Jeff Foskett speaks about leaving Brian's band and joining Mike's band

[Andrew G. Doe]

Don't say "spade", that's racist - say "African-American".

A lot of people don't realize that's what the saying was actually referring to...I didn't for the longest time until my uncle set me straight pretty quick.

I always thought it was talking about playing poker.

Goes back much further than that. The ultimate origin is a mistranslation of the Greek word for "trough" as "shovel" by Erasmus in his Apophthegmatum opus in 1533. Plutarch's original phrase (1st century AD) was "calling a fig a fig, and a trough a trough". It transferred into the English idiom in 1542 when Nicholas Udall translated Erasmus thus in his Apophthegmes, that is to saie, prompte saiynges. First gathered by Erasmus: "Philippus aunswered, that the Macedonians wer feloes of no fyne witte in their termes but altogether grosse, clubbyshe, and rusticall, as they whiche had not the witte to calle a spade by any other name then a spade."

There y'go. Bit of learnin' for ya.

[John Manning]

Don't say "spade", that's racist - say "African-American".

A lot of people don't realize that's what the saying was actually referring to...I didn't for the longest time until my uncle set me straight pretty quick.

I always thought it was talking about playing poker.

Goes back much further than that. The ultimate origin is a mistranslation of the Greek word for "trough" as "shovel" by Erasmus in his Apophthegmatum opus in 1533. Plutarch's original phrase (1st century AD) was "calling a fig a fig, and a trough a trough". It transferred into the English idiom in 1542 when Nicholas Udall translated Erasmus thus in his Apophthegmes, that is to saie, prompte saiynges. First gathered by Erasmus: "Philippus aunswered, that the Macedonians wer feloes of no fyne witte in their termes but altogether grosse, clubbyshe, and rusticall, as they whiche had not the witte to calle a spade by any other name then a spade."

There y'go. Bit of learnin' for ya.

And the origin of the word "Pier"?

[guitarfool2002]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

[Nicko1234]

The Mike and Bruce tour will only cease I would imagine when Mike Love either chooses to retire, or he is deceased. Or, if the entire organization gets their s**t together and cares enough about their legacy to end it elegantly and with some class and as one united performing unit.

Given how these guys always talk and act, I can never tell whether they care deeply about their legacy or whether they don't give a fudge about it.

The legacy is perfectly intact. Playing a few shows together now wouldn`t change anything.

And I don`t think there are many acts who get back together due to `legacy` anyway. Plenty of massive acts like Monty Python, The Police, The Shadows, The Spice Girls etc. have reunited over the past few years before inevitably parting again. It is down to money rather than legacy though.

[HeyJude]

The Mike and Bruce tour will only cease I would imagine when Mike Love either chooses to retire, or he is deceased. Or, if the entire organization gets their s**t together and cares enough about their legacy to end it elegantly and with some class and as one united performing unit.

Given how these guys always talk and act, I can never tell whether they care deeply about their legacy or whether they don't give a fudge about it.

The legacy is perfectly intact. Playing a few shows together now wouldn`t change anything.

And I don`t think there are many acts who get back together due to `legacy` anyway. Plenty of massive acts like Monty Python, The Police, The Shadows, The Spice Girls etc. have reunited over the past few years before inevitably parting again. It is down to money rather than legacy though.

I suppose it depends on what we're talking about when we're talking about a "legacy." The music is there, nothing will change that.

But as far as the band's story, it is littered with acrimony, lawsuits, estrangements, f-ups, missed opportunities and so on. If they had ended their career together (which obviously they still can do), that would make for a very different ending when the full story is retold. It would color every commentary about how acrimonious their history has been and how many times they missed opportunities, because it would always be tempered with them having their s**t together at the end. 

[SMiLE Brian]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

Exactly, there is a harshness on BW and a strange silence on others.

[Nicko1234]

I suppose it depends on what we're talking about when we're talking about a "legacy." The music is there, nothing will change that.

But as far as the band's story, it is littered with acrimony, lawsuits, estrangements, f-ups, missed opportunities and so on. If they had ended their career together (which obviously they still can do), that would make for a very different ending when the full story is retold. It would color every commentary about how acrimonious their history has been and how many times they missed opportunities, because it would always be tempered with them having their s**t together at the end. 

