I Am Brian Wilson: New Autobiography

[Pretty Funky]

So, looks like Brian's and Mike's memoirs could hit the shelves at almost the same time…

… which means it'd make sense to hav them published around the time of something that could drum up a load of favourable PR… a PS50 reunion tour, for example

A thread about Brian's book and - yet again - back to the subject of a possible reunion.  I'm not surprised Brian seemed to be irritable about the subject in a recent interview. It seems that whatever he does - new albums, tours, another book, a film about his life - it always harks back to the past.

ehhh...not knocking Brian but his albums, tours, book(s) and the film, for better or worse, all trade on the past.

Perhaps a fair bit of criticism on the tours but for literally everything else...I mean...what should a biographical book and movie be but a telling of his past?? And I dont think it's fair to call his albums that either. Sure theyre probably similar in style to his earlier stuff but, thats his technique. His niche. The way he writes. Whats wrong with that?

Well to be fair I was just questioning AJ's post about trading on the past but as you asked.

BW88. Beach Boys style vocals.
IJWMFTT. Remakes.
Imagination. BBsv's plus remake.
Roxy. Past.
PS Live. obvious past.
GIOMH. Artists from the past (or past it), some songs also.
BWPS. obvious past.
WIRWFC. Remakes.
TLOS. California/ LA 50s and 60s, Surfer Girl etc.
Gershwin. Mainly remakes
Disney. Remakes
NPP. Some modern artists at last!

Not definitive and not knocking the guy, just answering a post.

[guitarfool2002]

And look at those negative reactions that hit this board to word last summer that Brian was working with new artists. Talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't. Or criticism for criticism's sake, whichever fits. This whole deal about trading in the past is absurd, once you've created art or music that exists in the upper echelon of your field you're supposed to do what, exactly? Tear it down? Deny it, run away from it? I don't get this line of thought at all. In Brian's case he made his mark in his field of music by the age of 25, and he's still making music today, performing both old and new - What else exactly should he do to please people, then?

And I still can't believe the charges of trading in the past applied to a biography, any biography -  it's like criticizing a burger joint for making hamburgers. No logic at all, just empty criticism. Silly stuff. 

[Andrew G. Doe]

And I still can't believe the charges of trading in the past applied to a biography, any biography -  it's like criticizing a burger joint for making hamburgers. No logic at all, just empty criticism. Silly stuff. 

Definition of autobiography: "an account of a person's life written by that person". Not that person's present, or future... life, as in past. If Brian's autobiography doesn't at least allude to The Beach Boys, and his work with them, then it's going to be a mighty slim - and unspeakably tedious - volume. Beyond silly, actively and rampantly stupid.

[Ang Jones]

Brian seems on many occasions to have been constrained by the Beach Boys rather than truly supported by all of them and it is a pity that not only could some of the Beach Boys not keep up with him but nor could some of his fans.

Of the 29 Beach Boys' studio albums released over 53 years, on which ones was Brian "constrained" by the Beach Boys and which ones could his fans "not keep up with"?

The obvious ones are Pet Sounds and SMiLE.  Some of the fans, like some of the band, wanted to stick with the sort of songs with which they were familiar.

[Ang Jones]

So, looks like Brian's and Mike's memoirs could hit the shelves at almost the same time…

… which means it'd make sense to hav them published around the time of something that could drum up a load of favourable PR… a PS50 reunion tour, for example

A thread about Brian's book and - yet again - back to the subject of a possible reunion.  I'm not surprised Brian seemed to be irritable about the subject in a recent interview. It seems that whatever he does - new albums, tours, another book, a film about his life - it always harks back to the past.

ehhh...not knocking Brian but his albums, tours, book(s) and the film, for better or worse, all trade on the past.

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Brian seems on many occasions to have been constrained by the Beach Boys rather than truly supported by all of them and it is a pity that not only could some of the Beach Boys not keep up with him but nor could some of his fans.

Of the 29 Beach Boys' studio albums released over 53 years, on which ones was Brian "constrained" by the Beach Boys and which ones could his fans "not keep up with"?

The obvious ones are Pet Sounds and SMiLE.  Some of the fans, like some of the band, wanted to stick with the sort of songs with which they were familiar.

And... ummm... exactly how was Brian "constrained" by the band on Pet Sounds ? They sang their socks off on it (as they did with Smile, as well), and the former was released. As the latter wasn't, hard to see how the fans couldn't keep up with it as the vast majority of them never got to hear it in 1966-67. Also, said fans seemed to like "WIBN" and "GOK" well enough. Let's not even start with that familiar old "Good Vibrations". If anyone constrained Brian on those two albums the way you're implying (i.e. utter bafflement) it was the suits in the tower.

