John Stebbins FAQ Book: Rather harsh on Brian's Solo Tours and Handlers?

[Lowbacca]

While I'm somewhat disappointed in Mr. Stebbins's responses on this topic, not really answering harrisonjon's question and all, I think this:

Can of worms, man. Can of worms.

is really childish. If you have something to say, say it (and suitably argue your point) - but if is your only response then dig this: some of us might find the taste of worms not entirely displeasing. Please don't overindulge us.

It's not all about you (in the collective): there's a few here could open that can, and several others... and they'd wake up the following day to find their sources had totally evaporated. You've not grasped this basic premise yet, you've really not been paying attention: hell, there's even a recently started thread on this very topic. Politely* suggest you read it.

[* there's always a first time]

I have grasped. I still smell hypocrisy and gutlessness. And convenient resorts from continuing a discussion in a precarious direction.

I'm not being disrespectful or acting the fool on purpose. I just felt like stating how all of this comes across to me. And to a couple of others as well, I think.

It can be frustrating to re-explain a chapter in a book that is widely distributed, probably 15,000 copies in print, to someone who hasn't read the book as is the case with the poster Empire of Love. And even for those who have read it, I am of the opinion that the chapter stands for itself, it is not a mystery what my opinion is, the chapter is clear. But in no way do i think my point of view is the definitive one, it's just mine, and it's a comparatively informed one. I'm happy to discuss my writings, but in this case, that chapter is what it is. One of the nice things about getting to write books is that I can make a developed statement on a particular subject, and then have the satisfaction that I made my point. And in this case the point is made. Doing that, in a book, is the opposite of gutless. It's honesty.

Jon, "gutlessness" was clearly not directed at the contents of your book. And honesty is always appreciated.

You are disrespectful and gutless and acting the fool. What else could you possibly be? Jon didn't come in here spouting off, you did. He gave his response, so please respect it. Go gig up what you're after and you get back to us.

That was a very telling response. Thanks for that.

[drbeachboy]

While I'm somewhat disappointed in Mr. Stebbins's responses on this topic, not really answering harrisonjon's question and all, I think this:

Can of worms, man. Can of worms.

is really childish. If you have something to say, say it (and suitably argue your point) - but if is your only response then dig this: some of us might find the taste of worms not entirely displeasing. Please don't overindulge us.

It's not all about you (in the collective): there's a few here could open that can, and several others... and they'd wake up the following day to find their sources had totally evaporated. You've not grasped this basic premise yet, you've really not been paying attention: hell, there's even a recently started thread on this very topic. Politely* suggest you read it.

[* there's always a first time]

I have grasped. I still smell hypocrisy and gutlessness. And convenient resorts from continuing a discussion in a precarious direction.

I'm not being disrespectful or acting the fool on purpose. I just felt like stating how all of this comes across to me. And to a couple of others as well, I think.

It can be frustrating to re-explain a chapter in a book that is widely distributed, probably 15,000 copies in print, to someone who hasn't read the book as is the case with the poster Empire of Love. And even for those who have read it, I am of the opinion that the chapter stands for itself, it is not a mystery what my opinion is, the chapter is clear. But in no way do i think my point of view is the definitive one, it's just mine, and it's a comparatively informed one. I'm happy to discuss my writings, but in this case, that chapter is what it is. One of the nice things about getting to write books is that I can make a developed statement on a particular subject, and then have the satisfaction that I made my point. And in this case the point is made. Doing that, in a book, is the opposite of gutless. It's honesty.

Jon, "gutlessness" was clearly not directed at the contents of your book. And honesty is always appreciated.

You are disrespectful and gutless and acting the fool. What else could you possibly be? Jon didn't come in here spouting off, you did. He gave his response, so please respect it. Go gig up what you're after and you get back to us.

That was a very telling response. Thanks for that.

I used your own words of description. Yes, very telling.

[SMiLE Brian]

lowbacca asks an honest question about Stebbins' book and is met with insults. Something is not right here about honest questions about people claiming stuff about BW.....

[Lowbacca]

While I'm somewhat disappointed in Mr. Stebbins's responses on this topic, not really answering harrisonjon's question and all, I think this:

Can of worms, man. Can of worms.

is really childish. If you have something to say, say it (and suitably argue your point) - but if is your only response then dig this: some of us might find the taste of worms not entirely displeasing. Please don't overindulge us.

