VDP talks of SMILE and a lotta other music!

[KittyKat]

 

[RangeRoverA1]

I don't think VDP likes being continually asked about "Smile." I think he'd rather be known for other things, like writing music. He doesn't even think Brian is a genius, either. Someone asked him the other day if Brian is a genius and he said that's what Derek Taylor wanted people to believe. Chilly!

Weird...your post count says 'leet'.  That's quite odd

If I'm not mistaken, "leet" is a sub for number "1337" (or ...8? not sure). Sth. to do with the digital age.

[phirnis]

I think it's interesting that BW and VDP parted ways in 1967, artistically, but later on would be partying together throughout the early 70s. That always struck me as a bit weird.

[rab2591]

I think it's interesting that BW and VDP parted ways in 1967, artistically, but later on would be partying together throughout the early 70s. That always struck me as a bit weird.

VDPs still worked with Brian artistically after '67 - cowriting Sail On Sailor together. So it's not too odd that they'd be partying together during the early '70s.

[leggo of my ego]

When Brian Wilson sought to migrate into the counter-revolution, he needed to break

the habit of excess that was in the feel-good sleepwalk of the Eisenhower era.

 thats a funny way to say Mike Love?

[Bean Bag]

I think it's interesting that BW and VDP parted ways in 1967, artistically, but later on would be partying together throughout the early 70s. That always struck me as a bit weird.

VDPs still worked with Brian artistically after '67 - cowriting Sail On Sailor together. So it's not too odd that they'd be partying together during the early '70s.

One of my favorite moments in Beach Boy history is as described in the Stephen Gaines book, Heroes and Villains -- when VDP comes in to save the Holland album.  He says to a bunch of record execs "I think I have the song to save the album..." and plays a home demo tape of him and Brian working on Sail On, Sailor.

On the tape you hear Brian saying "hypnotize me, Van... make me think I'm not crazy."  And Van says "cut the sh-t, Brian.  Finish the song."  It was a bizarre, surreal moment to everyone in the room.  Apparently, the version they heard was amazing, and much better than the finished song.  I want to hear that tape!!


So... to me, that is kind of illustrative of Brian's and Van's relationship.  Van -- who always struck me as a very sensitive, intelligent and attuned person -- must have seen Brian's case as unique enough to provide little sympathy for its state.  Perhaps he saw it as a combination of excess and stardom and pampering.  Cuz, for Van to see Brian's plight as "sh-t" which needed to be "cut" is very priceless to me.  Priceless.

[Bicyclerider]

I think fan opinions of what happened to Smile have changed back and forth over the years - Leaf's book influenced people to see it as a Mike Love/group vs. Brian conflict, despite much evidence to the contrary or at least ignoring multiple other factors.  The conflicts between Van and Brian went to the background, although the evidence was always there.  Now there seems to be a fan swing towards the conflicts of Van Dyke and Brian being a primary factor, which is equally lopsided.  I think that's what the poster was trying to say, not that we should form our opinions based on fan opinions without direct information from the participants - although I might add a fan opinion based on the published interviews and video clips from the participants can be just as informed as anyone else's opinion.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I think it's interesting that BW and VDP parted ways in 1967, artistically, but later on would be partying together throughout the early 70s. That always struck me as a bit weird.

VDPs still worked with Brian artistically after '67 - cowriting Sail On Sailor together. So it's not too odd that they'd be partying together during the early '70s.

One of my favorite moments in Beach Boy history is as described in the Stephen Gaines book, Heroes and Villains -- when VDP comes in to save the Holland album.  He says to a bunch of record execs "I think I have the song to save the album..." and plays a home demo tape of him and Brian working on Sail On, Sailor.

On the tape you hear Brian saying "hypnotize me, Van... make me think I'm not crazy."  And Van says "cut the sh-t, Brian.  Finish the song."  It was a bizarre, surreal moment to everyone in the room.  Apparently, the version they heard was amazing, and much better than the finished song.  I want to hear that tape!!