The story will end with Brian restored to some kind of health and touring and recording again. That is the happy ending. The acrimony is pretty tame compared with some bands and certainly won`t overshadow the music for future generations.

And them all retiring The Beach Boys name at the same time doesn`t seem vaguely possible really. Mike plays 100 shows a year. Brian has maybe 10 booked for this year...

[GhostyTMRS]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

Back when Brian was cutting tracks with Jeff Beck and we were getting pics of Al in the studio and then..shock of all shocks...Blondie Chaplin in the studio I don't think you could've found a more "Rah-Rah-Go-Brian!" spot on the internet than this place...

...that was followed by months of nothing

..and then we heard about Lana Del Rey, Zooey, Frank Ocean..and THAT'S when I noticed this "perceived" anti-Brian stuff, but I don't think it's anyone being anti-Brian at all. A lot of posters here either don't know those new artists or don't respect them or both, and are ticked off that the album went in that direction. No one will know much of anything until the darn thing comes out, but message boards are playgrounds for speculation.

If by liking Mike and Bruce as well as Brian, one is now considered "anti-Brian", I don't know what to say there. I've watched this stuff go on for years. Back in the 70's, the fan sentiment was that Mike and Al were the bad guys who were keeping Brian down, and now Al is a good guy or whatever. It's all nonsense.

And again, Brian is the only Beach Boy who's actually putting out new product. Of course, he'd get the lions share of comments, criticism, etc.  Nobody else is doing anything.

[HeyJude]

I suppose it depends on what we're talking about when we're talking about a "legacy." The music is there, nothing will change that.

But as far as the band's story, it is littered with acrimony, lawsuits, estrangements, f-ups, missed opportunities and so on. If they had ended their career together (which obviously they still can do), that would make for a very different ending when the full story is retold. It would color every commentary about how acrimonious their history has been and how many times they missed opportunities, because it would always be tempered with them having their s**t together at the end. 

The story will end with Brian restored to some kind of health and touring and recording again. That is the happy ending. The acrimony is pretty tame compared with some bands and certainly won`t overshadow the music for future generations.

And them all retiring The Beach Boys name at the same time doesn`t seem vaguely possible really. Mike plays 100 shows a year. Brian has maybe 10 booked for this year...

Not even 10 shows. I think more like four or five this year for Brian so far, with a few more scheduled.

I think a scenario for the end game would be that Mike would decide to retire, and when he reaches that point, call everyone back to finish it out together.

I'm not quite convinced the "story" will end with Brian restored, "The End." His restoration in large part also includes the story of his estrangement from the rest of the band. That isn't the ending for the *group* that much of anybody would want.

The C50 tour was their highest profile in years, probably decades, and it ended with "Mike Love fires Brian Wilson" (again, a false statement technically) as a top "trending" item on the internet. Plus, I know we're only two years out, but nearly every interview, other than the super quicky local press for Mike's band, has usually mentioned the group's acrimonious history, and specifically the clusterfudge that was the end of C50.

*During* C50, those same acrimonious aspects were mentioned, but they were always tempered with "but the group has reunited...blah, blah blah." That *could* have been the end of the group's story, whenever that would have/could have been.

They could have even written a better ending while having Mike go back to his own band. Paraphrasing how Howie Edelson put it, they could have consulted one freaking PR person who could have told them to book a few gigs at the end of 2012 to cap off the reunion, where everyone is on the same page, film the damn thing for an awesome Blu-ray and live album, and then they at least wouldn't have looked like they didn't know what the hell they were doing PR-wise after a half century in the business.

[HeyJude]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

Back when Brian was cutting tracks with Jeff Beck and we were getting pics of Al in the studio and then..shock of all shocks...Blondie Chaplin in the studio I don't think you could've found a more "Rah-Rah-Go-Brian!" spot on the internet than this place...

...that was followed by months of nothing

..and then we heard about Lana Del Rey, Zooey, Frank Ocean..and THAT'S when I noticed this "perceived" anti-Brian stuff, but I don't think it's anyone being anti-Brian at all. A lot of posters here either don't know those new artists or don't respect them or both, and are ticked off that the album went in that direction. No one will know much of anything until the darn thing comes out, but message boards are playgrounds for speculation.

