I slit my wrists to Pisces Brothers

[Niko]

You know Mike could be saying that in the middle of one of his rambling speeches

[rab2591]

[Sheriff John Stone]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Were Brian and Paul in the same studio or session for "A Friend Like You"? Or did Paul "phone it in"?

[Bicyclerider]

Mike writes a song which doesn't have nor nostalgic fun in the sun lyrics neither references to old BB hits.

WHAT MORE DO YOU PEOPLE WANT FROM HIM?? 

To write a song with decent lyrics in this century?
"Hare Krishna, gonna miss ya" - really?

[KittyKat]

No worse than George having Badfinger singing "Hare Krishna" on the backing vocals for Ringo's "It Don't Come Easy." For no particular reason. George loved his Hare Krishnas.

[Jim V.]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Difference is Paul himself decided to be on a song about him and Brian being "friends."

George as of now cannot vouch for his supposed "friendship" with Mike Love.

[Bicyclerider]

No worse than George having Badfinger singing "Hare Krishna" on the backing vocals for Ringo's "It Don't Come Easy." For no particular reason. George loved his Hare Krishnas.

I don't mind the Hare Krishna, just the lame rhyme.

[Mendota Heights]

I don't mind the Hare Krishna, just the lame rhyme.

Not this time.

[urbanite]

In all the books about George and the Beatles, is Mike Love mentioned as a friend of George Harrison?  It's been a long time since I read any of those  books, but I don't remember reading about this friendship.  Why wasn't Mike at the tribute concert for George they did in London with Clapton, Ringo, Paul and Billy Preston, among others?

[Sheriff John Stone]

Why wasn't Mike at the tribute concert for George they did in London with Clapton, Ringo, Paul and Billy Preston, among others?

Because he was still upset at the way the reunion ended, his wife didn't tell him about the tribute concert, and George took passive-aggressive swipes at him in 1968.

[urbanite]

I thought maybe his astrological chart indicated it was not a good time for him to be in London. 

[Sheriff John Stone]

I thought maybe his astrological chart indicated it was not a good time for him to be in London. 

 

[sandmountainslim]

I never knew George Harrison but I am friends with Tony Bramwell who worked for the Beatles and was George's friend since childhood.   I will ask him if George and ML were pals.   
Either way I have no problem with the song and I'm glad Mike wrote it. 

[Dancing Bear]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Were Brian and Paul in the same studio or session for "A Friend Like You"? Or did Paul "phone it in"?

Brian was there when Paul added his vocals.

[Sheriff John Stone]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Were Brian and Paul in the same studio or session for "A Friend Like You"? Or did Paul "phone it in"?

Brian was there when Paul added his vocals.

Thanks. I really didn't know. I thought I would've seen some photos of that historic event. Seriously, no sarcasm intended.

[KittyKat]

Is Mike really claiming to be close personal friends of George's in the song? I thought it was more about being on a spiritual quest together and being bonded for life by meeting the Great One (funny guy in robe) together. And sticking with their beliefs after the other Beatles thought TM was silly. I haven't listened to the song but once, though, so I'm not sure what the complete lyrics are. Mike may feel a similar bond with David Lynch, who has worked with him on TM projects. That doesn't mean they're close personal friends who go to dinner at each other's house, but can still consider themselves soulmates of a sort.

[RangeRoverA1]

Don't know about the lyrics, but the title of the song is hopelessly, incredibly, outright silly. Does having similar signs really mean anything, let alone brotherhood/sisterhood (I know, that was meant as a metaphor, but still)? No, the whole astrology thing is a big bore. Anyway, I like the song (minus "Jai guru dev" because to my ears, it seems to not fit Mike's all-American accent), think the arrangements done masterfully, the track is not overwhelmingly busy. Don't mind the Red Book of rare animals imagery I get too. In general, I'm glad for the song to get more exposure among the audience. Go on this path, Mike!