I'd take that with a grain of salt since Gaines despised everything they did post Pet Sounds.....

[Bicyclerider]

The same story was related in Rolling Stone, was it not?  Wasn't that the source for the description in Gaines?

[bgas]

I think it's interesting that BW and VDP parted ways in 1967, artistically, but later on would be partying together throughout the early 70s. That always struck me as a bit weird.

VDPs still worked with Brian artistically after '67 - cowriting Sail On Sailor together. So it's not too odd that they'd be partying together during the early '70s.

One of my favorite moments in Beach Boy history is as described in the Stephen Gaines book, Heroes and Villains -- when VDP comes in to save the Holland album.  He says to a bunch of record execs "I think I have the song to save the album..." and plays a home demo tape of him and Brian working on Sail On, Sailor.

On the tape you hear Brian saying "hypnotize me, Van... make me think I'm not crazy."  And Van says "cut the sh-t, Brian.  Finish the song."  It was a bizarre, surreal moment to everyone in the room.  Apparently, the version they heard was amazing, and much better than the finished song.  I want to hear that tape!!

I'd take that with a grain of salt since Gaines despised everything they did post Pet Sounds.....

And of course not even a single soul ANYWHERE would dare to enjoy anything despised by Mr. Gaines? 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I meant that if Gaines already hated the released version, it's not saying much for him to proclaim the cassette demo as better.

[Bean Bag]

"cut the sh-t Brian" is quite poignant though.

If true, I see it as a Van's disgust with this amazing talent allowing himself (fully or partly) to become so embarrassingly unfocused and shambled.  Mental illness or not -- Brian was a waste-oid, wallowing in the luxury of his fantasy world.  A doped up, eccentric, perpetual kid.  Madness or not -- Brian appeared to have chosen that path somewhat -- to Van at least.

[Peter Reum]

I think VDP and Brian too, have moved past Smile.  The group did with Wild Honey. Carl produced most if not all of that album, and it is a great record. Brian and VDP, being the guys who were point men on the Smile project were not able to move past Smile. Both mens' reactions to questions about it prior to 2004 were filled with exasperation. In a 40 year period, the Smile question was the one that was least wanted and most horrid to answer. So, they began to obfuscate....Brian more than VDP, but both of them were tired of the Smile topic. They got together, made it performable, and knocked it out of the park. They have moved on, VDP has recorded several albums since 1967, and Brian has a long body of solo work behind him now. Smile is done in both mens' minds to their satisfaction. VDP has cut some tremendous music since 2004, as has Brian. The Smile question is no longer a burr in both mens' saddles, and what they are conversant about is their most recent work, which is totally understandable. Any debate about whose fault the 1967 project was can only be speculative. I love the boxed set that Tom, Alan, Mark, Dennis, and Capitol did. I also love the 2004 project. Both projects won a Grammy, and were received well in the world of music criticism. There comes a time when the whole enterprise begins to resemble tearing wings off of butterflies. Some questions are not answerable, at least to history's satisfaction. Smile is one of them.

[guitarfool2002]

One side note/issue before Smile: Carl produced most if not all of Wild Honey? I don't hear or see that. It's not "competitive Brian" in the studio from 1965-66, he admittedly pulled back and simplified the style, but his unique vibe and feel is still on the best of those tracks. "Darlin" was Brian's backing track 100% that they laid BB's voices on top of the session players' tracks from Redwood...Country Air, Aren't You Glad, Let The Wind Blow, I Was Made To Love Her, I'd Love Just Once To See You...I'm sorry, I can't hear those as "mostly Carl" especially since Carl was still learning how to cut a record in 1967, and those have that unique Brian vibe enough to disagree Carl was producing them or anything close to that kind of record in 1967. And the arrangements are 100% "Brian" sonically even if he wasn't as deep in the studio trenches as he was a year earlier. There is a difference between Carl getting more involved in the production and suggesting he produced most if not all of the album, which I don't think he had developed the "chops" to do in '67. "How She Boogalooed It"? *That* I can see Carl producing with what he knew in '67, it sounds that way.