If by liking Mike and Bruce as well as Brian, one is now considered "anti-Brian", I don't know what to say there. I've watched this stuff go on for years. Back in the 70's, the fan sentiment was that Mike and Al were the bad guys who were keeping Brian down, and now Al is a good guy or whatever. It's all nonsense.

And again, Brian is the only Beach Boy who's actually putting out new product. Of course, he'd get the lions share of comments, criticism, etc.  Nobody else is doing anything.

I think the anti-Brian/Mike thing has swung back and forth a few times since the early days of the interwebs in the mid-late 90's.

There was definitely a "Brian can do no wrong" attitude from some fans in the late 90's, and a lot of harshness about Mike. The harshness was not always unfounded; this was in the early days of touring without Carl and Al. There was also plenty of reason to be really into the new goings-on with Brian, finally cutting albums and doing tours.

I don't think there's necessarily less "anti-Mike" stuff on the internet these days than in past years. But there is a lot more "pro-Mike" stuff. I don't mean just being a BB fan and thinking Mike is an okay guy. There are some folks who clearly have a bias that leads them to go to extremes to defend Mike and minimize or criticize Brian in the process. This has, I feel, happened at the same time that "pro Brian" rhetoric has died down a bit. So I do see a shift in the last few years.

I've said this before, but the turning point in my mind was the aftermath of C50. Regardless of how I feel about it, as objective as I can be, there has been an odd upswing in going to extremes to defend Mike in the aftermath, along with a strong sentiment that I wouldn't call "pro Mike", but I would say VERY oddly ambivalent about the demise of the reunion of the group we love so much. That's what has astonished me. There was a lot of "so what?" from some surprising folks when C50 fell apart. That astonishes me.

Back to Foskett: I find it interesting that he's aware of the sentiments of fans about him and other BB's, especially if he's truly staying away from the internet commentary.

[SMiLE Brian]

Heyjude, could you run the BBs for us and give us more BBs shows!!!! 


Seriously, you know your sh*t about how the BBs should be run!

[CenturyDeprived]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

Back when Brian was cutting tracks with Jeff Beck and we were getting pics of Al in the studio and then..shock of all shocks...Blondie Chaplin in the studio I don't think you could've found a more "Rah-Rah-Go-Brian!" spot on the internet than this place...

...that was followed by months of nothing

..and then we heard about Lana Del Rey, Zooey, Frank Ocean..and THAT'S when I noticed this "perceived" anti-Brian stuff, but I don't think it's anyone being anti-Brian at all. A lot of posters here either don't know those new artists or don't respect them or both, and are ticked off that the album went in that direction. No one will know much of anything until the darn thing comes out, but message boards are playgrounds for speculation.

If by liking Mike and Bruce as well as Brian, one is now considered "anti-Brian", I don't know what to say there. I've watched this stuff go on for years. Back in the 70's, the fan sentiment was that Mike and Al were the bad guys who were keeping Brian down, and now Al is a good guy or whatever. It's all nonsense.

And again, Brian is the only Beach Boy who's actually putting out new product. Of course, he'd get the lions share of comments, criticism, etc.  Nobody else is doing anything.

I think the anti-Brian/Mike thing has swung back and forth a few times since the early days of the interwebs in the mid-late 90's.

There was definitely a "Brian can do no wrong" attitude from some fans in the late 90's, and a lot of harshness about Mike. The harshness was not always unfounded; this was in the early days of touring without Carl and Al. There was also plenty of reason to be really into the new goings-on with Brian, finally cutting albums and doing tours.

I don't think there's necessarily less "anti-Mike" stuff on the internet these days than in past years. But there is a lot more "pro-Mike" stuff. I don't mean just being a BB fan and thinking Mike is an okay guy. There are some folks who clearly have a bias that leads them to go to extremes to defend Mike and minimize or criticize Brian in the process. This has, I feel, happened at the same time that "pro Brian" rhetoric has died down a bit. So I do see a shift in the last few years.