[Andrew G. Doe]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

[Jukka]

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR.

What do you have against On the Island? It's beautiful? Where is your heart?

[Andrew G. Doe]

The track is fine... love Brian's vocals. However, sounds like Deschanel couldn't get it over and done with quick enough. There's insouciant, and then there's bored witless.

[gxios]

Listen to "An Occasional Man" by Jeri Southern from the 1950's.  It has a similar island vibe and the same clipped style of delivery.  I immediately thought of this record when I heard Zoe's song.

[Ang Jones]

Brian seems on many occasions to have been constrained by the Beach Boys rather than truly supported by all of them and it is a pity that not only could some of the Beach Boys not keep up with him but nor could some of his fans.

Of the 29 Beach Boys' studio albums released over 53 years, on which ones was Brian "constrained" by the Beach Boys and which ones could his fans "not keep up with"?

The obvious ones are Pet Sounds and SMiLE.  Some of the fans, like some of the band, wanted to stick with the sort of songs with which they were familiar.

And... ummm... exactly how was Brian "constrained" by the band on Pet Sounds ? They sang their socks off on it (as they did with Smile, as well), and the former was released. As the latter wasn't, hard to see how the fans couldn't keep up with it as the vast majority of them never got to hear it in 1966-67. Also, said fans seemed to like "WIBN" and "GOK" well enough. Let's not even start with that familiar old "Good Vibrations". If anyone constrained Brian on those two albums the way you're implying (i.e. utter bafflement) it was the suits in the tower.

I'm not disputing that the Beach Boys sang on both albums, simply that they could have been more supportive of his ideas. Of course many of the fans appreciated the music from the start but there have always been fans who are happier with All Summer Long than with some of the material from SMiLE.  They are entitled to an opinion but surely Brian is also entitled to move on when he wants to.

The fact that SMiLE wasn't released is pretty irrelevant because lots of tracks from it WERE released.

There seems to have been pressure for Brian to carry on producing songs about summer, surfing etc.  I think some of this came from other band members. Mike seemed and to some extent still seems happier performing the material mainly from the first few years of the band's career.

[Ang Jones]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

I've already written that of course Brian references the past - he does so frequently. But there is a big difference between remembering it and being influenced by it, even quoting from things he has done before, and trying to pretend it's 1965 again, and you're 'going steady'. 

My comment about harking back to the past was the continual wish of some fans that they reunite. The problem I have is with the  refusal to accept that Brian can succeed in what he is doing now and that he needs the Beach Boys. For what? His band are more talented instrumentally. As younger men, their vocals are better. What exactly is to be achieved by a reunion? I don't believe Mike is irreplaceable as a lyricist either. So it is just the idea rather than the reality of the band being together that is the big appeal. And whilst these guys were brilliant at harmony musically, too often that didn't extend to their relationships with each other and so we get obvious divisions, different ideas about direction and even the sour ending as in 2012.

Brian must have been touring with his current band for as long, or even longer, than he toured with the Beach Boys.  Maybe in years to come when Brian has retired, some will regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there.

[filledeplage]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

I've already written that of course Brian references the past - he does so frequently. But there is a big difference between remembering it and being influenced by it, even quoting from things he has done before, and trying to pretend it's 1965 again, and you're 'going steady'.  

My comment about harking back to the past was the continual wish of some fans that they reunite. The problem I have is with the  refusal to accept that Brian can succeed in what he is doing now and that he needs the Beach Boys. For what? His band are more talented instrumentally. As younger men, their vocals are better. What exactly is to be achieved by a reunion? I don't believe Mike is irreplaceable as a lyricist either. So it is just the idea rather than the reality of the band being together that is the big appeal. And whilst these guys were brilliant at harmony musically, too often that didn't extend to their relationships with each other and so we get obvious divisions, different ideas about direction and even the sour ending as in 2012.

Brian must have been touring with his current band for as long, or even longer, than he toured with the Beach Boys.  Maybe in years to come when Brian has retired, some will regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there.

It seems a convoluted argument.  I would agree with Andrew, in this instance that NPP has a BB feel.  It doesn't mean "going steady." How could that inference emerge for lifers with kids and grandkids in tow? And who would revert to 1965? I don't hear any echos that any other band in the BB sphere doesn't give Brian's band props for being accomplished musicians.  Ever.  By the same token, the touring band is far from incompetent.  