It's not all about you (in the collective): there's a few here could open that can, and several others... and they'd wake up the following day to find their sources had totally evaporated. You've not grasped this basic premise yet, you've really not been paying attention: hell, there's even a recently started thread on this very topic. Politely* suggest you read it.

[* there's always a first time]

I have grasped. I still smell hypocrisy and gutlessness. And convenient resorts from continuing a discussion in a precarious direction.

I'm not being disrespectful or acting the fool on purpose. I just felt like stating how all of this comes across to me. And to a couple of others as well, I think.

It can be frustrating to re-explain a chapter in a book that is widely distributed, probably 15,000 copies in print, to someone who hasn't read the book as is the case with the poster Empire of Love. And even for those who have read it, I am of the opinion that the chapter stands for itself, it is not a mystery what my opinion is, the chapter is clear. But in no way do i think my point of view is the definitive one, it's just mine, and it's a comparatively informed one. I'm happy to discuss my writings, but in this case, that chapter is what it is. One of the nice things about getting to write books is that I can make a developed statement on a particular subject, and then have the satisfaction that I made my point. And in this case the point is made. Doing that, in a book, is the opposite of gutless. It's honesty.

Jon, "gutlessness" was clearly not directed at the contents of your book. And honesty is always appreciated.

You are disrespectful and gutless and acting the fool. What else could you possibly be? Jon didn't come in here spouting off, you did. He gave his response, so please respect it. Go gig up what you're after and you get back to us.

That was a very telling response. Thanks for that.

I used your own words of description. Yes, very telling.

It's how you used them. I won't drop to meet that niveau, sorry.

lowbacca asks an honest question about Stebbins' book and is met with insults. Something is not right here about honest questions about people claiming stuff about BW.....

That's what I meant. What kind of a joint is this board sometimes?

[drbeachboy]

lowbacca asks an honest question about Stebbins' book and is met with insults. Something is not right here about honest questions about people claiming stuff about BW.....

Jon gave him an answer that he wasn't happy with. I didn't insult him, he used the words himself. I just disagreed with him about how he saw himself and his actions.

Edit: He must have thought some of us would think that, or he wouldn't have posted the terms that he did.

[Andrew G. Doe]

To be fair to everyone here, lowbacca's beef is not with Jon so much as with my "can of worms" comment and my subsequently declining to elaborate. His evident inability to see why neither I, Jon or anyone else is willing to expand on those three words is more than somewhat worrying, considering the recent unequivocal proof that the people we're discussing (and in some cases, being exceedingly rude about) do in fact read this forum. Simply put, someone tells you something in strict confidence, you don't share it with your cat, much less post it on a forum that Joe Q. Public can read. That is asshattery of the highest order.

[SMiLE Brian]

The idea that is trying to be implied is that the big secret is that BW is a zombie with handlers.

[Jon Stebbins]

The idea that is trying to be implied is that the big secret is that BW is a zombie with handlers.

How can a chapter that is well developed, points made, evidence presented, alternative view considered, book published, distributed...how can that be termed a "secret" or implication. Read the chapter, if you disagree, as some do, so be it. If the chapter gives you some added perspective, cool.

[Lowbacca]

lowbacca asks an honest question about Stebbins' book and is met with insults. Something is not right here about honest questions about people claiming stuff about BW.....

Jon gave him an answer that he wasn't happy with. I didn't insult him, he used the words himself. I just disagreed with him about how he saw himself and his actions.

Edit: He must have thought some of us would think that, or he wouldn't have posted the terms that he did.

Gosh Darn....

I love this board and I'm grateful beyond words for the involvement of people like Desper, Lawlor, Stebbins & AGD etc. who are closer to or simply know more about the band and the individuals than we 'common' fans do, but there's a realm of instances - intellectually as well as behaviour-related - that I'm not comfortable with. Normally I stay away from those threads to begin with, but I seem to have stumbled into this one. My bad. Which doesn't mean I don't stand by what I said. Nevertheless, I can't be the only one here being uncomfortable with the atmosphere at times?


Keep cool everyone,
Lowbacca out.

[drbeachboy]

The idea that is trying to be implied is that the big secret is that BW is a zombie with handlers.

I don't think that at all. But I do think Brian has people in place help him with business decisions, whether that be regarding recording in the studio or when he is out on the road touring. I think Brian has proved that he is a far cry from a zombie. Though, I bet like the rest of us, he has his good days and his bad days.