I've said this before, but the turning point in my mind was the aftermath of C50. Regardless of how I feel about it, as objective as I can be, there has been an odd upswing in going to extremes to defend Mike in the aftermath, along with a strong sentiment that I wouldn't call "pro Mike", but I would say VERY oddly ambivalent about the demise of the reunion of the group we love so much. That's what has astonished me. There was a lot of "so what?" from some surprising folks when C50 fell apart. That astonishes me.

Back to Foskett: I find it interesting that he's aware of the sentiments of fans about him and other BB's, especially if he's truly staying away from the internet commentary.

Part of me wonders if Mike would even do the C50 reunion again in hindsight, if he'd have known how things would go down in the end, and how he'd wind up being portrayed in the press. If he could press a button(s), would it be CONTROL + Z to undo C50?

Honest question.

I suppose that Mike deems it "worth it" for him to do what he had to do to get the M&B show back in action post C50, but I wonder if he wishes C50 had just never happened at all at this point. Especially after badmouthing the album in hindsight.

After all, while he might get interview questions like "when are you guys going to finally reunite", he'd never have to explain himself over and over again, or ever use the term "set end date".

[GhostyTMRS]

I think the anti-Brian/Mike thing has swung back and forth a few times since the early days of the interwebs in the mid-late 90's.

There was definitely a "Brian can do no wrong" attitude from some fans in the late 90's, and a lot of harshness about Mike. The harshness was not always unfounded; this was in the early days of touring without Carl and Al. There was also plenty of reason to be really into the new goings-on with Brian, finally cutting albums and doing tours.

I don't think there's necessarily less "anti-Mike" stuff on the internet these days than in past years. But there is a lot more "pro-Mike" stuff. I don't mean just being a BB fan and thinking Mike is an okay guy. There are some folks who clearly have a bias that leads them to go to extremes to defend Mike and minimize or criticize Brian in the process. This has, I feel, happened at the same time that "pro Brian" rhetoric has died down a bit. So I do see a shift in the last few years.

I've said this before, but the turning point in my mind was the aftermath of C50. Regardless of how I feel about it, as objective as I can be, there has been an odd upswing in going to extremes to defend Mike in the aftermath, along with a strong sentiment that I wouldn't call "pro Mike", but I would say VERY oddly ambivalent about the demise of the reunion of the group we love so much. That's what has astonished me. There was a lot of "so what?" from some surprising folks when C50 fell apart. That astonishes me.

Back to Foskett: I find it interesting that he's aware of the sentiments of fans about him and other BB's, especially if he's truly staying away from the internet commentary.

That's an excellent response, and I feel compelled to add my two-cents to the C50 tour stuff. I didn't see the C50 tour as a reactivation of the group we all know and loved (especially with Al's "one final time" quote being drilled into our heads in all the promo videos) but rather as a victory lap from the surviving members of The Beach Boys. I didn't expect it to continue for years and years and frankly, I'm not upset that it didn't. This'll probably make me sound like a lunatic on this board, but I think of The Beach Boys in the past tense. As a band that took a real wallop with the death of Dennis and then a mighty deathblow with Carl's passing. Anything that's happened after that I don't consider to be genuine Beach Boys. I know Mike and Bruce tour under the name of The Beach Boys, but I do really consider that an offshoot. Brian touring is also an offshoot for me. Both camps are wonderful at what they do, but coming together again doesn't make it the genuine Beach Boys anymore IMO with both Carl and Dennis gone. So I like to keep up with what the guys are doing (hence I visit this board) but I don't have a stake in another reunion or really care that the C50 folded. I'm still surprised it happened at all! I'm glad the guys are doing what they do and I wish them all the best. It's cool when they work together here and there, but in my head The Beach Boys finished a  long long time ago.         

[Shady]

Jeff Foskett ladies and gentlemen, a charlatan.

Why doesn't he just come out and admit that's Brian's tour schedule being sporadic dates here and there didn't fit his needs, instead of some long winded excuse.

You took Brian for a ride Jeff, you can join the long list of chancers who have.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Shady, in all honesty, you are way off the mark here. Not trying to be harsh, and also you know I'm not exactly a fan of his voice either, but in this case you are mistaken.

