gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 01:51:32 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Brian August 1967 interview  (Read 21506 times)
Ian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1833


View Profile
« on: April 18, 2015, 07:12:37 AM »

I published parts of this interview in The Beach Boys In Concert book but the book had so much stuff in it that it was never discussed.  But, I find this interview, from the August 25 1967 Honolulu Advertiser,  fascinating. 
          While rehearsing at the HIC Arena Brian explained to reporter Wayne Harada that he was appearing with the band because “We wanted to do another live album where the mood’s good.  And it’s great here.  We’re calling it Lei’d in Hawaii.”  Brian admitted, “I had a particular insecurity about traveling, so I stopped doing the live shows with the group.  Now that I’m back again, it’s a bit frightening... I think rock n’ roll-the pop scene- is happening. It’s great. But I think basically, the Beach Boys are squares. We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings. I write most of the songs and I’ve taken some drugs, which have opened my mind to a wider range of musical creativity. I write anywhere, usually at home. I don’t write about drugs and those things, though. As I said, we’re not a hip group. We’re pretty square.”
            Only three months after the end of Smile, Brian expresses both love and, to my eyes, resentment towards the group.  In a 1966 interview that I included in the book told Peter Jones of Record Mirror, “I know that in some circles we’re not regarded as all that ‘hip’ or ‘in.’ This is maybe, because, we haven’t just arrived from nowhere with something new with a new label. But I don’t care too much what anyone says, so long as I know I’m staying ahead- right up to the limit of my present capabilities.  I don’t put out anything I don’t respect. And I know for sure that the Beach Boys brought something new into rock ‘n’ roll.” But a year later-he is adamant that the Beach Boys are "square" and "not happening."  Is this just plain speaking or is there resentment about the Beach Boys decision to question and ultimately move away from the more avant-garde direction he was going in with Van Dyke?  Hard to say.
Logged
phirnis
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2594



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2015, 07:38:33 AM »

I think these are all intriguing observations. Personally I feel that the stuff they did around that time was so great because it was somewhere in between downright square and playfully avant-garde without any of the music sounding forced. I adore the Surf's Up album they did a couple of years later but that one strikes me as a somewhat self-conscious (although very inspired!) attempt at being hip while trying to shake off the "square" thing.
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2015, 07:43:50 AM »

I published parts of this interview in The Beach Boys In Concert book but the book had so much stuff in it that it was never discussed.  But, I find this interview, from the August 25 1967 Honolulu Advertiser,  fascinating. 
          While rehearsing at the HIC Arena Brian explained to reporter Wayne Harada that he was appearing with the band because “We wanted to do another live album where the mood’s good.  And it’s great here.  We’re calling it Lei’d in Hawaii.”  Brian admitted, “I had a particular insecurity about traveling, so I stopped doing the live shows with the group.  Now that I’m back again, it’s a bit frightening... I think rock n’ roll-the pop scene- is happening. It’s great. But I think basically, the Beach Boys are squares. We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings. I write most of the songs and I’ve taken some drugs, which have opened my mind to a wider range of musical creativity. I write anywhere, usually at home. I don’t write about drugs and those things, though. As I said, we’re not a hip group. We’re pretty square.”
            Only three months after the end of Smile, Brian expresses both love and, to my eyes, resentment towards the group.  In a 1966 interview that I included in the book told Peter Jones of Record Mirror, “I know that in some circles we’re not regarded as all that ‘hip’ or ‘in.’ This is maybe, because, we haven’t just arrived from nowhere with something new with a new label. But I don’t care too much what anyone says, so long as I know I’m staying ahead- right up to the limit of my present capabilities.  I don’t put out anything I don’t respect. And I know for sure that the Beach Boys brought something new into rock ‘n’ roll.” But a year later-he is adamant that the Beach Boys are "square" and "not happening."  Is this just plain speaking or is there resentment about the Beach Boys decision to question and ultimately move away from the more avant-garde direction he was going in with Van Dyke?  Hard to say.