[Andrew G. Doe]

The idea that is trying to be implied is that the big secret is that BW is a zombie with handlers.

You just keep thinkin', Butch. That's what you're good at. 

[Andrew G. Doe]

Gosh Darn....

I love this board and I'm grateful beyond words for the involvement of people like Desper, Lawlor, Stebbins & AGD etc. who are closer to or simply know more about the band and the individuals than we 'common' fans do, but there's a realm of instances - intellectually as well as behaviour-related - that I'm not comfortable with. Normally I stay away from those threads to begin with, but I seem to have stumbled into this one. My bad. Which doesn't mean I don't stand by what I said. Nevertheless, I can't be the only one here being uncomfortable with the atmosphere at times?

Keep cool everyone,
Lowbacca out.

Are you happy with some of the more asinine posts on this forum that have nothing to do with the band and everything to do with irrational personal dislike ? I'm sincerely curious.

[JakeH]

My recollection was that somewhere in the FAQ book Jon also says something like there's "overwhelming" evidence that Brian would rather not tour. One can hardly argue with that observation; the evidence begins to accumulate during the Kennedy administration.  So the question, in recent years, is why does he perform? There's a lot of potential reasons; whatever they are, they outweigh whatever inclination there is to not be on stage. I like to think (hope) that one factor is, basically, pride.
  
And this is where the OP’s second issue – Murry’s impact on Brian and Dennis – is actually, to my thinking, somehow related to Brian’s willingness to make appearances. The father wreaked unbelievable havoc in the lives of all three brothers, and, by extension, the group as a whole.  Unlike Dennis, Brian survived the onslaught, and that has to mean something to Brian, doesn’t it?  (And isn’t it true that Brian didn’t start touring under his own name until he became the “last Wilson?”) When a seventy-something Brian tours (and puts albums out), a strong statement is implicitly being made. Anyway, this is only one way of spinning it more positively, while not necessarily discounting any other theory or anyone else’s specific knowledge.

The provocative, opinionated writing in the FAQ about topics like this one was refreshing, and clearly offered as well-reasoned opinion rather than fact. I’m going to add this “decision to tour solo” issue to the list of things I’m hoping to see addressed in some form in the upcoming autobiography.

[Howie Edelson]

The simple answer for everyone whose interests about the Beach Boys' music, career and lives (specifically those who post THOUSANDS of times about people they don't know personally) is to actually know them.

Go meet them already. Ask THEM.

I am still amazed after all these years on the board that people will ask a question regarding a fact, a show, a session, or even how to improve their fanzine, and then ARGUE the answer they get.
That whole "You're not telling me EVERYTHING!" and "What do you REALLY mean?" is so lame. YOU go meet them. You go work with them. You go be part of a project with a Beach Boy for 18 months. You experience that organization for a year -- you tell ME. This isn't Teddy Roosevelt. These are living people.

Stebbins tells what HE thinks and sees.
And they all know him and they all respect him and they all talk to him.

To those for which a simple answer isn't good enough; if you're so passionate about something that keeps you talking about it year after year after year -- YOU find out the truth.

[drbeachboy]

lowbacca asks an honest question about Stebbins' book and is met with insults. Something is not right here about honest questions about people claiming stuff about BW.....

Jon gave him an answer that he wasn't happy with. I didn't insult him, he used the words himself. I just disagreed with him about how he saw himself and his actions.

Edit: He must have thought some of us would think that, or he wouldn't have posted the terms that he did.

Gosh Darn....

I love this board and I'm grateful beyond words for the involvement of people like Desper, Lawlor, Stebbins & AGD etc. who are closer to or simply know more about the band and the individuals than we 'common' fans do, but there's a realm of instances - intellectually as well as behaviour-related - that I'm not comfortable with. Normally I stay away from those threads to begin with, but I seem to have stumbled into this one. My bad. Which doesn't mean I don't stand by what I said. Nevertheless, I can't be the only one here being uncomfortable with the atmosphere at times?


Keep cool everyone,
Lowbacca out.

I have no bone to pick with you. Never have before and probably never will in the future. I just happen to disagree with you on this subject. I am sorry if throwing your own words back at you upset you. My apologies!

[drbeachboy]

To both JakeH and Howie, terrific posts, thank you!

[Andrew G. Doe]

Superb post Howie, as ever.

Problem with your excellent advice is, some folk can't - or won't - accept the truth. They know what they know, and they know they're right. Would that they knew what they didn't know.

