Hodgepodge

[Nicko1234]

Understood, Cam - I get that you feel that mental illness in no way played any role in the OMR incident.

But to be clear, the question I am asking you is: outside of the OMR incident, having nothing to do with the OMR incident... do you feel that people who suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to exactly the same way by those around them as the way emotionally well-adjusted people who do not suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to? Yes, no, maybe?

Wouldn`t it be best to steer away from this topic? Some people could take offence at your mentioning Autism in a previous post and the subject of mental illnesses and how they should be treated is far, far too complex and wide-ranging to be met with a yes or no answer.

I`m sure the vast majority of people on the board have had friends, family members and/or colleagues who have suffered from mental health issues. Discussing how they should be treated, even if other people can diagnose whether they are suffering from a mental health illness at all, is very complicated and could only be sensibly discussed in a much more indepth way.

[Nile]

Nobody really considered Brian mentally ill in 1968, did they? Burnt out from 7 years of working too hard, messing with substances he shouldn't have been, yes but a far cry from the wreck he would become. So forgive Mike for not exactly putting on the kids gloves when telling Brian that the band didn't want to work on Ol' Man River any longer.

I thought Brian was briefly institutionalized right at this time, no?

That was in 1969 - OMR sessions were in summer '68.

I thought that was in summer/fall of 1968! Right after the OMR sessions.. therefore so little of Brian`s new stuff on 20/20!

[Mike's Beard]

I could be wrong. I vaguely remember someone mentioning Brian having a brief spell in one in 1969 and being given some kind of medication which had a noticable effect on his persona. again, I could be wrong.

Understood, Cam - I get that you feel that mental illness in no way played any role in the OMR incident.

But to be clear, the question I am asking you is: outside of the OMR incident, having nothing to do with the OMR incident... do you feel that people who suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to exactly the same way by those around them as the way emotionally well-adjusted people who do not suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to? Yes, no, maybe?

Wouldn`t it be best to steer away from this topic? Some people could take offence at your mentioning Autism in a previous post and the subject of mental illnesses and how they should be treated is far, far too complex and wide-ranging to be met with a yes or no answer.

I`m sure the vast majority of people on the board have had friends, family members and/or colleagues who have suffered from mental health issues. Discussing how they should be treated, even if other people can diagnose whether they are suffering from a mental health illness at all, is very complicated and could only be sensibly discussed in a much more indepth way.

This.

[CenturyDeprived]

Understood, Cam - I get that you feel that mental illness in no way played any role in the OMR incident.

But to be clear, the question I am asking you is: outside of the OMR incident, having nothing to do with the OMR incident... do you feel that people who suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to exactly the same way by those around them as the way emotionally well-adjusted people who do not suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to? Yes, no, maybe?

Wouldn`t it be best to steer away from this topic? Some people could take offence at your mentioning Autism in a previous post and the subject of mental illnesses and how they should be treated is far, far too complex and wide-ranging to be met with a yes or no answer.

I`m sure the vast majority of people on the board have had friends, family members and/or colleagues who have suffered from mental health issues. Discussing how they should be treated, even if other people can diagnose whether they are suffering from a mental health illness at all, is very complicated and could only be sensibly discussed in a much more indepth way.

Well, no offense whatsoever was intended by my mentioning of autism; I personally know family who've been affected by autism, which of course is different then the scenario we are speaking of here... So I don't feel out of line relating personal experiences, as they may tangentially relate to this issue. And I'm aware mental illness is a sensitive topic.

But the point I'm making is that each case of mental illness, regardless of diagnosis, will have factors unique to the affected person, and would likely have its own set of parameters specific to the person and condition. Case-by-case, to be sure. Not simple. Yet I feel some people want to simplify things as to absolve any possibility that any past action by others interacting with Brian could *ever* be considered regrettable, under any circumstances. If you believe, as you've just stated, that simplification is not the appropriate answer (as do I), you cannot possibly think that it's a black and white situation as some people like to make it out to be. Complexity = shades of grey. There's gonna be some maybes.

As you have stated, I agree that it's a complex thing to diagnose and discuss, and I certainly don't pretend to know all the answers as they pertain to this topic, nor should anyone else on this board. But the ultimate thing I'm trying to convey is: the answer to my question which I posed to Cam (which pertains to matters well beyond OMR, yet oddly has only been answered with regards to OMR) cannot possibly be an absolute + steadfast "yes in every possible circumstance". There's no way it can be as simple as that. It's far too complex to get away with saying a blanket "yes" to that, yet I (perhaps wrongly) sense that "yes" will be Cam's answer right around the corner.  