Interesting. I'm not picking up resentment toward anyone or anything. It seems to me he is just recognizing that he and the Boys and what he writes are out of fashion or "not happening".
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
puni puni
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 885


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2015, 08:47:29 AM »

The comment "It doesn’t hurt now" sort of suggests that he still didn't care what other people thought at that point.
Logged
sockittome
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 842


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2015, 09:21:30 AM »

I don't know if I would call it out and out resentment, but it also doesn't sound like just an observation.  At this point Brian was still in the game (and contrary to some popular opinion, he would be for the next few years), but he had to be pretty frustrated with the direction things were going with the Boys.  A lot of drama was going down and clearly he had a lot on his mind.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2015, 09:53:47 AM »

I published parts of this interview in The Beach Boys In Concert book but the book had so much stuff in it that it was never discussed.  But, I find this interview, from the August 25 1967 Honolulu Advertiser,  fascinating. 
          While rehearsing at the HIC Arena Brian explained to reporter Wayne Harada that he was appearing with the band because “We wanted to do another live album where the mood’s good.  And it’s great here.  We’re calling it Lei’d in Hawaii.”  Brian admitted, “I had a particular insecurity about traveling, so I stopped doing the live shows with the group.  Now that I’m back again, it’s a bit frightening... I think rock n’ roll-the pop scene- is happening. It’s great. But I think basically, the Beach Boys are squares. We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings. I write most of the songs and I’ve taken some drugs, which have opened my mind to a wider range of musical creativity. I write anywhere, usually at home. I don’t write about drugs and those things, though. As I said, we’re not a hip group. We’re pretty square.”
            Only three months after the end of Smile, Brian expresses both love and, to my eyes, resentment towards the group.  In a 1966 interview that I included in the book told Peter Jones of Record Mirror, “I know that in some circles we’re not regarded as all that ‘hip’ or ‘in.’ This is maybe, because, we haven’t just arrived from nowhere with something new with a new label. But I don’t care too much what anyone says, so long as I know I’m staying ahead- right up to the limit of my present capabilities.  I don’t put out anything I don’t respect. And I know for sure that the Beach Boys brought something new into rock ‘n’ roll.” But a year later-he is adamant that the Beach Boys are "square" and "not happening."  Is this just plain speaking or is there resentment about the Beach Boys decision to question and ultimately move away from the more avant-garde direction he was going in with Van Dyke?  Hard to say.

Interesting. I'm not picking up resentment toward anyone or anything. It seems to me he is just recognizing that he and the Boys and what he writes are out of fashion or "not happening".

Do you really not think he wasn't annoyed/embarrassed by the band's image/perception at the time? That he was perfectly okay with it, and that his attempts to make a groundbreaking, psychedelic album was not at least partially an attempt to change/evolve that image?
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2015, 11:55:56 AM »

You guys are reading the whole things right. He's resigned to not being the new band and that they are thought of as square in some circles but THEY get enjoyment from their recordings of the songs Brian writes with his opened up mind with his wider range of creativity and his staying ahead right up to the limit of his capabilities.

Also "But I don’t care too much what anyone says, " and "I don’t put out anything I don’t respect". There is your answers to what happened with SMiLE and H&V and Smiley Smile.

Not a guy being regretful or compromising for anyone imo.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2132


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2015, 02:51:39 PM »

"It doesn't hurt now" - so it did hurt in the past?  Makes me think perhaps it does still hurt.  I assume he's referring to the Beach Boys getting grief for their out of date stage outfits and stage show, as related by Dennis whose comments inspired the final lyrics of Surf's Up.

Rock and roll and pop is happening and is great but the Beach Boys aren't happening they're square (and are not so great, by implication).  They enjoy their recordings Brian has used drugs and has wider musical creativity but he doesn't write about "drugs and those things" (the new drug inspired psychedelic avant garde rock music) because the Beach Boys aren't hip.  Sounds like theire is definitely regret and sadness but also resignation that he was not able to bring the Beach boys into the forefront of rock music as he had planned with Smile.
Logged
Mr. Verlander
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2015, 09:05:16 AM »

That little bit does put a bit of a different spin on it-"It doesn't hurt now". Maybe it did hurt quite a bit around the time that Pet Sounds was completed, SMiLE (as we all know) was going to be the big push towards getting the Boys to be viewed in a different light. Once it fell apart, during that time frame between SMiLE ending and Smiley beginning, Brian came to the conclusion that he talks about here, which is "screw it, we'll just be who we are, and if the people dig it, they dig it. If they don't, tough sh*t".