[HeyJude]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Um, yeah, not the same thing even remotely. I can't say whether Brian and McCartney's relationship constitutes a friendship either, but they have both spoken about each other and each other's work about a billion times in interviews over the years, they have met and spoken numerous times since 1968, attended each other's concerts, and even "A Friend Like You" wasn't written specifically about Paul as far as I know; he simply sang on it.

On the other hand, George never even spoke about the Beach Boys or Brian Wilson much in interviews (I recall only one instance I can think of in an interview of George even uttering the phrase "Beach Boys"; that was during one of the "Anthology" interviews where he recalls Paul's being influenced by the Beach Boys in doing the "Paperback Writer" vocals; that's not to say he didn't mention them at some other stage that I'm unaware of or not remembering), never professed to be in love with "Pet Sounds", and certainly never discussed Mike Love at length as far as I know.

[HeyJude]

Is Mike really claiming to be close personal friends of George's in the song? I thought it was more about being on a spiritual quest together and being bonded for life by meeting the Great One (funny guy in robe) together. And sticking with their beliefs after the other Beatles thought TM was silly. I haven't listened to the song but once, though, so I'm not sure what the complete lyrics are. Mike may feel a similar bond with David Lynch, who has worked with him on TM projects. That doesn't mean they're close personal friends who go to dinner at each other's house, but can still consider themselves soulmates of a sort.

I would imagine if Mike were pressed to offer more background and information on what he feels the song is about, he would probably offer an answer along these lines.

I think the issue is that, to some, writing a song and/or paying tribute to someone without any context or link other than what’s in your own mind can seem a bit tacky and off-putting. Not completely unlike Mike singing “Imagine” in 1983 presumably in part to pay tribute to John Lennon. Mike can have the best of intentions, but in presenting this “tribute” to a mass audience, people will sometimes attempt to link Mike to the subject of his tribute, and sometimes those links (or lack thereof) will seem very ironic if not offensive or tacky. In the case of “Imagine”, I don’t know that Mike ever mentioned in concert a claim of being “friends” with Lennon, but his roundly-criticized off-putting vocal turn on the song (Mike’s voice is not made for that type of ballad, see the 1979 Easter Seals Telethon for a similar awkward vocal turn on his one attempt taking the lead on “Good Timin’”), coupled with a contrast with Lennon and Lennon’s personality and politics that made the tribute appear, to some, about as appropriate as Al Jardine singing a Tupac song in concert, made the whole thing kind of laughable.

With this new “tribute” to George, Mike is calling George a “friend” seemingly to make people aware of the authenticity of the tribute. That seems tacky to some, when all evidence indicates there was not that sort of link between the two. Many artists have paid “tribute” to others without knowing the subject, or not having any strong link. I remember Peter Frampton covering “While My Guitar Gently Weeps” a few years after George died, and even that seemed kind of sad only in that George clearly, despite Frampton having played all over the “All Things Must Pass” album, had completely wiped Frampton from his mind to the point of continually not including Frampton’s name on the credits on the album. Ironically, considering the earlier reference to the George tribute concert, Frampton specifically tried to be a part of the George tribute concert in 2002 and was rejected. Then, a couple years later, he covered “Weeps” as a tribute. Not any less heartfelt, but a bit ironic perhaps in light of George having seemingly forgotten about Frampton in every apparent way.

Mike seems to need some kind of weird outside validation of his work, some outside link to something beyond the Beach Boys’ awesome body of work. It’s perplexing. He sometimes hypes himself up, or tells anecdotes, that someone would tell who hasn’t ever really accomplished much themselves. Like his “Back in the USSR” story. That’s something you’d read from some random unknown person in an old issue of “Beatlefan”: “I totally helped Paul with the lyrics to a song one time!”

Same thing with the constant Stamos references. It’s something you’d hear from some unknown, struggling actor or singer: “I’m friends with John Stamos, you know, Uncle Jesse from “Full House”!” Or Mike’s pollwinners contest story, or his reference to being one of the top three bands on oldies radios. These claims aren’t untrue, they’re just bizarre from a guy who doesn’t need to say these things when he has more impressive claims like “I wrote the lyrics to “Good Vibrations” and a butt-load of other Beach Boys hits”, or “I was the lead singer on a bunch of Beach Boys hits.”