As Mike's Beard correctly pointed out, Brian's condition may not have been diagnosed as early as 1968 (and certainly wasn't fully understood then), and I'm not "blaming" people for not taking the kid gloves approach when they didn't necessarily know all the possible implications of their actions. This is more about what may have been decisions/actions (including, but also beyond OMR) that, in hindsight, when knowing what we know now, might, just might, not necessarily be considered having been the absolutely ideal approach.

[Nicko1234]

Well, no offense whatsoever was intended by my mentioning of autism; I personally know family who've been affected by autism, which of course is different then the scenario we are speaking of here... So I don't feel out of line relating personal experiences, as they may tangentially relate to this issue. And I'm aware mental illness is a sensitive topic.

But the point I'm making is that each case of mental illness, regardless of diagnosis, will have factors unique to the affected person, and would likely have its own set of parameters specific to the person and condition. Case-by-case, to be sure. Not simple. Yet I feel some people want to simplify things as to absolve any possibility that any past action by others interacting with Brian could *ever* be considered regrettable, under any circumstances. If you believe, as you've just stated, that simplification is not the appropriate answer (as do I), you cannot possibly think that it's a black and white situation as some people like to make it out to be. Complexity = shades of grey. There's gonna be some maybes.

As you have stated, I agree that it's a complex thing to diagnose and discuss, and I certainly don't pretend to know all the answers as they pertain to this topic, nor should anyone else on this board. But the ultimate thing I'm trying to convey is: the answer to my question which I posed to Cam (which pertains to matters well beyond OMR, yet oddly has only been answered with regards to OMR) cannot possibly be an absolute + steadfast "yes in every possible circumstance". There's no way it can be as simple as that. It's far too complex to get away with saying a blanket "yes" to that, yet I (perhaps wrongly) sense that "yes" will be Cam's answer right around the corner.  

As Mike's Beard correctly pointed out, Brian's condition may not have been diagnosed as early as 1968 (and certainly wasn't fully understood then), and I'm not "blaming" people for not taking the kid gloves approach when they didn't necessarily know all the possible implications of their actions. This is more about what may have been decisions/actions (including, but also beyond OMR) that, in hindsight, when knowing what we know now, might, just might, not necessarily be considered having been the absolutely ideal approach.

Then you`ll know that this is precisely the sort of comment that could cause offence (albeit doubtless unintentionally).

[Smilin Ed H]

Oops. wrong fucking thread!

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Nobody really considered Brian mentally ill in 1968, did they? Burnt out from 7 years of working too hard, messing with substances he shouldn't have been, yes but a far cry from the wreck he would become. So forgive Mike for not exactly putting on the kids gloves when telling Brian that the band didn't want to work on Ol' Man River any longer.

I thought Brian was briefly institutionalized right at this time, no?

That was in 1969 - OMR sessions were in summer '68.

I thought that was in summer/fall of 1968! Right after the OMR sessions.. therefore so little of Brian`s new stuff on 20/20!

Yes, I'm pretty sure this is what Mike Eder confirmed a few years ago on this board but I'm afraid I can't look right at the moment.

[Cam Mott]

Understood, Cam - I get that you feel that mental illness in no way played any role in the OMR incident.

But to be clear, the question I am asking you is: outside of the OMR incident, having nothing to do with the OMR incident... do you feel that people who suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to exactly the same way by those around them as the way emotionally well-adjusted people who do not suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to? Yes, no, maybe?

To be clear, I answered your question. Mental illness has nothing to do with whether people owe each other an apology, if you owe an apology or are owed an apology it is regardless of mental illness. People should be civil to each other regardless of mental illness.

[Cam Mott]

Yes, I'm pretty sure this is what Mike Eder confirmed a few years ago on this board but I'm afraid I can't look right at the moment.

FWIIW, Carlin puts it as "for a period of time in 1968".

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Yes, I'm pretty sure this is what Mike Eder confirmed a few years ago on this board but I'm afraid I can't look right at the moment.

FWIIW, Carlin puts it as "for a period of time in 1968".

Thanks Cam!

[CenturyDeprived]

Understood, Cam - I get that you feel that mental illness in no way played any role in the OMR incident.

But to be clear, the question I am asking you is: outside of the OMR incident, having nothing to do with the OMR incident... do you feel that people who suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to exactly the same way by those around them as the way emotionally well-adjusted people who do not suffer mental illness should be treated/talked to? Yes, no, maybe?