I've never read this before, good find!
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2015, 09:24:01 AM »

"We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings." Or does it mean them being square for his not writing drug songs doesn't hurt "now" because they had so much luck before and they still get enjoyment from their recordings?
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2015, 10:36:51 AM »

"We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings." Or does it mean them being square for his not writing drug songs doesn't hurt "now" because they had so much luck before and they still get enjoyment from their recordings?

Brian was trying to convince himself that everything was ok, that he could be cool with their stagnant image, etc. But it's pretty obvious he's trying to save face, and trying to create a reality which hurts less than the actual reality of the time. Brian's always been one for escapist behavior. It's not dissimilar to denial, much like the act of posters refusing to think he could possibly have harbored the tiniest ounce of resentment towards his bandmates, especially his cousin. And I'm sure the resentment went both ways, no matter if it wasn't always at surface level. To think this is hogwash is to be an ostrich with one's head in the proverbial sand, IMHO.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 11:56:14 AM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2132


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2015, 12:34:25 PM »

Ian - any more interviews you came across while working on the book that you didn't have room for reprinting?  I'd love to read more especially around the 1966-1969 time frame!
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2015, 01:49:15 PM »

"We’re not happening-but we’ve been so lucky in the past. It doesn’t hurt now. We get enjoyment in our recordings." Or does it mean them being square for his not writing drug songs doesn't hurt "now" because they had so much luck before and they still get enjoyment from their recordings?

Brian was trying to convince himself that everything was ok, that he could be cool with their stagnant image, etc. But it's pretty obvious he's trying to save face, and trying to create a reality which hurts less than the actual reality of the time. Brian's always been one for escapist behavior. It's not dissimilar to denial, much like the act of posters refusing to think he could possibly have harbored the tiniest ounce of resentment towards his bandmates, especially his cousin. And I'm sure the resentment went both ways, no matter if it wasn't always at surface level. To think this is hogwash is to be an ostrich with one's head in the proverbial sand, IMHO.

IMHO, he isn't even referring to himself in the "hurt" quote except as a member of the "we"/"Beach Boys", which is the context within which the "It doesn’t hurt now" sits in the middle. It doesn't hurt the group now, with being "square" the "it". WE'RE not happening but WE'VE had a lot of luck in the PAST, being square doesn't hurt the group NOW, and the WE get a lot of enjoyment in OUR recordings .
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2132


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2015, 05:41:17 AM »

It doesn't hurt now  - to me is a very different meaning than it doesn't hurt us (the group) now - if he meant the latter he would have said it that way.  So I beg to differ.
Logged
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2871


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2015, 06:17:45 AM »

I think I'm with Cam on this one. It doesn't hurt to be considered squares now - we've had an amazing run of success, much more than virtually any other rock and roll group has ever had, so we are now content to just make our albums and have less success with them, sales wise. Had our career always been the way it is now, we'd have been hurt by it - both emotionally and financially (maybe he means one or the other or both) but now it doesn't affect us as much (remember this was only 1967 -- just the beginning of the downward sales spiral).

Again this is just my interpretation. Now, that said, whether he is being honest or not is a whole other issue. Brian (as well as Dennis for that matter) was always walking the line between wanting to do things his way and wanting to please people and hear that he was doing a good job. It's hard to imagine these two seemingly opposite and competing feelings going on in one person but hey, people are complex, especially people like Brian Wilson. For such a long time, Brian could get away with doing things his way and being very, very successful at it, being told he was a genius, etc.  By 1967, things were starting to change.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2015, 06:21:38 AM by Chocolate Shake Man » Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2015, 07:44:31 AM »

I think I'm with Cam on this one. It doesn't hurt to be considered squares now - we've had an amazing run of success, much more than virtually any other rock and roll group has ever had, so we are now content to just make our albums and have less success with them, sales wise. Had our career always been the way it is now, we'd have been hurt by it - both emotionally and financially (maybe he means one or the other or both) but now it doesn't affect us as much (remember this was only 1967 -- just the beginning of the downward sales spiral).

Again this is just my interpretation. Now, that said, whether he is being honest or not is a whole other issue. Brian (as well as Dennis for that matter) was always walking the line between wanting to do things his way and wanting to please people and hear that he was doing a good job. It's hard to imagine these two seemingly opposite and competing feelings going on in one person but hey, people are complex, especially people like Brian Wilson. For such a long time, Brian could get away with doing things his way and being very, very successful at it, being told he was a genius, etc.  By 1967, things were starting to change.