With a very few examples - we all know who - everyone posting here has no idea about what these people are really like. I mean, really like. How they spend their days, their friends, their likes and dislikes. We're the next door neighbors, we look over the fence, we see the external coming and goings, we might pass on the block, maybe get invited to a BBQ. We occasionally get a peek through the windows, or overhear an arguement, but for 98% of the time, we just don't know. Whatever we think we know... we don't. Always remember that.

[Wirestone]

The simple truth of it is, though, that Brian has not toured particularly heavily for some 10 years, with the exception of the C50 dates.

Indeed, there are years (2006, 2010, 2014) when he has played only 10 shows or so. So it seems difficult to say he's being driven in some horrible way to tour, at least not these days.

To my mind, the facts of the situation -- the actual number of dates played, for instance -- are always a useful addition to discussions of this type.

And Howie's point is, as ever, excellent. It's not difficult to get to know folks in the BW/BB world who have seen what's going on. Several post here. It's not tough to get your own batch of sources together, if you really want to. And then you can draw your own conclusions.

I'm much more bullish on BW touring, but it's also been clear for a long time that he doesn't have unalloyed positive feelings about it. For one thing, he has to battle the voices while thousands are watching. That can't be fun, even if the show turns out well.

(From Bellagio, and the counting is my own. I'm discounting guest appearances where he might perform a song or two.

2006 -- 12 shows
2007 -- 41 shows
2008 -- 39 shows
2009 -- 38 shows
2010 -- 9 shows
2011 -- 38 shows
2012 -- C50 shows
2013 -- 29 shows
2014 -- 11 shows)

[jeffh]

The last time I saw him I was sitting to be the left of the stage. After the final song, Brian exited to the right. Fans of course started cheering for an encore. While they were doing this Brian was sitting in a folding chair, in the wings. I could see this clearly from where I was sitting. It was so sad, he was sitting threre with his elbows on his legs, arms up, and his head cradled in his hands. He looked like he wanted to cry. All of the band members kept their distance from him. Finally they all came out for the encore. Brian wore his fake smile. I will NEVER forget him sitting there, looking so very bummed out.

[ontor pertawst]

I've seen that as well, and it's hard not to feel for the guy at those moments. Good days and bad days.

But on the flip side of all the trauma, Murry also drilled "fight for success" and "show em who's got the guts" into him as well and he faces the demons and works hard even when he doesn't want to... because he's a pro. He knows more than anybody the reputation he has and has to live up to... can you imagine that kind of pressure? Competing against yourself when yourself was the guy who put out Pet Sounds in his 20s? With a huge audience out there that he STILL thinks he might disappoint? "Now I gotta go out and be a genius... oh f***! f***! f***!"  

 So he doesn't do it while pointing at the audience. So he doesn't race to the center of the stage and jump up for no apparent reason. Big deal. How many shows did he miss on C50? How many shows has he missed since he started touring? All those decades of extended family conflict and arguments have crowned him as the king of passive-aggressive behavior, he doesn't need to be pissy in interviews or go all alpha male to get his way. There isn't some musclebound jock with a cattle-prod forcing him to go out there. If he didn't know how important these shows were, if he didn't want to do 'em -- he wouldn't. He'd go all "Waves of Love," fold his arms, and pretend to be asleep. But he keeps going and does some pretty amazing shows now and again: look at that recent best BBs-related concert memories thread, how many of those were BW shows?

 We're lucky to still have him putting out good music and the chance to see more shows. How f***ed to not applaud all the courage and moving forward even against odds, age, and baggage. Not to mention a bad ear and a hard time with stage monitors. And he's STILL giving you guys some of your best Beach Boys-related concert memories.  He's got supportive family and friends that clearly love the guy to bits, are those the handlers? How is it a remotely Landy-like situation? Someone please name the current Surf Nazis. But what do I know? I've just been to a few BBQs, really.

\

[Sheriff John Stone]

The simple answer for everyone whose interests about the Beach Boys' music, career and lives (specifically those who post THOUSANDS of times about people they don't know personally) is to actually know them.

Go meet them already. Ask THEM.

I don't think there is a simple answer. It is way too complicated. And, the reason it is complicated is because, when you DO ASK THEM, you don't always get the truth. You will be told what they want you to know, and, more importantly, what they DON'T want you to know.