To be clear, I answered your question. Mental illness has nothing to do with whether people owe each other an apology, if you owe an apology or are owed an apology it is regardless of mental illness. People should be civil to each other regardless of mental illness.

Well, absolutely. People should be civil to each other regardless of mental illness. Though I don't know why you are implying that I am talking about a hypothetical apology. I am not, nor did my question to you say a single iota about an apology.

The entirety of my question consisted of pondering whether or not it might be good for people, when dealing with others who have mental illness, to consider dealing with those people in any remotely different a way compared to how they would deal with others who do not suffer from mental illness. If such a thought should ever in a million years even enter their mind.  

That's the entirety of my question.

I'm asking you *nothing* about apologies, and I'm asking you *nothing* about OMR specifically. It's also *not* a question about what was medically known/diagnosed about Brian's condition circa 1968. I'm well aware that people around Brian were not aware at that time of the extent of his condition, and I am willing to cut them some slack due to that lack of knowledge.

But it doesn't stop me from asking my question to you, Cam, which for some reason still remains unanswered. Maybe it's tough for you to answer and you just want to say you simply "don't know", but you haven't even said that much.

[donald]

Back on track.   20/20 stands as a strong release and BTW, a damn good deal for the money at the time.    BTW, one of Brian's biggest fans is an internationally known expert on autism and in particular, Asperger's syndrome.   Never heard him suggest Brian was in the spectrum but I have wondered what he thought privately.    does'nt change his high opinion of the man as an artist.....maybe informs his respect and opinion.

[guitarfool2002]

Back on Ol' Man River for a minute longer, after it got lost in translation somewhere...

Just to state or re-state the obvious and appeal to logic for a change, a few thoughts.

- Consider the fact that in 1967 a studio was built *inside Brian Wilson's home* with a specific goal to allow *Brian Wilson* easier access to record and produce music for the Beach Boys to release and for Brother Records to release in general...

- Consider the fact that the records which Brian Wilson had produced and had written and recorded sold millions and millions of copies over the previous 5 years leading up to 1967, enough to pay for said studio built inside his home and plenty of cars and fun things for the band members to partake in or give away to a psychotic ex-con and liar and his band of trust-fund-baby STP-addled followers and hangers-on...

- Consider the fact that (according to Carlin) the 1968 failed-disastrous "Maharishi Tour" was Mike's idea and design and brainchild overall to help get the band's fortunes 'back on track', as was the signing and recording of the Pickle Brothers to Brother Records as a viable record selling act to boost the new label...


And it seems absurd, does it not, to have the person who in the same year 1968 cost the band perhaps 6-figures or more thanks to a ridiculously bad idea for a package tour and recording a failed comedy troupe making any accusations at all of "wasting money" or spending too much money on a song, or somehow pointing a finger of blame at the guy who was recording music for the band in the studio which was built in his home to allow him to do that very thing which it seems he was taking too long to do according to the member who put the kibosh on work for that song...

And the whole idea of 'wasting money'...exactly what was the overhead involved in a home studio located and operated in a private home owned and occupied by Mr. and Mrs. Brian Wilson? Seriously, what were the costs associated in booking studio time...*if the studio was located in Brian's house*?

Surely the costs of Brian working on Ol' Man River in his home studio to "the band" as an entity after the fact (i.e. after the bills had been paid) were less than the Maharishi's flower and macrobiotic backstage catering requests from April 1968 or thereabouts, or even the cost of the Manson clan as they helped themselves to Dennis' stuff.

[Mike's Beard]

Well the Manson clan stole out of Dennis' own pocket, not the band's and as woefully misguided as Mike's Maharishi Tour was he actually thought it would be a success. But yeah, I get what you are saying in that without studio fees the cost of working over and over again on something would be minimal.

[guitarfool2002]

Well the Manson clan stole out of Dennis' own pocket, not the band's and as woefully misguided as Mike's Maharishi Tour was he actually thought it would be a success. But yeah, I get what you are saying in that without studio fees the cost of working over and over again on something would be minimal.

I'd say not only are these studio costs associated with Brian recording this music inside his own house barely even minimal compared to booking commercial studio time, the whole point of "wasting money" as described in this thread is almost a non-issue entirely, if not a ridiculous claim entirely.