They also had just had one of the most famous hippest hits of Pop history and had been voted hip above all others (including the Beatles) plus they had just recorded (arguably) but not released yet one of the most avant garde albums of all time and had had a #12 with a song in the style of their previous hippest hit. It seems to me Brian is, as he implies to me, not concerned with what some others think on the strength of their mentioned past and current accomplishments in which he seems to take pride.

Also, hadn't H&V just/was-about-to-have risen to number 12 on Billboard at the time of the interview and might have been still on its way higher as far as Brian knew at the time.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2015, 09:10:11 AM by Cam Mott » Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Autotune
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1699



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2015, 09:15:52 AM »

The most amazing thing for me is the short time span: i.e. how quickly (1 year) they developed a concioisness that they weren't hip anymore. Not too long before they had their last hit, but yet there is this unhip consciousness in mid 1967. Must have been heartbreaking.
Logged

"His lyrical ability has never been touched by anyone, except for Mike Love."

-Brian Wilson on Van Dyke Parks (2015)
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2871


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2015, 11:18:53 AM »

Well,  the switch seems to be that Brian goes from commenting on others who think The Beach Boys are square to saying himself that they are square.

I'm also curious about the Good Vibrations single. Yes, it was a huge smash and to my ears it sounds as hip as any of the music really swings from that period does. But did it connect with the hip crowd totally? After all, the #1 songs from around that time included Cherish, Last Train to Clarksville, Poor Side of Town, Winchester Cathedral, and I'm a Believer. The Monkees were probably the biggest selling act during this period. Good Vibes was definitely a trippy piece of psych pop, but was it perceived that way by the hip community? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know. Heroes and Villains likewise, one would assume, would have been appealing to a hip crowd but Hendrix dismissed it as psychedelic barbershop, which may be indicative of how the hip crowd, particularly in America saw the band. In England, surely, (where they beat the Beatles in a poll) it was a somewhat different story but at that point at least it seemed to be the American audience that Brian was thinking about.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2015, 11:20:44 AM by Chocolate Shake Man » Logged
Mr. Tiger
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2015, 11:44:18 AM »

If Brian was just fine and dandy with being at the helm of a group that he now considered 'square' (rather than the object of his greatest aspirations), why take his name off the producer's credit when we know he still did the producing for Smiley Smile?    For me, the evidence that he was psychologically distancing himself from the other Beach Boys post-SMiLE was already evident; this only confirms it further. As others have said, the contrast with the way he had talked about his group only a year before is staggering.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2015, 12:39:32 PM »

Well,  the switch seems to be that Brian goes from commenting on others who think The Beach Boys are square to saying himself that they are square.

I'm also curious about the Good Vibrations single. Yes, it was a huge smash and to my ears it sounds as hip as any of the music really swings from that period does. But did it connect with the hip crowd totally? After all, the #1 songs from around that time included Cherish, Last Train to Clarksville, Poor Side of Town, Winchester Cathedral, and I'm a Believer. The Monkees were probably the biggest selling act during this period. Good Vibes was definitely a trippy piece of psych pop, but was it perceived that way by the hip community? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know. Heroes and Villains likewise, one would assume, would have been appealing to a hip crowd but Hendrix dismissed it as psychedelic barbershop, which may be indicative of how the hip crowd, particularly in America saw the band. In England, surely, (where they beat the Beatles in a poll) it was a somewhat different story but at that point at least it seemed to be the American audience that Brian was thinking about.

This is a question that is maybe worthy of a separate discussion/thread entirely!  Smiley

I'll start by name-checking Tower Of Power and asking "What Is Hip?" For the whole discussion you need to relate it specifically to the time period, what had happened prior to Fall 1966 in popular culture and what immediately followed into 1967.

California Hip was different than New York Hip, which was different from London Hip, et cetera. There was an undercurrent common to each and every, yet what and who was considered hip and what comprised all of that was noticeably different in each of those regions which were at that time the epicenters of popular music and popular culture in general, minus a few notable examples like Motown, Stax, etc. But the trends which would become mainstream were bubbling under in each of those areas far before the mass media amplified them.

