Quick review of Jon Stebbins' Beach Boys FAQ

[bonnevillemariner]

Just read Jon Stebbins' The Beach Boys FAQ (Kindle Edition).  It thoroughly scratched my itch for greater Beach Boys knowledge.  That itch will return, of course, but this was a really good start.  I may write a thorough review of the book here at some point, but for now, a few quick observations:

-Love the fact that this was written from the perspective of a mega-fan.  As a budding mega-fan myself, I knew there was dirt to be dug but was not necessarily looking forward to it.  The fact that Stebbins writes with love helped the dirt go down smoother.  I also appreciate that his fandom doesn't deter him from addressing events and issues honestly.

-Stebbins curiously omits the Boys' appearances on Full House from an otherwise comprehensive list of filmography.  Especially when Full House gets 4 other mentions outside that chapter.

-Format discontinuity on album descriptions: Stebbins spends a lot of space discussing the earlier albums (understandable, preferred, crime-not-to).  Less is given to the mid-career albums (understandable, at least personally for me).  Virtually no mention of later albums like Summer in Paradise or Still Cruisin'.  I've actually never heard the former and the latter is a guilty pleasure.  They're no Pet Sounds or Smile, but I would have at least liked to read more about the context under which each was conceived and released.

-Writing style discontinuity: there are sharp differences in tone and style in Stebbins' writing.  At times his prose-- especially when describing the Beach Boys sound-- can nearly move one to tears.  Other passages read as though they were typed with a 10 minute deadline. Sometimes he moves between erudite and tawdry in the same sentence ("Instead of bending over and taking his screwing like Al did, or ejecting from the scene like David did, Mike hung in there and formulated an aggressive posture.")

-Stebbins definitely thinks more of Dennis as both a musician and a person than I do, but his portrayal of Denny as something of a tormented Brian-lite are touching and make me want to hesitate before dismissing, for the umpteenth time, the majority of Dennis' work.  In fact, while I was reading I had Spotify open and would listen to a song as I read Stebbins describe it.  (That's a very good way to read this book, actually.)  I will concede that I came away from the book appreciating Dennis and his stuff a little more.

-The edition I bought touched on the pending release of The Smile Sessions.  Here's to hoping Stebbins plans to update the book with a chapter on C50 and TWGMTR.  

All in all, it's a great start to my deep dive into Beach Boys history.

[rogerlancelot]

My copy came with The Smile Sessions because I ordered them both at the same time from Amazon. Both items will always bring back great memories and I will never part with either. Per Stebbins: I still am looking for an affordable copy of The Lost Beach Boy and I still haven't (gulp) got the live book yet. My bad.

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Is this accurate?

'-Format discontinuity on album descriptions: Stebbins spends a lot of space discussing the earlier albums (understandable, preferred, crime-not-to).  Less is given to the mid-career albums (understandable, at least personally for me).'

His reviews of their 1967-1973 albums are as long as - if not longer - than his reviews of their 1963-1965 albums.

Surfer Girl, Little Deuce Coupe and Shut Down Vol 2 for instance get little more than a paragraph each; whereas the average length of the later album reviews is at least two pages, usually more.

[bonnevillemariner]

His reviews of their 1967-1973 albums are as long as - if not longer - than his reviews of their 1963-1965 albums.

Surfer Girl, Little Deuce Coupe and Shut Down Vol 2 for instance get little more than a paragraph each; whereas the average length of the later album reviews is at least two pages, usually more.

You may be right.  I might be thinking of the aggregate focus on the classic sound and earlier albums.  But my larger point is that the later albums aren't really covered at all.  If you're correct that the mid-career albums get equal, if not greater attention, my point is even more valid.  I didn't expect a 2-page expose of the later albums, but some treatment would be nice-- if only for the sake of consistency.  Maybe Stebbins was following the old rule: If you can't say anything nice...

[Andrew G. Doe]

What's with the "you may be right... if you are correct" nonsense ? The guy has looked at the relevant pages of the book, something you seemingly have not.

[bonnevillemariner]

What's with the "you may be right... if you are correct" nonsense ? The guy has looked at the relevant pages of the book, something you seemingly have not.

I don't recall the descriptions of the middle albums being equal or longer than the early albums, and since Stebbins' treatment of the middle albums was a minor part of my larger point (which is that the later albums got little to no treatment), I have little motivation to go back to the book to confirm either my recollection or his rebuttal.  Thus the concession that he may be right.  It's no more nonsensical than you adding a space at the end of your sentences before punctuation.  What the hell is up with that?

[bgas]

No matter what, your "review" really belongs here:  http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/board,4.0.html

[Niko]

This book is great.

[Niko]

I still am looking for an affordable copy of The Lost Beach Boy and I still haven't (gulp) got the live book yet. My bad.

Same same!

[Smilin Ed H]

What's with the "you may be right... if you are correct" nonsense ? The guy has looked at the relevant pages of the book, something you seemingly have not.