And tracing that back even more, it could be said that the same source of income that funded the home studio also funded what was in Dennis' pockets which the Manson clan eventually stole, and that funding was primarily based on the Beach Boys songs Brian produced, arranged, wrote and co-wrote since 1962 which sold millions of copies and made the band international superstars who were in demand both in record sales and appearances. Without those songs and productions (i.e. the records themselves) to sell, there would be no studio, nothing to tour behind, no trappings of wealth which the whole band and their families enjoyed, and surely nothing for those Manson-clan idiots to destroy or steal outright. So the same income that paid for studio gear in 1968 also paid for the car and whatever else Dennis lost to Charlie and his 'followers'.

Maybe not as direct as where the Maharishi tour funding came from and was subsequently lost/wasted, but basically from the same source. Different bucket, same well.

[Nicko1234]

Dennis`s imvolvement with Manson has absolutely nothing to do with this topic imo.

And I doubt money does either. The band tired of working on a song. Call in the Feds...

[guitarfool2002]

Dennis`s imvolvement with Manson has absolutely nothing to do with this topic imo.

And I doubt money does either. The band tired of working on a song. Call in the Feds...

Really?

Somebody had quoted part of it, what happened to it?

"When Brian did get out of bed, his behavior grew increasingly strange and obsessive. He recorded dozens of versions of 'Ol' Man River', from the Jerome Kern musical Showboat, constantly finding new combinations of chords, instruments, and voices to alter the feel of the old Broadway standard. "He was always working on it", Stephen Desper remembers. "I definitely recorded that song a lot of times". The guys eventually tired of that, though, and one day Mike announced that he'd had it, thank you very much, and now they were done wasting their time and money on Brian's "Old Man River" experiments. Brian left the studio with his eyes stinging. (And he still remembers how angry it made him: "Mike was really cocky about that one," he complains with a sour smile.  "I remember that much about it.")"

So I guess the group was dropping everything and doing anything, lot of times for Brian on OMR alone, but even they got tired of it and Mike spoke up.

[Nicko1234]

Dennis`s imvolvement with Manson has absolutely nothing to do with this topic imo.

And I doubt money does either. The band tired of working on a song. Call in the Feds...

Really?

Somebody had quoted part of it, what happened to it?

"When Brian did get out of bed, his behavior grew increasingly strange and obsessive. He recorded dozens of versions of 'Ol' Man River', from the Jerome Kern musical Showboat, constantly finding new combinations of chords, instruments, and voices to alter the feel of the old Broadway standard. "He was always working on it", Stephen Desper remembers. "I definitely recorded that song a lot of times". The guys eventually tired of that, though, and one day Mike announced that he'd had it, thank you very much, and now they were done wasting their time and money on Brian's "Old Man River" experiments. Brian left the studio with his eyes stinging. (And he still remembers how angry it made him: "Mike was really cocky about that one," he complains with a sour smile.  "I remember that much about it.")"

So I guess the group was dropping everything and doing anything, lot of times for Brian on OMR alone, but even they got tired of it and Mike spoke up.

Yep. I doubt it was about money. Simple as that. No need to bring Manson into it imo.

[bossaroo]

was OMR recorded entirely in the home studio?

what a marvelous arrangement and production. the version on the 2-fer is perfect to my ears.
sure it may not have been a huge commercial success had it been released, but a remarkable achievement nonetheless.

regardless of Mike or anyone else's objections, the tape reels reveal a true gem.

Brian+the American songbook=some of the best sh*t ever.

[guitarfool2002]

So Mike's suggesting it was a waste of money was as ridiculous as it seems based on the situation at hand? I agree 100%. He was wrong bringing up "wasting" money as he did to explain why he was putting the kibosh on Brian's Ol' Man River efforts since it was nowhere near the amount of time and money the band had wasted on his own ideas to lift the band's fortunes in 1968, ideas that all seemed to do just the opposite of lifting their fortunes.

Manson, I bring up simply because, as I spelled out quite clearly and quite accurately too, the things he and his trust-fund groupies leeched and destroyed from Dennis came from the same well, i.e. the Beach Boys records that sold in the millions. It may have been a different bucket to get the water, but it came from the same well as the spoils enjoyed by the other band members. And around this same time, Manson too was brought into that same studio to record. For those saying Brian recording his music in his home studio was a waste, did they feel likewise about Manson considering all of the peripherals and baggage that came with him?