[Howie Edelson]

The “brand issue” is about power and revenge. Period.

It’s not delusional to think that Mike Love has a different answer for whether certain members are “Beach Boys” depending on when it benefits him (e.g. reunion tour, gala event, “high profile” names needed to fill 15,000-seat major market venues, etc. . .) Arguing it is semantics.

Nobody was confusing Al Jardine, Daryl Dragon, and Owen Elliot as THE BEACH BOYS. No one. Imagine looking at that and saying, “Look, it’s The Beach Boys.” It was a d* ck move on Mike’s part (“. . . . but, but, but, Alan passed on paying the license fee, when it was still only a non-exclusive. . . . . . .” )

D* ick move. Revenge. Ugliness.

Al Jardine was deliberately sh *tcanned and publicly humiliated. It’s that same ugliness and revenge that the licensing “issue” is held over some member’s heads despite promises (which turn into reneged promises) that the “issue" won’t be an "issue" if A and B happen.

I’ve said it numerous times before: This is what happens when a band has no management.

Jeff’s interview was welcomed. I have the utmost respect for Jeff. The past 15 years could not have happened without him and I’ve told him as much. And he did it with love. Regarding his departure, I think there are very few options when your job is THAT JOB. Read Bob Green’s book and you see what the options are: Dismal. Although I thought Jeff’s interview was heartfelt (and caring for our beloved panda Brian 24/7 can’t be the easiest job for anyone — least of all a man pushing 60) those recent road dates were HARDLY backbreaking. And those recent sessions were HARDLY Western Recorders c. 1965. So, with due respect, there’s a bit of a fudge. And I gotta say it — leaving that gig for MIKE is the biggest political maneuver since the group fired Brian to get him back into detox. It’s a message. And if he’s sending that message, he should own that message. There’s enough spin from each camp, and enough support for Jeff that he should tell the ENTIRE story. I do not believe he did.

My sadness is that he won’t be around as Brian winds down and rounds third, and I think he should be. He deserves to be. It’s his victory lap, too. Regardless of his title, or paycheck, or professional stress; his exit from Brian's employ was to play the same exact music with a worse band, And people, it is. It’s not bad by any means. Totten’s creative overhaul literally saved Mike’s reputation — and Mike’s band is VERY, VERY good, better than most. But it’s absolutely less. Tang vs. fresh-squeezed. Art vs. Showbiz (I know, Mike's band is better because they come to your hometown rather than making you schlep into the city. . . .) Every time Brian’s band is supplemented with an actual additional Beach Boy the fact is underscored. It's a better car.

Brian's group without Jeff is a band wounded. Mike's with Jeff is an oldies act with a dynamite falsetto guy (and remember you almost caught the beach ball that came zooming right next to you!!!)

[Chocolate Shake Man]

My sources don't require me to toe the party line to stay connected/

Amen! That's the one big change here. I wasn't visiting the board much for a few years, and I came back recently to see this strange, almost anti-Brian sentiment take hold. Weird...

Other posters noticed this as well, for the record. There seemed to be an uptick in what you noticed in 2014, or perhaps more than what had happened in previous years even going back to the BW Christmas album.

Back when Brian was cutting tracks with Jeff Beck and we were getting pics of Al in the studio and then..shock of all shocks...Blondie Chaplin in the studio I don't think you could've found a more "Rah-Rah-Go-Brian!" spot on the internet than this place...

...that was followed by months of nothing

..and then we heard about Lana Del Rey, Zooey, Frank Ocean..and THAT'S when I noticed this "perceived" anti-Brian stuff, but I don't think it's anyone being anti-Brian at all. A lot of posters here either don't know those new artists or don't respect them or both, and are ticked off that the album went in that direction. No one will know much of anything until the darn thing comes out, but message boards are playgrounds for speculation.

If by liking Mike and Bruce as well as Brian, one is now considered "anti-Brian", I don't know what to say there. I've watched this stuff go on for years. Back in the 70's, the fan sentiment was that Mike and Al were the bad guys who were keeping Brian down, and now Al is a good guy or whatever. It's all nonsense.

And again, Brian is the only Beach Boy who's actually putting out new product. Of course, he'd get the lions share of comments, criticism, etc.  Nobody else is doing anything.