I don't recall the descriptions of the middle albums being equal or longer than the early albums, and since Stebbins' treatment of the middle albums was a minor part of my larger point (which is that the later albums got little to no treatment), I have little motivation to go back to the book to confirm either my recollection or his rebuttal.  Thus the concession that he may be right.  It's no more nonsensical than you adding a space at the end of your sentences before punctuation.  What the hell is up with that?

What's up with that? You presented this as a review of something concrete and then you can't be arsed to check to see if what you said was accurate.  To quote that great American philosopher, B. D. Wilson: "It's a strange world."

[bonnevillemariner]

What's up with that? You presented this as a review of something concrete and then you can't be arsed to check to see if what you said was accurate.  To quote that great American philosopher, B. D. Wilson: "It's a strange world."

No, I presented it as a quick review with intentions of writing a more thorough review at a later time.  In essence this was a brief rundown of my initial reactions upon finishing the book.  This isn't a journalistic effort or professional review; it's a post on a stupid message board.  You're quibbling over a minor point in a list of mostly glowing praise.  So no, I won't be arsed.

[Bicyclerider]

I also just read this, and thoroughly enjoyed it, although I noticed a couple of errors  which I wrote down but of course don't have with me to share with the board.  it's a shame this book was written before the Smile Sessions were released and before the reunion. I will say the book was nothing like what I expected.  I thought the majority of the book would be, well, facts - like the chapters on beach boys equipment, who sang leads on which songs, etc. - instead most of the book was Jon's personal take on the music and the various critical events in Beach Boys history.  I liked his account of Al's falling out with Mike which I'd never really understood.  And the story about visiting the set of Stamos's TV movie on the Beach Boys was hilarious!

[Smilin Ed H]

What's up with that? You presented this as a review of something concrete and then you can't be arsed to check to see if what you said was accurate.  To quote that great American philosopher, B. D. Wilson: "It's a strange world."

No, I presented it as a quick review with intentions of writing a more thorough review at a later time.  In essence this was a brief rundown of my initial reactions upon finishing the book.  This isn't a journalistic effort or professional review; it's a post on a stupid message board.  You're quibbling over a minor point in a list of mostly glowing praise.  So no, I won't be arsed.

Pretty evident. I know not to bother with your next attempt.

[bonnevillemariner]

I also just read this, and thoroughly enjoyed it, although I noticed a couple of errors  which I wrote down but of course don't have with me to share with the board.  

Careful, Bicyclerider, you've just broken two very important forum rules:

1. Criticizing/claiming error in a book that I'm coming to understand is a pretty sacred cow here,

2. Not documenting your observations of these errors with footnotes/quotes/pics/lithographs/academic papers.

How dare you_?_

Cue the ad hominems...

[bonnevillemariner]

Pretty evident. I know not to bother with your next attempt.

I'm shattered.

[Jon Stebbins]

I also just read this, and thoroughly enjoyed it, although I noticed a couple of errors  which I wrote down but of course don't have with me to share with the board.  

Careful, Bicyclerider, you've just broken two very important forum rules:

1. Criticizing/claiming error in a book that I'm coming to understand is a pretty sacred cow here,

2. Not documenting your observations of these errors with footnotes/quotes/pics/lithographs/academic papers.

How dare you_?_

Cue the ad hominems...

Hey...wow, sacred cow? Mrs O'leary's is the only one worth our prayer.  Ba...dum. I appreciate all points of view and perspectives, and glad to hear you enjoyed the read. As you mentioned, I did avoid some of the '80's and beyond product because IMO I think it's wasted space that can be given to more relevant things. Again IMO. That was my call, as with the In Concert book, Ian and I tended to not give much space to the post '85 years because we wanted to focus on what we felt were the things most impactful and important to the Beach Boys legacy. That bugged some people, but not us. I would have loved to include the Smile sessions, and the C50, in the FAQ book...those to me are really important to the group's written history. But the delivery date preceded those events. Luckily we did get to add a respectful C50 section in the BB's In Concert book. FAQ errors...ummm...Bicyclerider probably noticed the horrific Glee Love reference as Audree's (should have been Murry's) sister, even though I was well aware she was a Wilson since the '60's, just a brain freeze that my editor missed as well. That's the only one in there that really bugs me. Overall I'm proud of the book, I tried to make it a fun and accessible read. I did my best to balance the irreverent aspects, with the scholarly and respectful aspects. Most of all I tried to write it from the perspective of a true Beach Boys fan, which I am and will always be. Thanks to all of you for your interest in the book(s).

[Smilin Ed H]

Pretty evident. I know not to bother with your next attempt.

I'm shattered.

Oscar Fucking Wilde.

[bonnevillemariner]

Hey...wow, sacred cow?