I don't believe it is simply a matter of not accepting the truth or being cynical. If somebody made the effort, they could come up with several - numerous! - statements made through the years by band members which have been proven to be totally false. And, it doesn't stop there; it filters down through the band members' family, friends, associates, and hangers-on. I get that; there's too much to lose - getting mentioned in album liner notes, receiving an annual Christmas card, and backstage access at concerts! And, I'm not even saying that we have the right to know in the first place. However, I have observed through the years that everything that comes out of the mouths of the Beach Boys has to be questioned. Certainly some of the honored guests who are part of the media have experienced this. Just look at some of the books and interviews from decades ago and compare what was said with what has eventually come out.

So many times I go back to what Kris Kristofferson once said, and I'm paraphrasing..."If you want to know the truth, just ask the studio janitor; he doesn't have "a side".

[Mr. Cohen]

Again, in my opinion, I think in Brian's dream world he'd record an album every 5 years and the BBs would still be "his" band.  I sense he wanted a hit AC record with Imagination. I believe TLOS was a labor of love. Smile and TWGMTR were therapeutic. No Pier Pressure was a thrill. The rest (including touring), I believe, he viewed as work necessary to put himself in position to do those projects. If he doesn't tour Pet Sounds and Smile, I don't think he would've have gotten the opportunity for TLOS, for example.

[Mr. Cohen]

I look it his situation the way I look at my car. I hate my car. I probably wouldn't ever work on it without my wife nagging me. But, in the end, I like the opportunities the car provides and am grateful for the nagging.

[Howie Edelson]

Sheriff -- I disagree.

To the band's (and I suppose my credit) the group members have never been overtly untruthful to me. Perhaps because they're aware that I know what I know coming in, certain things will be said on and then off the record. Or a situation (e.g. the credits for TWGMTR / the 50th) will be explained with the specific names being left out for publication. They've never tried to feed me bullsh it, perhaps because they know that one of their partners has already told me the truth.

Despite what everybody thinks -- there's not MANY different truths with the BB's. There's the DEAL and how one of two camps decides to deal with it.
It is far from brain surgery.

Sheriff, I'm confused, have you had an instance when you've had a frank conversation or interview with a member of the Beach Boys where they've actively misled you on information?

[Sheriff John Stone]

Sheriff -- I disagree.

To the band's (and I suppose my credit) the group members have never been overtly untruthful to me. Perhaps because they're aware that I know what I know coming in, certain things will be said on and then off the record. Or a situation (e.g. the credits for TWGMTR / the 50th) will be explained with the specific names being left out for publication. They've never tried to feed me bullsh it, perhaps because they know that one of their partners has already told me the truth.

Despite what everybody thinks -- there's not MANY different truths with the BB's. There's the DEAL and how one of two camps decides to deal with it.
It is far from brain surgery.

Sheriff, I'm confused, have you had an instance when you've had a frank conversation or interview with a member of the Beach Boys where they've actively misled you on information?

No need for confusion, Howie. I think my opinion on a rock & roll message board is actually a simple and direct one, one felt by a great majority of Beach Boys' fans, especially fans on this board.

For almost fifty years, we have been subjected (for lack of a better word) to numerous books and many, many more interviews. Certainly not all, but with many of these books and interviews, the interviewer did exactly what you are proposing - get to know the band member or develop some sense of trust, and simply ask them questions. We have not only received quotes from the band members themselves, but also from family members (including brothers, cousins, wives, and ex-wives), musicians, record company executives, and friends. However, through the decades, from one book to another, from one interview to another, we have seen/read many of these quotes (facts?) to be proven false. And I'm not insinuating that we were originally, intentionally misled (well, not all the time ), but I am saying that many of the quotes were full of sh--. And, again, these quotes were given to people, people like yourself, who felt that they had established trust.

Now, I'm not naive. I realize that this goes on in all phases of life, not just rock & roll, and not just with The Beach Boys. But I do think it is naive - especially with The Beach Boys - to simply say "ask and you shall receive", especially when you're asking for the truth. Howie, I know you follow this board, so I know you are aware that this board takes pride in dispelling myths. It's almost like a mission for some, and I mean that in a good way. If there's a book or an interview out there, we'll find it and we''ll read it. And, if something smells fishy, we'll dig and dig and dig until we get to the bottom of it. It happens on almost a weekly basis. We don't assume it's the truth, just because the quote was given to somebody we know and respect, even if it's somebody like you. You expressed that you disagree with that premise, but I think that if most diehards are honest, they would agree with it.