Was "Friends" mostly Carl too, or was that Brian stepping back into the fold for one personal album then dropping out again?

[phirnis]

I don't feel Brian or VDP have moved past Smile since 2004. VDP is still being asked about it in nearly every interview he does and the average pop fan thinks of little else than Smile whenever his name comes up. That hasn't changed at all in recent years. He would probably prefer to be asked about Clang of the Yankee Reaper or whatever instead but unlike Smile, it is not what people usually think about when it comes to the definite high points in all of pop music. And Brian's solo work has been full of little moments somewhat reminiscent of Smile (like the Heigh-Ho/Whistle While You Work arrangement on the Disney record), probably in order to make people think, wow, that sounds like Smile, he's still got it!

[Tricycle Rider]

YIKES! Guitarfool, I didn't mean to cause such a response! Especially from one of my favorite posters on this board. (really)

For what it's worth, after I read my post (immediately after posting it) I realized that it didn't come out quite the way I intended it to, and tried to change it, but some weird glitch happened with either my internet, or this site, where it wouldn't connect. I left the tab open, and went on to other things, and didn't see your post until just now when I opened a new tab to see if I was able to connect with the site.

I still have that original tab open, and i took a screen shot of it, but I can't seem to attach it to this post. The board will let me browse for what i want to attach, and load it, but where is the button that actually says "attach"? When I preview my post, the attachment isn't there. I'm sure it's user error.

Some people are better than others at this posting thing. You, Guitarfool are EXCELLENT at it. I'm terrible at it. I can't seem to express myself properly, and i never learned to type properly, so it takes me FOREVER to get things out. It's a real "ocean through a straw" thing for me.

All I meant to do is ponder some of the things that Van Dyke was saying, and to remember the old days (late 70s-80s) when not much was known about SMiLE amongst the general population. (not that a lot is known now)

Unless you were around in the 60s and read contemporary articles (Seigal/Williams/Vosse/Nolan) you were out of luck. They didn't reprint things then, Dom's book wasn't out yet, no internet, no SMiLE Shoppe.

I just remember that from what I "heard" back then, (a lot of it from those hipsters you would run into at your local record shops) The Beach Boys (especially Mike) didn't like the LP, and that's why it didn't happen. We know now that it was not that simple, and that there were multiple reasons combined that brought about what happened.

That being said, obviously we will never know EXACTLY what happened for a variety of reasons.

All I meant by the "Van Dykes fault" thing was, to beware of trying to make the SMiLE thing black and white when it's really shades of grey. In fact, it was that part of the post that I was trying to go back in and change.

I hope i made more sense this time!  

I'd also add: never apologize for your opinions! Especially not on a public messageboard.... This place is no particular poster's classroom and we are not doing term papers here..... You're a great poster too! Let it rip!!!!

Thanks Pinder, I appreciate that vote of confidence. (really) 

[Tricycle Rider]

To Tricycle Rider: I have the same problems posting, a lot of times what I'm thinking comes out looking/feeling different as it appears on the page! Many times the mood and spirit of what I'm thinking comes off more harsh or "finger pointing" than what I'm thinking at the time. I get caught up in the emotion.

Thanks guitarfool, for not leaving me out there alone!

I tell you, you'd never know that (the problems posting thing) by reading your posts. I've gotten so much from your posts that I actually started archiving them a while back. (I hope that's alright with you) I especially like the technical conversations about studio techniques, microphones, reverb chambers etc...

About getting caught up in the emotion thing, that's almost impossible NOT to do with music as magical and brilliant as this.

