in the early 80's. Roberta Flack, not necessarily an A-list concert draw, offered that much money...that's amazing. It's no secret the venue was throwing exorbitant money at these artists, including the BB's. And again, that's across the board what happens in the music biz in general. Witness how much was just paid to Britney Spears for a residence in Vegas. Crazy money.

[CenturyDeprived]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

IMO, Mike's deliberate nose-thumbing of the issue, in the crass manner that it was done, is the thing that I feel makes it worse.  It's not just him being "honest" about money being the motivating factor, it's actually actively telling an organization like the UN to screw off. How 'bout an ounce of sensitivity. Mike's quote almost reads like he's talking about something insignificant like sports teams.

If another artist who performed there in the 80s made as crass a quote, and then had the cojones to post a heartfelt Mandela loveletter on facebook today, I'd be just as incensed. 2013 Mike should just keep his mouth shut about Mandela. I suspect it's just his publicist anyway who wrote it.

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

[HeyJude]

1- actual quote needed

2- performing in a country is not equal to endorsing its politics. There's nothing asshole-like about it

I think the whole point, and the set of things that set this line of the discussion off, was not the act of doing the shows. That's a very interesting and debatable topic, as guitarfool's thorough and appreciated rundown indicates. It's the commentary from Mike that's being picked apart here. Doing a show in a country where you are aware of the apartheid situation may or may not be an a-hole move, that's debatable and sometimes can involve all sorts of passivity or ignorance of the part of the performers. "The UN can go screw themselves" is inflammatory, and I would imagine that, while everything is subjective, you'd probably find a good number of people, including people who agree with the sentiments, that it's a comment that is rather a-hole-ish. I'm not even offended by Mike's comments; I can objectively say many would find them inflammatory. As always, Mike can say and do whatever he wants, but he will always answer (to both fair and unfair assessments) for those comments.

Also, I think something being missed is that this is just a passing observation that it is perhaps a bit ironic that the man who wrote the nice words on Facebook about Mandela also played Sun City. Pointing that irony out doesn't have to be a big to-do, it doesn't have to be a big loaded accusation. An observation (admittedly meant to point out the irony) stating "Didn't Mike also play Sun City?" doesn't immediately mean "what an a-hole!"

[HeyJude]

And yet another Mike Love thread where people come out of the woodwork with an excuse to rag on Mike. You can tell it's real slow in the Beach Boys world when guys who haven't posted on the board in weeks to check in to see if there's a subject that they can contribute to. Sure enough. Same ol', same ol.

It's about time for Mike to say something REALLY controversial to get your hair on end.....

I don't get it. All this discussion is on-topic, and has remained civil as far as I can tell. What could possibly be the problem? Mike (and a billion other people) post their personal comments and thoughts online, and in reaction people agree or disagree or discuss what Mike said. That's why people share their words. If Mike didn't want to share his words, he would have written in his personal journal, not on Facebook for everybody to read. If you're going to have the balls to post that after having played Sun City and told the UN to go screw themselves, that's, well, actually rather ballsy, but it's also going to open you up to valid and invalid criticism.

I for one can't wait for Mike's kind words professing his retroactive support for Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, and the Coalition Against Clean Surfing Conditions.

I continue to find it ironic, after sadly closing in on twenty years on the internet, that "complaint" posts about the nature of a discussion are undeniably less on-topic, and less constructive than the discussion they complain about.

[HeyJude]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

This is an interesting point, as the "bigger" someone is, the more immune they are to these types of criticisms. There obviously are no lasting (or ever any?) boycotts of Sinatra or Queen or the Beach Boys.

Most bands and artists and famous people have these awkward things from their career that can be criticized, and the more respected and admired they are, the more those things are ignored or glazed over, and that is for better or worse.

[CenturyDeprived]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

This is an interesting point, as the "bigger" someone is, the more immune they are to these types of criticisms. There obviously are no lasting (or ever any?) boycotts of Sinatra or Queen or the Beach Boys.

Most bands and artists and famous people have these awkward things from their career that can be criticized, and the more respected and admired they are, the more those things are ignored or glazed over, and that is for better or worse.

I'm just glad the BBs didn't add "Ten Little Indians" to the setlist when the played Sun City.

[bgas]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

This is an interesting point, as the "bigger" someone is, the more immune they are to these types of criticisms. There obviously are no lasting (or ever any?) boycotts of Sinatra or Queen or the Beach Boys.

Most bands and artists and famous people have these awkward things from their career that can be criticized, and the more respected and admired they are, the more those things are ignored or glazed over, and that is for better or worse.

I'm just glad the BBs didn't add "Ten Little Indians" to the setlist when the played Sun City.