Kinda seems like that sometimes.  Of course, in this case, it may just be this forum is rife with nitpickers.  I perceived a much heavier emphasis in your book on the early material (something I appreciated because I personally don't care for much beyond Sunflower).  Skimming back thru, it doesn't seem that your self-contained treatments of the middle albums get shorter shrift, so much as your focus on the early albums throughout the book make it feel lopsided that way.  Which, again, is totally cool by me.  That focus on the early stuff is weaved throughout several chapters and is hard to quantify.  I generally find the nitpicking amusing-- a bunch of middle-age men pissing online over trivial minutiae.  I should have foreseen that out of my list of legitimate points, the only one anybody would address is the relative length of your album descriptions.

I appreciate all points of view and perspectives, and glad to hear you enjoyed the read.

Couldn't put it down!

...just a brain freeze that my editor missed as well.

I hate those.  I'm an author myself, and I was horrified when I opened up the edited manuscript (after printing had begun) and read on *page 1* that a reference to my friend John read "my son, John."  After cursing the editor I went back to the draft I submitted and yep, there it was.  I had written "son" and never noticed it through a year of working and re-working the text.  Editor should have caught that, but yeah.

Now... about the omission of Full House on that filmography list.  Come on, man!

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Hey...wow, sacred cow?

Kinda seems like that sometimes.  Of course, in this case, it may just be this forum is rife with nitpickers.  I perceived a much heavier emphasis in your book on the early material (something I appreciated because I personally don't care for much beyond Sunflower).  Skimming back thru, it doesn't seem that your self-contained treatments of the middle albums get shorter shrift, so much as your focus on the early albums throughout the book make it feel lopsided that way.  Which, again, is totally cool by me.  That focus on the early stuff is weaved throughout several chapters and is hard to quantify.  I generally find the nitpicking amusing-- a bunch of middle-age men pissing online over trivial minutiae.  I should have foreseen that out of my list of legitimate points, the only one anybody would address is the relative length of your album descriptions.

I appreciate all points of view and perspectives, and glad to hear you enjoyed the read.

Couldn't put it down!

...just a brain freeze that my editor missed as well.

I hate those.  I'm an author myself, and I was horrified when I opened up the edited manuscript (after printing had begun) and read on *page 1* that a reference to my friend John read "my son, John."  After cursing the editor I went back to the draft I submitted and yep, there it was.  I had written "son" and never noticed it through a year of working and re-working the text.  Editor should have caught that, but yeah.

Now... about the omission of Full House on that filmography list.  Come on, man!

You're an author as well? My advice? Learn to take criticism with a little more dignity...

[bonnevillemariner]

You're an author as well? My advice? Learn to take criticism with a little more dignity...

What exactly was undignified about my responses?

[Mikie]

It's a shame this book was written before the Smile Sessions were released and before the reunion. I will say the book was nothing like what I expected.  I thought the majority of the book would be, well, facts - like the chapters on beach boys equipment, who sang leads on which songs, etc. - instead most of the book was Jon's personal take on the music and the various critical events in Beach Boys history.  

Geez, tough crowd. As far as I'm concerned, save the effing Smile-o-phile content for another day. Not sure Jon could have added much regarding the 2011 release anyway. The reviews and articles on the Smile Sessions and accompanying book in the box were good enough for me. Maybe Priore will come out with yet another edition of "Look, Listen, and Smile" and include TSS. What hasn't been said already? And the equipment and who sang what? I knew going in that it wouldn't be in the FAQ book. Save that for C-man's or whoever else's specialized book that will be out eventually.

I thought Jon did a great job on the Fact book.  Sacred Cow?  Uh Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!  That's funny. 

[Andrew G. Doe]

What's up with that? You presented this as a review of something concrete and then you can't be arsed to check to see if what you said was accurate.  To quote that great American philosopher, B. D. Wilson: "It's a strange world."

No, I presented it as a quick review with intentions of writing a more thorough review at a later time.  In essence this was a brief rundown of my initial reactions upon finishing the book.  This isn't a journalistic effort or professional review; it's a post on a stupid message board.  You're quibbling over a minor point in a list of mostly glowing praise.  So no, I won't be arsed.

Suppose I did a review of something and admitted I'd not actually heard/read/seen it... by your rules, that's perfectly OK. By my rules, I'd expect some to quote rightly rip me a new one.

This place has a simple credo - iffn you're going to state something as fact, either be sure it is a fact or check it before posting. Can save you a deal of grief.

[bonnevillemariner]

Um, no, because I actually purchased and read the book. Not sure what you're getting at. I made an observation that I still believe to be true based on the clarified parameters in my last post.

[rogerlancelot]

I've probably said this here somewhere before but the highlight for me was Jon's story about going with Ed to visit the set of the made-for-tv movie. Just reading that section alone was worth any amount of money spent any day!

 

[rab2591]

I've probably said this here somewhere before but the highlight for me was Jon's story about going with Ed to visit the set of the made-for-tv movie. Just reading that section alone was worth any amount of money spent any day!

 

Had to go back and re-read this just now.

"We were told that Stamos insisted on upon the absolute top-tier L.A. caterers. Now we know where the budget went."

What a great story - definitely re-reading this book sometime this summer.