It would be like if, in every single public interview Dennis ever gave in the last 5 or 10 years of his life, he continually told the story of writing “You Are So Beautiful”, and then launched a lawsuit about it, and then wrote tribute songs to Billy Preston and Joe Cocker.

[MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm]

Is Mike really claiming to be close personal friends of George's in the song? I thought it was more about being on a spiritual quest together and being bonded for life by meeting the Great One (funny guy in robe) together. And sticking with their beliefs after the other Beatles thought TM was silly. I haven't listened to the song but once, though, so I'm not sure what the complete lyrics are. Mike may feel a similar bond with David Lynch, who has worked with him on TM projects. That doesn't mean they're close personal friends who go to dinner at each other's house, but can still consider themselves soulmates of a sort.

I would imagine if Mike were pressed to offer more background and information on what he feels the song is about, he would probably offer an answer along these lines.

I think the issue is that, to some, writing a song and/or paying tribute to someone without any context or link other than what’s in your own mind can seem a bit tacky and off-putting. Not completely unlike Mike singing “Imagine” in 1983 presumably in part to pay tribute to John Lennon. Mike can have the best of intentions, but in presenting this “tribute” to a mass audience, people will sometimes attempt to link Mike to the subject of his tribute, and sometimes those links (or lack thereof) will seem very ironic if not offensive or tacky. In the case of “Imagine”, I don’t know that Mike ever mentioned in concert a claim of being “friends” with Lennon, but his roundly-criticized off-putting vocal turn on the song (Mike’s voice is not made for that type of ballad, see the 1979 Easter Seals Telethon for a similar awkward vocal turn on his one attempt taking the lead on “Good Timin’”), coupled with a contrast with Lennon and Lennon’s personality and politics that made the tribute appear, to some, about as appropriate as Al Jardine singing a Tupac song in concert, made the whole thing kind of laughable.

With this new “tribute” to George, Mike is calling George a “friend” seemingly to make people aware of the authenticity of the tribute. That seems tacky to some, when all evidence indicates there was not that sort of link between the two. Many artists have paid “tribute” to others without knowing the subject, or not having any strong link. I remember Peter Frampton covering “While My Guitar Gently Weeps” a few years after George died, and even that seemed kind of sad only in that George clearly, despite Frampton having played all over the “All Things Must Pass” album, had completely wiped Frampton from his mind to the point of continually not including Frampton’s name on the credits on the album. Ironically, considering the earlier reference to the George tribute concert, Frampton specifically tried to be a part of the George tribute concert in 2002 and was rejected. Then, a couple years later, he covered “Weeps” as a tribute. Not any less heartfelt, but a bit ironic perhaps in light of George having seemingly forgotten about Frampton in every apparent way.

Mike seems to need some kind of weird outside validation of his work, some outside link to something beyond the Beach Boys’ awesome body of work. It’s perplexing. He sometimes hypes himself up, or tells anecdotes, that someone would tell who hasn’t ever really accomplished much themselves. Like his “Back in the USSR” story. That’s something you’d read from some random unknown person in an old issue of “Beatlefan”: “I totally helped Paul with the lyrics to a song one time!”

Same thing with the constant Stamos references. It’s something you’d hear from some unknown, struggling actor or singer: “I’m friends with John Stamos, you know, Uncle Jesse from “Full House”!” Or Mike’s pollwinners contest story, or his reference to being one of the top three bands on oldies radios. These claims aren’t untrue, they’re just bizarre from a guy who doesn’t need to say these things when he has more impressive claims like “I wrote the lyrics to “Good Vibrations” and a butt-load of other Beach Boys hits”, or “I was the lead singer on a bunch of Beach Boys hits.”

It would be like if, in every single public interview Dennis ever gave in the last 5 or 10 years of his life, he continually told the story of writing “You Are So Beautiful”, and then launched a lawsuit about it, and then wrote tribute songs to Billy Preston and Joe Cocker.