Look at Hendrix - The US had ignored him more or less, yet he was the toast of London among the elite young musicians. He was basically unknown until Monterey Pop, and even as word spread he wasn't a well-known name. The Monkees ironically invited him to tour with them that summer, a move which was eventually ill-fated but which also spoke to the scene in general.

Hendrix's comment on Heroes, I've said on this board in much more detail, was I believe a misnomer and perhaps taken too far out of the context in which he made the remark. He didn't dig the Heroes single and said so. Yet he would in the next few years go on to build up and use his own personal studio where he and Eddie Kramer could do to the guitar and studio production what Brian was trying to do with voices and studio production - totally redefine and reshape what was possible in a recording studio, and how many ways accepted sounds could be transformed into things no one had heard nor knew was possible outside perhaps avant garde circles.

They were chasing versions of the same goal. So what did Hendrix call Heroes, a "psychedelic barbershop quartet"...he also said of The Monkees "Oh God, I hate them. Dishwater." Yet the Monkees in summer of '67 essentially invited him on board to tour on a private jet with the band who was among the hottest and most successful that year, and by most accounts they had a good time together, hanging with Stephen Stills among others for the short-lived experience. The Monkees' crowd wasn't in tune with Hendrix, they parted ways, simple as that.

So was Hendrix's Monkees comment saying they were "dishwater" perhaps taken to mean more than what or why (or from where) he was making the comment? I think so. Plus, Hendrix's word didn't quite carry the weight it would among "hip" musicians later simply because outside of London, his name didn't carry much weight.

The Monkees - Great example. Their TV show was designed a certain way from the outset. It would look mainstream, it would look corny and hokey and "safe", yet there were scenes deliberately included to shatter the walls of convention and open up a bit of what was going on under the media radar to the mainstream "kids" watching (and their parents who quite possibly had no idea what was going on half the time).

Inside jokes about drugs, a group of young men living on their own in a beach house with no parents or Dad-Mom figures in sight to help them work through life's problems, long hair, scenes that would break the imaginary wall of sitcom writing where they'd totally interrupt the scene at random times to make comments or walk off the set...really unique and actually pretty subversive stuff for mid-60's network TV.

The hip folks watching I think were the ones who "got" what the show was doing under the surface. Those artists, musicians, writers, etc who went on the record prove that the message beyond the feel-good kids' TV comedy audience saw something between the lines, and perhaps recognized this show was trying to break down some of those walls of convention that were firmly in place for what could or could not be done on TV.

Now factor in Good Vibrations and when that record came out.

That, too, broke down walls for what could and could not be done on a pop record. The Beatles on Sullivan, 2/64, guys with long(er) hair singing and playing songs they wrote themselves, record audiences watched. Bob Dylan, "Like A Rolling Stone", put elements of Beat poetry and free verse into a single with a rock band backing and catchy chorus hook, and have it run a few minutes longer than what was conventional in a pop singles market. Rock music for the masses, yet with that undertone of kicking down the door so others could follow.

Once you have that mainstream success with something unconventional, or so new it can't be labeled, it opens the door wide enough for others to get the chance to do similar things in their own music. Beatles on Sullivan, record audiences watching, Dylan's "Rolling Stone" single, obscure poetry set to a rock backing with a radio-friendly hook...

...Good Vibrations making a pocket symphony with distinct movements that each had a sonic stamp of its own, using a half-dozen studios to record the song's in sections rather than a start-to-finish performance, using bizarre instruments and sounds, singing about the semi-psychedelic notion of vibrations, good vibes/bad vibes, etc...

It went to #1. There are quite a few comments already on the record from those we'd consider "hip" in the music business of 1966 where they said this was a pretty monumental record that opened up some doors via its success. Some of them also say the success may have trapped Brian in some ways, and Brian himself has said "how do you follow up something like Good Vibrations?".

But consider what records that came before Good Vibrations had used anything like the sounds and structure of that record. A pop single with distinct movements which developed and morphed section-to-section. It was psychedelic before mainstream media types could say what exactly that meant, and before many media types even had a clue what that meant.

Remember, 1966 - You still wore a coat and a tie to the office or the newsroom, if you were 22 or 52. By the end of 1967, there were kaftans, sandals, long hair and beards, paisley, Nehru jackets, whatever the case among journalists and media offices. The times changed that fast.