What blows my mind is this concept of "retribution" that would or should be foisted upon them, and they should "regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there." And, Brian has never asserted, ever that vengeful tone, that I've heard, and at 73 why would he start now?  Your position is clear.  You don't want another reunion.  

However, to assert a "crime and punishment" theory is a little over the top, in my opinion.  And ultimately they may be Beach Boys but they are Big Boys and can self-determine their career direction.  

Lots of musicians never retire and why many enjoy longevity.  They music gives them renewed enjoyment and plenty of endorphins, (as recent research is revealing) as well as fosters continued creativity.

[harrisonjon]

The format of Paul McCartney's "Many Years From Now" would work for me if it were used for Brian's book. Miles writes the narrative but inserts numerous Macca quotes, plus quotes from Linda. That could be done for Brian's book by including Melinda (and Marilyn) quotes. Anderle, VDP et al would be interesting additions but not essential to the core of the book IMHO.

[Ang Jones]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

I've already written that of course Brian references the past - he does so frequently. But there is a big difference between remembering it and being influenced by it, even quoting from things he has done before, and trying to pretend it's 1965 again, and you're 'going steady'.  

My comment about harking back to the past was the continual wish of some fans that they reunite. The problem I have is with the  refusal to accept that Brian can succeed in what he is doing now and that he needs the Beach Boys. For what? His band are more talented instrumentally. As younger men, their vocals are better. What exactly is to be achieved by a reunion? I don't believe Mike is irreplaceable as a lyricist either. So it is just the idea rather than the reality of the band being together that is the big appeal. And whilst these guys were brilliant at harmony musically, too often that didn't extend to their relationships with each other and so we get obvious divisions, different ideas about direction and even the sour ending as in 2012.

Brian must have been touring with his current band for as long, or even longer, than he toured with the Beach Boys.  Maybe in years to come when Brian has retired, some will regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there.

It seems a convoluted argument.  I would agree with Andrew, in this instance that NPP has a BB feel.  It doesn't mean "going steady." How could that inference emerge for lifers with kids and grandkids in tow? And who would revert to 1965? I don't hear any echos that any other band in the BB sphere doesn't give Brian's band props for being accomplished musicians.  Ever.  By the same token, the touring band is far from incompetent.  

What blows my mind is this concept of "retribution" that would or should be foisted upon them, and they should "regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there." And, Brian has never asserted, ever that vengeful tone, that I've heard, and at 73 why would he start now?  Your position is clear.  You don't want another reunion.  

However, to assert a "crime and punishment" theory is a little over the top, in my opinion.  And ultimately they may be Beach Boys but they are Big Boys and can self-determine their career direction.  

Lots of musicians never retire and why many enjoy longevity.  They music gives them renewed enjoyment and plenty of endorphins, (as recent research is revealing) as well as fosters continued creativity.

NPP for me doesn't particularly have a BB feel, except insofar as Brian Wilson wrote music for the Beach Boys. My reference to 'going steady' was a quote from a TWGMTR song - Isn't It Time. "Isn't it time we go steady again". This whole lyric is about going back to the way things were - just as Do it Again was back in 1969. I quite like the music to this song but the words - well, especially when juxtaposed to some melancholy songs from Brian at the end of the album, give a rather depressing tone to the album for me, denial battling against resignation -  a feeling that is entirely lacking from NPP

Crime and punishment? Have I inadvertently strolled into some alternative universe? I never mentioned either thing. More a case of 'don't it always seem to go you don't know what you've got til it's gone'. Those who are now regretting the fact that the BBs are no longer together may at some point regret that Brian isn't playing with his current band any longer. I know I will. But it isn't about being punished.

I have consistently stated this isn't my call. Neither is it the call of anyone posting here unless Beach Boys are posting using an alias. Like everyone, though, I'm entitled to my own opinion and if it's OK for someone to suggest that they should have a reunion then it's OK for me to suggest they shouldn't.

As for Mike and Bruce, I made no criticism of their band, nor am I suggesting that Mike and Bruce should lose whatever endorphin rush they get from continuing to play.

[filledeplage]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

I've already written that of course Brian references the past - he does so frequently. But there is a big difference between remembering it and being influenced by it, even quoting from things he has done before, and trying to pretend it's 1965 again, and you're 'going steady'.  