Well said, agree with all.

Along these lines, and I realize it's a nitpick, I have to confess that I find it kind of amusing that the song is called "Pisces BrotherS", a title which seems to want to drive home that there was a link between them. If the song is a tribute to George as seen from Mike's perspective, shouldn't it just be called "Pisces Brother"?

[Dancing Bear]

I think we're getting  a bit carried away in the Mike bashing. Brian invited McCartney to sing in a track named 'A Friend like You' and no one criticized him for hyping up a friendship that just isn't there. Mutual admiration society, yes, but... Or maybe the song was so boring that it was easier to just moan that after all there years we finally had those two guys in the sane studio and it happened to be for that miserable track.

Um, yeah, not the same thing even remotely. I can't say whether Brian and McCartney's relationship constitutes a friendship either, but they have both spoken about each other and each other's work about a billion times in interviews over the years, they have met and spoken numerous times since 1968, attended each other's concerts, and even "A Friend Like You" wasn't written specifically about Paul as far as I know; he simply sang on it.

On the other hand, George never even spoke about the Beach Boys or Brian Wilson much in interviews (I recall only one instance I can think of in an interview of George even uttering the phrase "Beach Boys"; that was during one of the "Anthology" interviews where he recalls Paul's being influenced by the Beach Boys in doing the "Paperback Writer" vocals; that's not to say he didn't mention them at some other stage that I'm unaware of or not remembering), never professed to be in love with "Pet Sounds", and certainly never discussed Mike Love at length as far as I know.

So you don't think that inviting McCartney to sing in a song titled "A Friend Like You" ever implies that they may be friends? Not remotely?

Well, that's the natural conotation that I get, but I don't think Brian - or his handlers - was searching for validation. It never passed through my mind, really. It's just a song.

Even if Mike only saw or talked to George once since 1968 - I guess they are talking in that Bangladesh era photo, would George AVOID Mike? - I don't see much harm in Mike praising George for the spiritual path both sort of followed since the 60s. It certainly beats calling other folks 'chickenshit' to a microphone.

[SMiLE Brian]

Didn't George tell Al Jardine at the rock and roll hall of fame after Mike's speech something along the lines of "Mike didn't follow the teachings of the Marishi that night"

[Autotune]

Is Mike really claiming to be close personal friends of George's in the song? I thought it was more about being on a spiritual quest together and being bonded for life by meeting the Great One (funny guy in robe) together. And sticking with their beliefs after the other Beatles thought TM was silly. I haven't listened to the song but once, though, so I'm not sure what the complete lyrics are. Mike may feel a similar bond with David Lynch, who has worked with him on TM projects. That doesn't mean they're close personal friends who go to dinner at each other's house, but can still consider themselves soulmates of a sort.

Exactly. He never claimed they were personal friends; the song simply implies that spiritual bond and the spiritual link he felt towards GH. And it's not like Mike was pushing this song in people's throats in order to claim frindship with a Beatle. For God's sake, this ditty remained unreleased for years and was known to a handful of fans only (all of us) who never complained sh*t about its lyrics.

[urbanite]

I don't get the link between astrology and TM expressed in the song.  One involves the movement of the planets, the other is a meditation technique.

[the captain]

I don't get the link between astrology and TM expressed in the song.  One involves the movement of the planets, the other is a meditation technique.

There is apparently an astrological component to TM.

“Maharishi Vedic Sciences and Technologies” are not sciences in the modern sense that they have been derived and empirically tested through the scientific method. These sciences and technologies, which include astrology (jyotish) and related uses of gemstones, architecture (sthapatya veda,) North Indian classical music music (gandharva music), medicine (ayurvedic ), fire rituals (yagya), and other teachings, are codified and scientized versions of traditional Indian beliefs and cultural practices."

http://www.has.vcu.edu/wrs/profiles/TranscendentalMeditation.htm

(Virginia Commonwealth University's World Religions and Spirituality Project)