I think the anti-Brian/Mike thing has swung back and forth a few times since the early days of the interwebs in the mid-late 90's.

There was definitely a "Brian can do no wrong" attitude from some fans in the late 90's, and a lot of harshness about Mike. The harshness was not always unfounded; this was in the early days of touring without Carl and Al. There was also plenty of reason to be really into the new goings-on with Brian, finally cutting albums and doing tours.

I don't think there's necessarily less "anti-Mike" stuff on the internet these days than in past years. But there is a lot more "pro-Mike" stuff. I don't mean just being a BB fan and thinking Mike is an okay guy. There are some folks who clearly have a bias that leads them to go to extremes to defend Mike and minimize or criticize Brian in the process. This has, I feel, happened at the same time that "pro Brian" rhetoric has died down a bit. So I do see a shift in the last few years.

I've said this before, but the turning point in my mind was the aftermath of C50. Regardless of how I feel about it, as objective as I can be, there has been an odd upswing in going to extremes to defend Mike in the aftermath, along with a strong sentiment that I wouldn't call "pro Mike", but I would say VERY oddly ambivalent about the demise of the reunion of the group we love so much. That's what has astonished me. There was a lot of "so what?" from some surprising folks when C50 fell apart. That astonishes me.

Back to Foskett: I find it interesting that he's aware of the sentiments of fans about him and other BB's, especially if he's truly staying away from the internet commentary.

I might also add that there has been a strange "Brian is a manipulator" sentiment that has emerged in the last few years. That, coupled with a general ramping up of the "mental illness isn't an excuse" argument, has made for more negativity. And there is just a general imbalance between the side that typically says, "Brian was responsible for a lot but other people take a share of responsibility too" vs. "Brian was responsible for everything and therefore the failures of the 60s were entirely his fault."

[Shady]

Shady, in all honesty, you are way off the mark here. Not trying to be harsh, and also you know I'm not exactly a fan of his voice either, but in this case you are mistaken.

None of us can really know what Jeff's motivation was. The timing of this whole thing is interesting, that's all I'm saying.

And to be honest, I don't buy his story, what can I say.

[SMiLE Brian]

It's honestly kinda disturbing how Mike does such legal ugliness to the other band members he has known for over 50 years. It's almost like the BBs are his brand and the others aren't really BBs anymore.

[bgas]

It's almost like the BBs are his brand and the others aren't really BBs anymore.

Gee, did you get inside Mike's head just now and channel him for our benefit?

[Shady]

Brian, Carl and Dennis Wilson, the least greedy people on the planet.

What a shame they had to be surround by people motivated by money and....greed.

[SMiLE Brian]

It's almost like the BBs are his brand and the others aren't really BBs anymore.

Gee, did you get inside Mike's head just now and channel him for our benefit?

maybe....

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I think the way things happened after Carl's death was majorly f***ed up, and I to this day feel the Beach Boys should not exist without a Wilson in the band. I know the voting members of BRI disagree with me. That said, I do have a question for you doubters...do you really think for a minute Mike wouldn't rather be playing with the full band rather than what he's currently doing? Take all of the spin from both camps and put it aside (and really, that all it is...spin). If it came down to it, I think he'd toss Bruce* off the bridge if it meant getting the full band reunited if it were possible for them to put together their differences. I think everybody in the group would ideally want to stay together. Not going to happen anytime soon, and more to the point, certain people would need to back the f*** out of things that aren't their own business in order for that to happen. I don't see that happening anytime soon, which quite frankly saddens and angers me.

*-Bruce isn't the problem (I think he only gives a sh*t about getting a paycheck), I was just saying, that's all.

[Howie Edelson]

I think Mike Love is absolutely happiest performing in the current incarnation of the touring Beach Boys.
There is zero bulls hit factor at work every day.   

[wantsomecorn]

I feel like if Brian truly wanted to be in The Beach Boys, or to tour under the Beach Boys name, then he would be able to.

Either way, neither him nor Mike care enough to talk to each other to reunite, and it's not going to happen soon. Either they tour for 50 Years of Pet Sounds or someone dies first.