My comment about harking back to the past was the continual wish of some fans that they reunite. The problem I have is with the  refusal to accept that Brian can succeed in what he is doing now and that he needs the Beach Boys. For what? His band are more talented instrumentally. As younger men, their vocals are better. What exactly is to be achieved by a reunion? I don't believe Mike is irreplaceable as a lyricist either. So it is just the idea rather than the reality of the band being together that is the big appeal. And whilst these guys were brilliant at harmony musically, too often that didn't extend to their relationships with each other and so we get obvious divisions, different ideas about direction and even the sour ending as in 2012.

Brian must have been touring with his current band for as long, or even longer, than he toured with the Beach Boys.  Maybe in years to come when Brian has retired, some will regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there.

It seems a convoluted argument.  I would agree with Andrew, in this instance that NPP has a BB feel.  It doesn't mean "going steady." How could that inference emerge for lifers with kids and grandkids in tow? And who would revert to 1965? I don't hear any echos that any other band in the BB sphere doesn't give Brian's band props for being accomplished musicians.  Ever.  By the same token, the touring band is far from incompetent.  

What blows my mind is this concept of "retribution" that would or should be foisted upon them, and they should "regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there." And, Brian has never asserted, ever that vengeful tone, that I've heard, and at 73 why would he start now?  Your position is clear.  You don't want another reunion.  

However, to assert a "crime and punishment" theory is a little over the top, in my opinion.  And ultimately they may be Beach Boys but they are Big Boys and can self-determine their career direction.  

Lots of musicians never retire and why many enjoy longevity.  They music gives them renewed enjoyment and plenty of endorphins, (as recent research is revealing) as well as fosters continued creativity.

NPP for me doesn't particularly have a BB feel, except insofar as Brian Wilson wrote music for the Beach Boys. My reference to 'going steady' was a quote from a TWGMTR song - Isn't It Time. "Isn't it time we go steady again". This whole lyric is about going back to the way things were - just as Do it Again was back in 1969. I quite like the music to this song but the words - well, especially when juxtaposed to some melancholy songs from Brian at the end of the album, give a rather depressing tone to the album for me, denial battling against resignation -  a feeling that is entirely lacking from NPP

Crime and punishment? Have I inadvertently strolled into some alternative universe? I never mentioned either thing. More a case of 'don't it always seem to go you don't know what you've got til it's gone'. Those who are now regretting the fact that the BBs are no longer together may at some point regret that Brian isn't playing with his current band any longer. I know I will. But it isn't about being punished.

I have consistently stated this isn't my call. Neither is it the call of anyone posting here unless Beach Boys are posting using an alias. Like everyone, though, I'm entitled to my own opinion and if it's OK for someone to suggest that they should have a reunion then it's OK for me to suggest they shouldn't.

As for Mike and Bruce, I made no criticism of their band, nor am I suggesting that Mike and Bruce should lose whatever endorphin rush they get from continuing to play.

Endorphins are now known to lower blood pressure, boost immune systems, among other benefits not confined to just "Mike and Bruce" but across the board.  It was something I came across recently, but has been in the music therapy domain for a few years now, and seems to make sense after hearing Howie Kaylan (The Turtles or Flo and Eddie) declare at a recent Happy Together concert,"Rock and roll keeps you young."

And, I guess music (or exercise or laughter) is good for all of us, and whether it is the performer or the audience.  It's fun, and Brian is no different. Whether he has an "end date" set in stone, is up to him.  Betty White, the American actress hasn't retired from comedy, and she is in her 90's.  Nor has Tony Bennett. Time will tell.

Of course we are all entitled to an opinion.  What difference does it make if any band members have a nom de plume and are posting here? We all are subject to the same ground rules here.  It isn't the opinion which is intractable, but the concept of "they were imprudent and now have to pay the price" in terms of regret. 

But I disagree that NPP doesn't have a BB feel or potential.  Sail Away and The Right Time sounded like BB potential songs because "what is a BB song" covers a large realm.

[Ang Jones]

It's true that Brian's music references the past and of course a biography and a film that details parts of Brian's life are bound to. The difference is that Brian's latest music isn't just pretending we are back in 1965. Things have changed.  Whatever Happened from No Pier Pressure describes the past,  but it isn't pretending we are still in it.

So, there's not a single track on NPP that doesn't have some kind of connection with that past, or doesn't hark back ? I like the album a lot, more each time I hear it (track 4 excepted) but to me one of its graces is that it's, essentially, Son Of TWGMTR. Some of Brian's very best solo work harks back to the halcyon days of the 60s - TLOS, "Rio Grande" to name but two. Nothing wrong with looking back at the past, or reinventing it. The trick is not to get stuck there. I think David Leaf summed it up very neatly back in the late seventies when I noted on a marked similarity in a new track to one from the sixties: "Brian never forgets a good riff".