And like Dylan, like Beatles on Sullivan, someone had to kick down that door of convention to let others come in, and demonstrate that *we* (and I use that term deliberately) can get these things we're all talking about into the public mainstream and have it be *successful* commercially. Reach our audience, get it started so it grows and grows.

Unique to 1966 as a notion? Nah. But the timing was such that it all came together through various media to get what was being talked about if not planned in the major pop-culture opinion-shaping markets of Hip like NY, LA, London, etc into the mainstream discussion. What better than a hit TV show, a hit single, etc. Monkees, Dylan, Beatles, Hendrix...

...and Good Vibrations through the musical mind of Brian Wilson, who set to music that brief enough inkling of the scene which was spawning all of these mindsets and ideas to become a #1 record and have millions buying and singing along to a pop record that was actually more subversive and more packed with subliminal meanings (especially musical) than many singing along and buying realized at the time.

I think the hip people knew what they were hearing and appreciated it for what it was and what it was trying to do if not overtly than by design and sound. Many of them have said as much in interviews. It was that #1 record success that said "the door is being held open, we can do this too" and that's exactly what they did. "Good Vibrations" can have all kinds of weird-ass sounds and psychedelic undertones and become a #1 record? Let's do it too. Check 1967 for more proof of this.



« Last Edit: April 20, 2015, 12:41:17 PM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
clack
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 537


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2015, 02:15:00 PM »

Good Vibrations was cutting edge stuff in Oct 1966. But then the Doors, Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, Hendrix, Cream and the Velvet Underground put out lps in the 1st months of '67. And it wasn't just the sound of the records, it was the image and the attitudes of the bands.

Even dope-smoking folk rock acts like Donovan, the Mamas and the Papas and the Lovin' Spoonful started looking square...
Logged
Ian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1833


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: April 20, 2015, 04:10:41 PM »

As I wrote in the book, at that August 1967 appearance they were still wearing striped shirts and they were only just beginning to take control of album covers and packaging. Basically the substance (music) was still great but they didn't pay enough attention to image.  This was something the British bands were much more attuned to.
Logged
Ian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1833


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: April 20, 2015, 04:15:22 PM »

The main point I was making was that Brian seemed to lose all interest in the bbs by 1971 and even in 1968 and 69 he was trying to make something happen with other artists.  So I am wondering if that discontent wasn't already evident in that interview. In the 1993 documentary with don was he said the beach boys wanted to make different music from him and that it created a rift
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 20, 2015, 07:19:10 PM »

So I am wondering if that discontent wasn't already evident in that interview. In the 1993 documentary with don was he said the beach boys wanted to make different music from him and that it created a rift

I got sidetracked with the GV stuff, but this is what I also picked up in the interview and wanted to discuss a bit more.

I'd take it a step further and suggest we not only could detect some of the discontent in the interview, but we could all but see (and hear) it play out in the events of Fall 1967, in other words the 2-3 months of Brian's music-making activities that immediately followed this interview.

A sampling of some things he recorded or worked on that we have proof of via recordings and session sheets Fall '67: Cool Cool Water, Been Way Too Long, Darlin (Redwood), Time To Get Alone (Redwood), Surf's Up (solo Brian performance).

Of those particular 5 tracks, 4 of them have either direct Smile roots or a direct and unmistakeable Smile-era influence in sound or construction. Darlin was targeted for Danny Hutton.

After the Hawaii re-rerecords, a new Beach Boys single was needed. Thus, "Wild Honey" was recorded as the first major post-Hawaii song project that fall. R&B sound, "home studio" vibe with that piano, but the main hook was a Theremin - that was no coincidence. This was a single, go back to GV for another Theremin-based hook right out of the gate.

But after that, I'd argue the most musically complex recording and the song/session requiring the most effort from Brian as writer-producer-arranger was "Time To Get Alone", what I still consider one of the highlights of his entire career. There were the little sonic nods to Smile, like the discordant string arrangement that went from bizarre sweeps and whines to beautiful cohesion in the same section of music. A triumphant song and section featuring orchestral overdubs, and the usual "Brian chords" that made it unique. And a polished studio sound that didn't have the home-brew vibe that marked anything the Beach Boys released in the latter half of 1967.