God bless those Beach Boys 

[guitarfool2002]

Here's a point to consider: I put a challenge of sorts into one of my posts to show that something either Vosse or Anderle wrote in '67 and '69 can be proven untrue, or even complete mythology. I've read the idea previously where it's not what Vosse said but what he didn't say that can be questioned, but I'll say let's focus just on what appeared in those interviews...is anything false or even "wrong" that can be shown to be wrong? I think they cover a wide range of topics, across the board. For comments on drugs...see Brian's interviews on that topic through the decades. And if we focus on what's not said, that creates an impossible standard for journalism across the board, down to the restaurant reviewer who could be challenged because he ordered, ate, and reviewed the Filet Mignon dinner but didn't say a word about the salmon which he didn't order. It doesn't make his thoughts on the Filet at that restaurant any less valid.

I think, again, there are some absolutes along with the speculations. But when the speculators intentionally ignore or omit some of the absolutes, in the form of eyewitness accounts which are shared by more than one person, it becomes revisionist if not false history that doesn't serve a purpose beyond that person seeking to revise it.

So here's my motivation, my "game" in all of this. I'm a musician who was simply blown away by Smile, as other musicians were and are and always will be. I never heard music that sounded like that, or which was structured like that. I never got over hearing 30+ minutes of it in one sitting, that first time I was able to do so going track to track. And since then, I've collected, gathered, and sought out anything related to Smile I could find. I love the music, and consider it probably the most forward-thinking and unique music of the 20th century when it was created, across all styles and genres including advanced jazz and classical/modern/avant garde.

The fact that people in 2004 were saying similar things, commenting on how modern or even futuristic this music sounded in 2004 considering it was mostly created in 1966-67 by a man in his mid-20's, suggested I wasn't alone in thinking this went beyond "pop music" and what boundaries were in place for labeling it.

So when I see Smile and the whole era of 1966-67 depicted in a clusterfuck of a "Beach Boys" TV movie, where Brian was reduced to a drug-addled mess who played with toy animals in the studio, while hangers-on and dope fiends like "Tommy" or whatever the producers had to rename Van Dyke's character to avoid a lawsuit were engaging Brian's dopey whims...only to have Mike step in and save Brian from all this nonsense by cowriting Good Vibrations with him...

...Yeah, I thought that was complete crap. It put something other than the truth onto the legacy of the music that I and others were convinced was among the most glorious music of that century, and turned it into a complete laughingstock. Smile even on the session tapes we all know now is so far removed from that image, yet here was a TV movie, supposedly "official" being shown to millions on ABC suggesting it was a drug-fueled orgy of self indulgence and unsavory characters there to distract Brian from writing music with his cousin. Complete nonsense.

Fortunately 2004 and then 2012 helped put that movie into the oblivion it deserved.

And even in 2012, though...those Smile "webisodes" on YouTube where band members are on camera describing Smile as they remembered it. Did people believe that? It was great PR to help sell the box set and sell that communal band spirit in the moment, but how true was it?  

So I do think as long as there are people promoting that version of Smile as seen on YouTube or on ABC or anywhere else, some folks can and will be there to dispute it. And while it's not as overt or ridiculous, I do see attempts to paint over certain parts of the story as already told in print by some direct participants as heading too far in that direction.

[Dancing Bear]

And even in 2012, though...those Smile "webisodes" on YouTube where band members are on camera describing Smile as they remembered it. Did people believe that? It was great PR to help sell the box set and sell that communal band spirit in the moment, but how true was it?  

Well, how untrue is it? Mike's been telling his side very consistently for decades. So neither he nor Brian chose to talk about confrontations in 2011. It doesn't make what they did say in the webisodes untrue.

So was the Beatles' Anthology, so was Beautiful Dreamer and so on. I don't remember Van Dyke talking about problems he may have had with Brian as a writing partnership in Beautiful Dreamer. He apparently prefers to spill 'em out in his blog and interviews. 

Anyway... I think we all agree 99% on 'what happenned during Smile'. Mike would rather be recording a more commercial yet artistic album, Brian didn't feeel like finishing the album for n reasons and Van Dyke wrote lyrics enough to fill a double album, got signed by Warner and focused on his first solo album. Going on and on about the 1% is fun, I guess.