That would have been SO cool!!  The Bestest song on Surfin Safari, played halfway around the world in Darkest Africa

[Sheriff John Stone]

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

Funny, but it didn't keep Blondie from sharing a stage with old friends Brian Wilson and Al Jardine, who JOINED old Mike Love for the 1981 Sun City show. Maybe Blondie didn't know that Al and Brian played the show. No, maybe he just forgot. Nah, he probably didn't care. But, for Mike's quote, well, that's grounds for NEVER sharing a stage with him! How crass. The actual act of performing and accepting $$$$$$$$$$, that's OK. Just don't TALK about it! Sail on, sail on sailor....

[HeyJude]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

This is an interesting point, as the "bigger" someone is, the more immune they are to these types of criticisms. There obviously are no lasting (or ever any?) boycotts of Sinatra or Queen or the Beach Boys.

Most bands and artists and famous people have these awkward things from their career that can be criticized, and the more respected and admired they are, the more those things are ignored or glazed over, and that is for better or worse.

I'm just glad the BBs didn't add "Ten Little Indians" to the setlist when the played Sun City.

 

I for one, in seeing and pointing out these ironies and odd moments in the BB's career, usually have fun and laugh about it (as much as one can; and hopefully appropriate to the topic).

Has anyone here ever played a non-fan "Hey Little Tomboy?" I loathe those "reaction videos" people post on YouTube where someone shows them or plays them something shocking to get their reaction, but some "Hey Little Tomboy" reaction videos with the unsettled look on one's face would be pretty freaking funny.

I find it amusing that Mike wrote those comments on Facebook after playing Sun City and told the UN to go screw themselves, that's about it. My initial reaction didn't go beyond that. I for one am not trying to invoke a bunch of fake outrage about it. It's hilarious, and another slightly Spinal Tap-esque moments from our Boys.  

[HeyJude]

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

Funny, but it didn't keep Blondie from sharing a stage with old friends Brian Wilson and Al Jardine, who JOINED old Mike Love for the 1981 Sun City show. Maybe Blondie didn't know that Al and Brian played the show. No, maybe he just forgot. Nah, he probably didn't care. But, for Mike's quote, well, that's grounds for NEVER sharing a stage with him! How crass. The actual act of performing and accepting $$$$$$$$$$, that's OK. Just don't TALK about it! Sail on, sail on sailor....

I'm laughing thinking about Blondie, in preparation for his shows with Brian, Al, and Dave, poring over the 1981 Beach Boys tour itinerary and becoming enraged, culminating in an awkward backstage confrontation, with the situation being controlled by the calming presence of Joe Thomas.

I'm also picturing this interview with Brian:

Question: "Brian, remember when you played the Sun City venue in December 1981?"

Brian: "Huh?"

[Sheriff John Stone]

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

Funny, but it didn't keep Blondie from sharing a stage with old friends Brian Wilson and Al Jardine, who JOINED old Mike Love for the 1981 Sun City show. Maybe Blondie didn't know that Al and Brian played the show. No, maybe he just forgot. Nah, he probably didn't care. But, for Mike's quote, well, that's grounds for NEVER sharing a stage with him! How crass. The actual act of performing and accepting $$$$$$$$$$, that's OK. Just don't TALK about it! Sail on, sail on sailor....

I'm laughing thinking about Blondie, in preparation for his shows with Brian, Al, and Dave, poring over the 1981 Beach Boys tour itinerary and becoming enraged, culminating in an awkward backstage confrontation, with the situation being controlled by the calming presence of Joe Thomas.

I'm also picturing this interview with Brian:

Question: "Brian, remember when you played the Sun City venue in December 1981?"

Brian: "Huh?"

It is laughable, isn't it? But, the quote? NEVER FORGET THAT!!!!!!

[CenturyDeprived]

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

Funny, but it didn't keep Blondie from sharing a stage with old friends Brian Wilson and Al Jardine, who JOINED old Mike Love for the 1981 Sun City show. Maybe Blondie didn't know that Al and Brian played the show. No, maybe he just forgot. Nah, he probably didn't care. But, for Mike's quote, well, that's grounds for NEVER sharing a stage with him! How crass. The actual act of performing and accepting $$$$$$$$$$, that's OK. Just don't TALK about it! Sail on, sail on sailor....

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree, since I don't believe you can legitimately equate the full band playing there with one of the bandmembers additionally saying a very insensitive, inflammatory super-tactless remark that makes zero bones about giving one ounce of a f*ck about anything/anybody except money. That bandmember would be doing something that's more worthy of criticism. Actions do speak louder than words, no denying that. But words like that make a notably negative difference.