It was "studio Brian" again, for lack of a better description, going for full arrangements and a developed, high-fidelity production, only it wasn't done for or with the Beach Boys.

Then it eventually turned into a debacle as The Beach Boys did not want Brian working with Redwood, they wanted him to produce their next album.

What exactly was that next album? Originally it was going to cull live tracks recorded in '66 and '67 (notably Hawaii which was re-recorded as soon as they got home from Hawaii), and have those live tracks mixed in with the new stuff. But wasn't that sort of a half-assed concept in some ways? Beach Boys old hits recorded (or re-recorded) 'live' padding the album of new material. A compromise? A masterplan all along? Topic for debate. But either way, that original concept of tacking on live material from several shows in the vaults shows perhaps less effort and enthusiasm than the few minutes of beauty and musical sophistication on a track like Time To Get Alone.

That was where Brian's efforts were focused, it would seem. That was, again, "studio Brian" doing up a full production rather than cutting corners, or delivering half-songs with more sparse band backing as heard on most of Wild Honey.

I'm glad they eventually scrapped the live-studio hybrid plan for Wild Honey, but doesn't it show you where the enthusiasm may have been to compare even Time To Get Alone to that original concept of Wild Honey to include vault material?

And take into consideration that solo recording of Surf's Up. One of the most poignant recordings I've ever heard, a total mind-blower...but where did that come from emotionally, practically, and even in the sense of what was it going to be used for if anything? That's Brian, Fall '67, revisiting the centerpiece of his scrapped masterpiece, as the Beach Boys were doing the white R&B sound, which no coincidence Brian also suggested as a new direction, according to Carl.

Surf's Up and Time To Get Alone on one side, and what become Wild Honey on the other...can't you see and hear a musician split between two worlds and two different musical outlooks as of Fall 1967?

Then factor in Been Way Too Long, Cool Cool Water - Those are from Smile, both of them. Maybe not in name, not in exact form and song structure, but those are Smile ideas getting recorded in Fall '67. Hardly R&B, hardly the "Wild Honey sound" if you will.

Factor in Darlin. This was a hit, a catchy hit with a mean hook and killer groove, reshaping and streamlining and earlier composition which was also given to an outside artist into something for Brian's pal Danny to sing with his group. It had that undefinable "oomph" that sounded more like a hit record than I'd suggest even Wild Honey. Grooved like a motherfucker, didn't it? And it was Brian doing a tune for another "outside" artist.

I'd say all of the above 5 examples I cited could be Brian making music for Brian. There is such a divide, to my ears at least, between those and what he was doing for the Beach Boys. Sometimes the two would intersect and produce terrific results, like Let The Wind Blow, Country Air...hints of "studio Brian" again. But still lacking the icing on top of the cake that I hear in TTGA or Darlin, or the Smile-era quirkiness in CCW and BWTL.

I hear the discontent coming to fruition in those recordings. Not only did Brian hint at it in the Aug '67 interview, but I think he also put it onto tape in the studio via those tracks and perhaps a few others that sound worlds away from what the Beach Boys were doing in Fall '67, song wise, which we'd hear on Wild Honey.

It's a musician torn between making music for himself and making music with and for his band. Not hard to tell which is which just by listening.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: April 21, 2015, 03:53:51 AM »

I'm not seeing discontent with the group in Brian's words. Brian defines what he means by hip/happening and square in the statement in this case and he includes himself as one of the squares and even the source of their then current squareness. The scene is happening but WE are squares and we are squares because I don't write songs about drugs.

To me this quote shows Brian is Brian because he doesn't think like everybody else and he isn't concerned with other people's ideas of hip. He puts them as content with their current work and beyond the current definition of hip/happening due to their past record of bringing something new to the scene.

Surely Brian was the one who was keeping them in matching striped shirts on stage. They all dressed hip privately and Dennis complained about their stagewear but they still kept wearing it. As I remember the shirts weren't the problem, they were still popular with most of the country, the matchy matchy stage uniform was what was passé.

They are working on live material because they want a live album with a particular feel according to Brian. Brian has had outside projects for years already and they all wanted BRI so they could all put out as a group and also do outside projects as individuals, it was the group's plan and something Brian had been doing and I believe Mike (and Bruce) had already done. Because of BRI and the home studio they were freer individually and freer and more unified as a group at the same time in my opinion.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.652 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!