[guitarfool2002]

My asking "how true was it" is a rhetorical question. If you want to take those YouTube interviews at face value, as the correct version of events, you're believing what amounts to a whitewash. Not as egregious as the ABC TV movie, but mining the same kind of thought.

But again, here comes the same old-same old kind of dance that's been going on here for some time. Let's say various band members on camera say (as they did) how much they liked the music, how enthusiastic they were about it when Brian presented it to them: That's the version of events that goes into the record?

Hey, they all liked it! Nothing to see here, all of the reports to the contrary are not to be considered in light of interviews 40+ years after the fact done as promotional tools to sell a new box set where everyone who saw tensions, discussions, and even outright disputes over the music and ideas about the direction of the band related to this music (and how it affected Brian, too) simply got it wrong, or willingly misrepresented what they saw and heard firsthand for some personal agenda.

Again, I ask: Where Vosse and Anderle to name two wrote about these things, were they lying? Or is there something that can be presented to the contrary to dispute what they witnessed? Or was Smile really a case of the scene depicted in that ABC movie? If so, then even that turkey of a film would contradict the notion that they were on board with the Smile music, because the "Mike" character wouldn't have had to step in and "save" the Brian character from all these negative influences and distractions so they could finish Good Vibrations and make hit records again if the music was embraced across the board...or whatever snake oil that movie was selling. 

[Cam Mott]

I'm don't dispute anything Anderle or Vosse said but some of what they said is stated as fact and some of it stated as presumption/speculation. "I think what" this and "I think" that and "I knew what that meant" etc.. Isn't it?

[guitarfool2002]

I'm don't dispute anything Anderle or Vosse said but some of what they said is stated as fact and some of it stated as presumption/speculation. "I think what" this and "I think" that and "I knew what that meant" etc.. Isn't it?

I think you're mixing their comments on Smile tracks and fragments they heard but didn't know what they were on a larger scale with their observations of what they actually witnessed and heard in terms of interactions and events. In both cases, they are clear and concise with what they saw happening, as in certain tensions and disputes among band members and participants...including, important to note, the way Brian and Van Dyke would clash.

Can this be any more clear:

Anderle: "You could do a trilogy just on the lives of The Beach Boys. There is so much emotion, and drama, in that family, much more than I've ever seen in any other family, and everything directly affects Brian. Brian is always conscious of those boys, continually conscious of them, as brothers and as human beings. Very seldom as an act. Again, that's why, a great reason why Smile wasn't finished, the way Brian wanted it, because of their resistance in the studio.


Now, I could list more examples where this resistance is not only mentioned but also described, not just by Anderle and Vosse but also by others, but it's all out there to be read and heard.  And it wasn't speculation or opinion when they saw this kind of thing happen and report it firsthand. They don't "think" some band members and family clashed with Brian, they saw it happening. Vosse had to sit there and suffer through Murry Wilson telling him how much of a mistake Good Vibrations had been and how Brian did this or that as a mistake, even as it was becoming one of the most successful singles of 1966...he reported what he saw and heard.

Unless we can try to twist it around, and where Vosse may have seen an argument going down in the studio among bandmates, he was sorely mistaken and actually saw everyone patting Brian on the back and good times all around, all the time. The arguments were probably about where to order takeout for dinner that night, because as we heard on YouTube everyone welcomed the new music with open minds and open arms. 

It's not about putting these different "elements" of the story higher or lower in importance, but it is about not deliberately whitewashing entire parts out of the story to boost others.

[Tricycle Rider]

I think fan opinions of what happened to Smile have changed back and forth over the years - Leaf's book influenced people to see it as a Mike Love/group vs. Brian conflict, despite much evidence to the contrary or at least ignoring multiple other factors.  The conflicts between Van and Brian went to the background, although the evidence was always there.  Now there seems to be a fan swing towards the conflicts of Van Dyke and Brian being a primary factor, which is equally lopsided.  I think that's what the poster was trying to say, not that we should form our opinions based on fan opinions without direct information from the participants - although I might add a fan opinion based on the published interviews and video clips from the participants can be just as informed as anyone else's opinion.