I would think that 1981 Blondie would perhaps have felt the BBs playing in Sun City was questionable, but I imagine if he'd additionally read ML's 1981 crass comment, he'd have found it to have been an undeniably sh*tty thing to say. And after having been called the "N" word by ML's bro, I imagine he'd not think too highly of the Love family having much in the way of tact/sensitivity. I have no idea whether Blondie would have then in 1981, or would now in 2013, share a stage with ML... not sure if they ever had a real beef with each other.

[Sheriff John Stone]

One must wonder what South African native Blondie Chaplin (who'd been allegedly called the "N" word by Mike's brother) thought of the Mike's '81 quote, had Blondie heard the quote at the time.

Funny, but it didn't keep Blondie from sharing a stage with old friends Brian Wilson and Al Jardine, who JOINED old Mike Love for the 1981 Sun City show. Maybe Blondie didn't know that Al and Brian played the show. No, maybe he just forgot. Nah, he probably didn't care. But, for Mike's quote, well, that's grounds for NEVER sharing a stage with him! How crass. The actual act of performing and accepting $$$$$$$$$$, that's OK. Just don't TALK about it! Sail on, sail on sailor....

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree, since I don't believe you can legitimately equate the full band playing there with one of the bandmembers additionally saying a very insensitive, inflammatory super-tactless remark that makes zero bones about giving one ounce of a f*ck about anything/anybody except money. That bandmember would be doing something that's more worthy of criticism. Actions do speak louder than words, no denying that. But words like that make a notably negative difference.

I would think that 1981 Blondie would perhaps have felt the BBs playing in Sun City was questionable, but I imagine if he'd additionally read ML's 1981 crass comment, he'd have found it to have been an undeniably sh*tty thing to say. And after having been called the "N" word by ML's bro, I imagine he'd not think too highly of the Love family having much in the way of tact/sensitivity. I have no idea whether Blondie would have then in 1981, or would now in 2013, share a stage with ML... not sure if they ever had a real beef with each other.

Have a good weekend. Listen to some Christmas music! Andy Williams, Perry Como, Johnny Mathis, Sinatra, Slade!

[CenturyDeprived]

Whether various artists could plead ignorance is an interesting question, but while we don't have the remainder of the interview from which Mike's quote is pulled, his answer seems to indicate he had an awareness of the backlash and the UN having issues, and he was choosing to ignore it, perhaps arguably actively thumb his nose.

Likewise I'm a pretty big Sinatra fan, and talk of his performing there is rare, if it's mentioned at all. And in that Oct '83 newspaper clipping, Sinatra's management and reps fire off quotes that manage to put an even bigger foot in their collective mouths than that line from Mike, yet very rarely if ever have I seen Sinatra's reputation called into question over the issue...where we could argue his "people" had a stance that looks even worse in 2013 standards than the most negative reaction we'd have to something Mike said.

I'm just thinking out loud, it's interesting to look back especially considering how information was spread in 1983 far outside (if not primitive compared to) what we have in 2013.

This is an interesting point, as the "bigger" someone is, the more immune they are to these types of criticisms. There obviously are no lasting (or ever any?) boycotts of Sinatra or Queen or the Beach Boys.

Most bands and artists and famous people have these awkward things from their career that can be criticized, and the more respected and admired they are, the more those things are ignored or glazed over, and that is for better or worse.

I'm just glad the BBs didn't add "Ten Little Indians" to the setlist when the played Sun City.

 

I for one, in seeing and pointing out these ironies and odd moments in the BB's career, usually have fun and laugh about it (as much as one can; and hopefully appropriate to the topic).

Has anyone here ever played a non-fan "Hey Little Tomboy?" I loathe those "reaction videos" people post on YouTube where someone shows them or plays them something shocking to get their reaction, but some "Hey Little Tomboy" reaction videos with the unsettled look on one's face would be pretty freaking funny.

I find it amusing that Mike wrote those comments on Facebook after playing Sun City and told the UN to go screw themselves, that's about it. My initial reaction didn't go beyond that. I for one am not trying to invoke a bunch of fake outrage about it. It's hilarious, and another slightly Spinal Tap-esque moments from our Boys.  

I actually filmed my coworker listening on headphones to "Smart Girls" for the first time (played off my iPod). I should've put it on youtube.
I have a sick habit of playing bad Beach Boys songs for my coworkers (in our downtime) just to see their reactions, including classics like "Hey Little Tomboy" (extended shave-your-legs version).  

[bgas]

Why all the negativity?  Both Smart Girls and Hey Little Tomboy are great songs. Always taking them out of context isn't the answer.