[Nicko1234]

So Mike's suggesting it was a waste of money was as ridiculous as it seems based on the situation at hand? I agree 100%. He was wrong bringing up "wasting" money as he did to explain why he was putting the kibosh on Brian's Ol' Man River efforts since it was nowhere near the amount of time and money the band had wasted on his own ideas to lift the band's fortunes in 1968, ideas that all seemed to do just the opposite of lifting their fortunes.

Manson, I bring up simply because, as I spelled out quite clearly and quite accurately too, the things he and his trust-fund groupies leeched and destroyed from Dennis came from the same well, i.e. the Beach Boys records that sold in the millions. It may have been a different bucket to get the water, but it came from the same well as the spoils enjoyed by the other band members. And around this same time, Manson too was brought into that same studio to record. For those saying Brian recording his music in his home studio was a waste, did they feel likewise about Manson considering all of the peripherals and baggage that came with him?

Well, the only way I can see money playing any role is if they wanted to use the studio for other things at that time which they thought might be more beneficial. But I can`t see that being a major thing.

I would guess that time was a much bigger factor. I doubt they saw a cover of Ol` Man River as that big a deal and would be amazed that we are discussing it 47 years later. 

[guitarfool2002]

So Mike's suggesting it was a waste of money was as ridiculous as it seems based on the situation at hand? I agree 100%. He was wrong bringing up "wasting" money as he did to explain why he was putting the kibosh on Brian's Ol' Man River efforts since it was nowhere near the amount of time and money the band had wasted on his own ideas to lift the band's fortunes in 1968, ideas that all seemed to do just the opposite of lifting their fortunes.

Manson, I bring up simply because, as I spelled out quite clearly and quite accurately too, the things he and his trust-fund groupies leeched and destroyed from Dennis came from the same well, i.e. the Beach Boys records that sold in the millions. It may have been a different bucket to get the water, but it came from the same well as the spoils enjoyed by the other band members. And around this same time, Manson too was brought into that same studio to record. For those saying Brian recording his music in his home studio was a waste, did they feel likewise about Manson considering all of the peripherals and baggage that came with him?

Well, the only way I can see money playing any role is if they wanted to use the studio for other things at that time which they thought might be more beneficial. But I can`t see that being a major thing.

I would guess that time was a much bigger factor. I doubt they saw a cover of Ol` Man River as that big a deal and would be amazed that we are discussing it 47 years later.  

It seems Brian seemed to think it was a pretty big deal based on the quote posted from the book:  

Brian left the studio with his eyes stinging. (And he still remembers how angry it made him: "Mike was really cocky about that one," he complains with a sour smile.  "I remember that much about it.")"

[Nicko1234]

It seems Brian seemed to think it was a pretty big deal based on the quote posted from the book:  

Indeed. But I don`t think any of the other members would have felt the same way and understandably so.

[Cam Mott]

They did have the expense of the Maha tour and the April tour and the SMiLE recordings (not done in the home studio) all in a row and I don't know what the expenses for the group in their home studio were but apparently they felt they were enough. Although according to the book, after complaining they weren't going to spend more time and money on OMR, in the next page or so they are spending more time and money on another version of OMR.

[Mike's Beard]

So Mike's suggesting it was a waste of money was as ridiculous as it seems based on the situation at hand? I agree 100%. He was wrong bringing up "wasting" money as he did to explain why he was putting the kibosh on Brian's Ol' Man River efforts since it was nowhere near the amount of time and money the band had wasted on his own ideas to lift the band's fortunes in 1968, ideas that all seemed to do just the opposite of lifting their fortunes.

Manson, I bring up simply because, as I spelled out quite clearly and quite accurately too, the things he and his trust-fund groupies leeched and destroyed from Dennis came from the same well, i.e. the Beach Boys records that sold in the millions. It may have been a different bucket to get the water, but it came from the same well as the spoils enjoyed by the other band members. And around this same time, Manson too was brought into that same studio to record. For those saying Brian recording his music in his home studio was a waste, did they feel likewise about Manson considering all of the peripherals and baggage that came with him?

But that was Dennis' own personal money and belongings the Family helped themselves to. If they'd signed Manson to Brother and gave him an open expenses account on Brother's dime then he would be a legimate example of the band wasting cash.
On a side note I'd like to add that with a bit of editing the version of Ol' Man River on the Friends/2020 twofer could easily have been included on 20/20. Maybe Brian was repeating the mistakes of Smile a little too close for comfort and was scrapping take after perfectly usable take of OMR? Pure conjecture on my part I know but that could be vaild reason for the band calling time on the song.