Van Dyke Barks

[Autotune]

But guitarfool, claiming that Mike's fastball during the Smile year was to be limited to a Do It Again-type collaboration, or that the fact that did not re-work the lyrics to the Smile stuff that got released eventually is an indication of an inability to collaborate with Brian on Smile is more wildly speculative than my post. Your remark about Mike not pitching lyrics during Van Dyke's tenure as Brian's lyricist being an indication of lack of interest/will/skill (?) is hard to understand.  

Fact is Roger's lyrics to Don't Worry Baby show a sensitive side that good or bad was to remain unexplored later in time. The possible Pet Sounds collaboration is wild (absurd) speculation, but why would saying that he was capable of sensitive lyrics be off-base? Likewise, the Wilson-Love collaboration and its creative arch is for all to see; with Good Vibes he came up with lyrics that related beautifully to Brian's musical techniques that would be further explored on Smile, while reaching for audiences that Wilson-Parks never reached. I'm not just saying they would have remained putting out big hits, they could have achieved artistically-fulfilling results as well, and gotten the album finished (if we take Van's withdrawal as a cause for its abortion).

I'm saying there is a limit that gets reached where speculation starts getting into fantasy, especially where reality is readily available. Did Mike add anything at all lyrically to Surfs Up, Cabinessence, Wonderful, Wind Chimes? No. He could have, especially the later ones when the band needed material to shape and fill their albums, but he did not. They used the lyrics almost 99% verbatim from the original Wilson-Parks songwriting collaboration, and the only person to add anything new was when Brian showed up and delivered the final lyric line in Surfs Up's coda. Where was Mike if he was filled to the brim with potential to bring the Good Vibrations lyrical and commercial magic to the Smile table? He didn't do anything! If the speculation is why he didn't after speculating that if he *did* things would have been better for the music and the band overall, that's anyone's choice speculate away, have a blast. But again, it's pure fantasy that has no conclusion.

I never said Mike's "fastball" was *limited* to Do It Again type radio singles, I just said that was his fastball which he delivered and which he could deliver. Could that be sustained over a whole album? Did the theme of certain albums call for that approach, or something different? Did Mike want to write full albums like that, did Brian want him to write full albums like that...it goes on and on as long as we want to spin the speculations into scenarios. But what happened...happened. Mike could deliver a hook for a hit single, that was his fastball. Maybe that's not always what the music needed, though. It's not a bust, it's not a dig at Mike, it's just the way it actually happened. God Only Knows turned out perfectly, as did California Girls, what happened is what ultimately served the songs best. Mike could have done God-Only-Knows what to God Only Knows too, maybe it would have hit #1 out of the gate, but the song is what it is in 2015 because Brian and Tony did what they thought was best for the song. Same with Brian and Van Dyke on Surf's Up, there's no point in even trying to suggest Mike would have made it better because the song is what it is and has it's rightful position in popular music history as of 2015 because of what it is, not what it could have been if another author took a shot at writing lyrics on top of it.

"Mike could deliver a hook for a hit single". Sure he could. But he also wrote full sets of lyrics. I wouldn't call the lyrics to the verses of Good Vibes a hook. Those are full lyrics. Asher's contributions to Pet Sounds don't get the "hook" tag and the term, when applied to Mike Love's work in the context of your post, sounds derogatory and I percieve slight contempt. Your whole argument, even if it's not your intention, is flavored by the concept that Mike would add a superflous idea to something that was already great (i.e. he was basically unable to provide greatness to the creation of a song), while others (i.e. Van Dyke) made weighty artistic contributions to the integrity of the songwriting. There seems to be a lack of ability or interest or will to consider Mike an artistically valuable member of a songwriting partnership. But what else should he have done at that time to prove his worth as a most successful lyric (and hook) supplier for Brian?