Thanks Bicyclerider  

David Leaf's book WAS my introduction to the "inner" world of The Beach Boys, and you're right, it definitely gave you the idea that it was a "Mike Love/group vs. Brian conflict". I vaguely recall a story after the book was published about David Leaf being in the same room with Mike Love (at a fan convention or something?) and Mike was glaring at him. I can't remember now where I heard/read that. Anyway, thanks for mentioning that book.

In regards to "Now there seems to be a fan swing towards the conflicts of Van Dyke and Brian being a primary factor, which is equally lopsided.  I think that's what the poster was trying to say, not that we should form our opinions based on fan opinions without direct information from the participants". That IS what I was trying to say, but it just didn't come out right.  

EDIT: I see I've posted right between Cam and guitarfool2002 having a discussion. Just my luck! I didn't mean to interrupt fellas, I started this post about an hour ago, but got pulled away from the computer before I could finish, and hit Post. Just ignore me, I'm the guy in the corner with the lampshade over his head. (i'm not here!)  
 

[drbeachboy]

From what I read over the years, I found Anderle & Vosse quite a bit Brian-centric. It really is a shame that there wasn't a person there who didn't have some kind of agenda going on. At this point all you can do is weigh all the sides reporting and glean from that information what really went down. Even then, you still will never know exactly.

[guitarfool2002]

From what I read over the years, I found Anderle & Vosse quite a bit Brian-centric. It really is a shame that there wasn't a person there who didn't have some kind of agenda going on. At this point all you can do is weigh all the sides reporting and glean from that information what really went down. Even then, you still will never know exactly.

That would make sense if they're talking mostly about Brian during this time because they were closer to Brian both in a business sense and in a personal sense with Brian than anyone else. They can speak about things that happened when the Beach Boys weren't there, things they did with Brian, conversations they had with Brian, etc. That's just part of how the story played out due to the scheduling and the way things were done at this time. I'd argue Michael Vosse saw firsthand more of Smile coming together at Brian's house and in the studio than Bruce, Al, Mike, and possibly even Dennis as they were simply not there for a lot of the instrumental sessions, or the various writing and studio sessions with Van Dyke. Van Dyke, I believe, has also said he really didn't see that much of the band members because his work writing and playing on the sessions was done without Mike or Al, for example, being present.

But when they did interact with band and family, they did see some events unfold which they mentioned and described. And they also had more access to Brian and in conversations outside the band's business he would naturally talk about certain things which again they reported, but which the other band and family may not have heard.

Remember when Hal Blaine got called to be a witness in Mike's lawsuit? The lawyers asked him about certain songs, certain sessions, and what he could testify about Mike's involvement in those songs. And Hal basically said he didn't see that much of Mike in the studio as he was recording some of the tracks in question because Mike simply was not there for those instrumental tracking dates, and more often Mike would be in studio to record vocals after Hal's job was done. And, of course, Hal would not be there for a vocal group session since he didn't sing and wasn't needed there.

So the lawyers may have been expecting Hal to report something he just wasn't able to report, while his direct dealings with Brian in the studio were more of a regular thing where the Beach Boys (minus Carl most often) weren't there when Hal was there, especially into 1966.

I'd say consider some of that with Vosse and Anderle too before casting them as Brian-centric, or using that to suggest a far-reaching agenda. If Anderle was there to manage the band and set up Brother Records, he would be crazy to "take sides" when he was still there as his success depended on the band's success, and trying to pick sides in what were family issues going back to Hawthorne wouldn't serve a purpose. He was there to make them money. A few months after leaving the Brother operation, he gives the interview: Does he call out anyone specific in that interview? If anything you'd think he'd have the bigger axe to grind with Brian, who hired him and then in about a year Anderle was out the door...yet Nick Grillo remained. Does Anderle go negative on anyone, including Brian? Does Vosse, for that matter? They deliberately avoid naming names, even when Anderle is asked directly if there was a "ringleader" in the resistance he mentions.