Without Brian's past, he has no present, or future.

As for the book, it seemed that Fine forged a close relationship with Brian, enabling him to open up and be... well, Brian. I'm guessing he took all the interviews with him, thus the new collaborator, whoever they may be, must start from scratch again. I wish him well in his challenging task. It's a book I very much want to read.

I've already written that of course Brian references the past - he does so frequently. But there is a big difference between remembering it and being influenced by it, even quoting from things he has done before, and trying to pretend it's 1965 again, and you're 'going steady'.  

My comment about harking back to the past was the continual wish of some fans that they reunite. The problem I have is with the  refusal to accept that Brian can succeed in what he is doing now and that he needs the Beach Boys. For what? His band are more talented instrumentally. As younger men, their vocals are better. What exactly is to be achieved by a reunion? I don't believe Mike is irreplaceable as a lyricist either. So it is just the idea rather than the reality of the band being together that is the big appeal. And whilst these guys were brilliant at harmony musically, too often that didn't extend to their relationships with each other and so we get obvious divisions, different ideas about direction and even the sour ending as in 2012.

Brian must have been touring with his current band for as long, or even longer, than he toured with the Beach Boys.  Maybe in years to come when Brian has retired, some will regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there.

It seems a convoluted argument.  I would agree with Andrew, in this instance that NPP has a BB feel.  It doesn't mean "going steady." How could that inference emerge for lifers with kids and grandkids in tow? And who would revert to 1965? I don't hear any echos that any other band in the BB sphere doesn't give Brian's band props for being accomplished musicians.  Ever.  By the same token, the touring band is far from incompetent.  

What blows my mind is this concept of "retribution" that would or should be foisted upon them, and they should "regret they didn't make the most of that whilst it was there." And, Brian has never asserted, ever that vengeful tone, that I've heard, and at 73 why would he start now?  Your position is clear.  You don't want another reunion.  

However, to assert a "crime and punishment" theory is a little over the top, in my opinion.  And ultimately they may be Beach Boys but they are Big Boys and can self-determine their career direction.  

Lots of musicians never retire and why many enjoy longevity.  They music gives them renewed enjoyment and plenty of endorphins, (as recent research is revealing) as well as fosters continued creativity.

NPP for me doesn't particularly have a BB feel, except insofar as Brian Wilson wrote music for the Beach Boys. My reference to 'going steady' was a quote from a TWGMTR song - Isn't It Time. "Isn't it time we go steady again". This whole lyric is about going back to the way things were - just as Do it Again was back in 1969. I quite like the music to this song but the words - well, especially when juxtaposed to some melancholy songs from Brian at the end of the album, give a rather depressing tone to the album for me, denial battling against resignation -  a feeling that is entirely lacking from NPP

Crime and punishment? Have I inadvertently strolled into some alternative universe? I never mentioned either thing. More a case of 'don't it always seem to go you don't know what you've got til it's gone'. Those who are now regretting the fact that the BBs are no longer together may at some point regret that Brian isn't playing with his current band any longer. I know I will. But it isn't about being punished.

I have consistently stated this isn't my call. Neither is it the call of anyone posting here unless Beach Boys are posting using an alias. Like everyone, though, I'm entitled to my own opinion and if it's OK for someone to suggest that they should have a reunion then it's OK for me to suggest they shouldn't.

As for Mike and Bruce, I made no criticism of their band, nor am I suggesting that Mike and Bruce should lose whatever endorphin rush they get from continuing to play.

Endorphins are now known to lower blood pressure, boost immune systems, among other benefits not confined to just "Mike and Bruce" but across the board.  It was something I came across recently, but has been in the music therapy domain for a few years now, and seems to make sense after hearing Howie Kaylan (The Turtles or Flo and Eddie) declare at a recent Happy Together concert,"Rock and roll keeps you young."

And, I guess music (or exercise or laughter) is good for all of us, and whether it is the performer or the audience.  It's fun, and Brian is no different. Whether he has an "end date" set in stone, is up to him.  Betty White, the American actress hasn't retired from comedy, and she is in her 90's.  Nor has Tony Bennett. Time will tell.

Of course we are all entitled to an opinion.  What difference does it make if any band members have a nom de plume and are posting here? We all are subject to the same ground rules here.  It isn't the opinion which is intractable, but the concept of "they were imprudent and now have to pay the price" in terms of regret. 

But I disagree that NPP doesn't have a BB feel or potential.  Sail Away and The Right Time sounded like BB potential songs because "what is a BB song" covers a large realm.

I have NO problem with musicians continuing to play and indeed tour for as long as they want and as long as people want to see them. Of course this applies to Brian as well as to Mike and Bruce. Nor do I care if any of them post here under an alias. My point simply was that whilst it isn't MY call or the call of any other fan, if Brian, Mike or Bruce are posting here, of course it IS their decision.

Your opinion of NPP is of course down to you. Each of us has a take on this - sometimes others will agree, sometimes not but each opinion has some validity in that it is based on things we have picked up from the music. With the arts the listener/viewer/reader is a part of the equation - there is more to every creative work than just what is put into it but also what we get out of it. Of course as Brian wrote songs for the Beach Boys for many years we are sometimes going to hear things in that music that reminds us of earlier Beach Boys' songs.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Y'know, you're starting to turn into an OSDalike, in that pretty much anything and everything you post these days revolves around the same old premise: you, personally, don't want another reunion and didn't want the 2012 one either. We get the message.

[SMiLE Brian]

Ang, It's a badge of honor to be in the same sentence as OSD! 

[harrisonjon]

They, especially Brian, are generally doing better work at 70+ than they were doing at 50+ or even 40+. Without the 2012 album, Brian's BB career as a truly creative artist would have been more or less over in 1977, when he was half the age he was in 2012.

[puni puni]

And look at those negative reactions that hit this board to word last summer that Brian was working with new artists.

It was the artists he was working with that sparked a negative reaction, not that some of them happened to be new. Also the shamelessness of "Yeah, the only reason these 'guest collaborators' are here is to make a quick buck from 10-year-olds, not to create art." Everybody would have lost their sh*t in anticipation if somebody like R. Stevie Moore or Noah Lennox was called in instead of what's-her-name-coincidentally-signed-to-Capitol-Records and what's-his-name-coincidentally-signed-to-Capitol-Records.

[guitarfool2002]

And look at those negative reactions that hit this board to word last summer that Brian was working with new artists.

It was the artists he was working with that sparked a negative reaction, not that some of them happened to be new. Also the shamelessness of "Yeah, the only reason these 'guest collaborators' are here is to make a quick buck from 10-year-olds, not to create art." Everybody would have lost their sh*t in anticipation if somebody like R. Stevie Moore or Noah Lennox was called in instead of what's-her-name-coincidentally-signed-to-Capitol-Records and what's-his-name-coincidentally-signed-to-Capitol-Records.

Go back and read some of that crap that got posted when the announcements came down. It didn't go down as you're stating it. And I still haven't seen any of those who were insisting certain things about the way the guest artists were chosen to participate ever 'fessing up to being dead wrong on their assumptions of what happened versus what actually did. Including this bit about Capitol Records. But they never do.

"Everybody" is a pretty bold assumption to make, isn't it? If Brian wanted to record this record with members of Animal Collective or any Elephant 6 artists or Mac DeMarco or Ty Segall or Christopher Owens or anyone else we'd name, they would have been contacted.

[sea of tunes]

I would have loved Noah Lennox recording with Brian Wilson. That would have been a mindf***.  

That might actually sound like...if Atticus Ross was given Beach Boys multi-tracks to make mash-ups. Which itself is pretty heavenly. 

If I'm not mistaken, according to Melinda, their children made the suggestions about the guest artists on NPP. I didn't get the impression that Brian was very much involved in selecting the guest artists.

And that's fine, he doesn't have to be involved with that.  He's Brian Freaking Wilson.

[Ang Jones]

SMiLE Brian - thanks for your message!

AGD - Oh, so you mention my referring to a reunion but no mention of the person who brought the subject up.  I didn't post my opinion until after if had yet again been introduced into the conversation. So I infer that going on and on and on about the reunion is fine if you are one of those who wants it but not if you are one of those who doesn't. Just so we've got that straight.

I know my opinion on the subject is tedious in the extreme to you - likewise!

[puni puni]

It's true that some people were anxious simply over the fact that it was a "guest singers album" since Gettin' In Over My Head was so bad, but I seriously doubt people would have had the same reaction had Mac DeMarco been on the bill. I hate that dude and even I would have been excited.

I wouldn't be surprised if Brian has no idea who Elephant 6 is even though people have been asking him about it for 10 years. I wish his kids had better taste in music.