[Please delete my account]

I think this and other supposedly snide or snarky remarks from Parks are very innocuous. I realise I may be biased in favour of him just as many of you are biased against him- because I do love the lyrics of Smile, perhaps as much as the music. But whether you like or dislike him or his work I think he's earnt the right to be given the benefit of the doubt and left alone.

Some interesting detours in this discussion, though.

[Autotune]

 Van Dyke and Mike should go in a room to write songs. Maybe they don't need old Brian Wilson.  

They definitely need to screw and get it over with.

Nah... The screwjob happened many moons ago; Mike should just cut Van a check for a few mil, out of the goodness of his heart, as an apology for partially derailing SMiLE.

And that, my friend, was your totally-out-of-the-blue dig at Mike Love of the day. Yesterday's was:

"Other real question: Can Jake Abel (Mike Love) get a supporting actor nom? If he did, would Mike himself try to crash the Oscars?" (L&M as early Oscar contender thread).

[filledeplage]

I must say, I often tire of the Brian coddling that goes on.  He went through a tremendous amount, yes, and I feel for him just as much as anyone, but I also feel that because of his tremendous gifts (which really are/were super tremendous, obviously) he is almost universally given a pass and his his own repugnant behavior at times in his life is excused and/or skirted.  
Derek Taylor made comments about some of the ways in which Brian behaved during his tenure with the band, and it gives the impression of an overgrown, spoiled child.   Mozart may have been amazingly talented, but he was also probably a childish pain in the a** much of the time to those who knew him.  This could be true of Brian (and quite frankly, may be true for many of us, me included - everyone has their foibles at times).   I'm not trying to bait anyone's ire here, but the reality is that Van Dyke, and others (even Ol' Mr. Love) probably have quite legitimate beefs, and were/are genuinely hurt by many of the ways Brian behaved/behaves.   I don't know any of these people at all, so I really can't say, but all I am saying is that everyone is human and no matter how amazingly talented one is, perhaps they too have some amends to make?  
(ducks head and runs like hell)

Absolutely, there's always two sides to every story. But, to me, this is about public context. It's understandable that there may be long standing issues to resolve. But, those should be privately held and privately resolved without resorting to sly put downs in the media. Mike and Van Dyke constantly take public cheap shots at Brian. Meanwhile, Brian takes the high road and compliments them in every interview. Brian may have behaved like a spoiled child in the past, but the ones making catty comments in interviews and on Twitter are the ones who are now looking like 13 year old drama queens.

Exactly. Its not the fact that they had a falling out that people are blaming Van and Mike for. Its how theyve dealt with it, publically putting him down while offering nothing constructive or explaining their feelings. Like I said before, if Van feels the need to make his dislike known Id actually respect him a lot if he just flat out said what was bothering him. With Mike, I know what was/is bothering him, I completely empathize, Id feel the same way...and if he just dropped the talking points and expressed his hurt/vulnerable side about it, Id have so much more respect for him.

The two sides is nonsense. The inference from that old black and white satire-altered video, as a Brian birthday greeting, for me is, "this is who you were before you met me." You were nothing till I came along.  It was condescending disrespect for the BB roots, to the whole band.  They were breaking boundaries long before VDP came on the "cool scene."

On the flip side, you can't take his body of work from him.  I like his influence in the Popeye movie, my favorite Robin Williams movie.  It has a BB feel. The kind that it appears that he disdains.  It is hard to understand the paradox.

I agree. Linking to the shred video was a deliberate put down of Brian's efforts prior to meeting Van Dyke and his ilk. Unfortunately, that whole 60's LA arts scene comes across as a bunch of pretentious pseudo-intellectuals and "artistes" to me. Van Dyke included. I think his relationship with Brian likely started from a point of condescension that's become magnified as attention to Brian has escalated this year.

As to Brian's collaborators coming and going; I think that's true with most of us. When I change jobs I rarely keep in contact with those who were close working partners before, because the thing we had in common was the work. I wasn't "using" them. I was working with them. Collaborating on music is a job for Brian. Those he works with need not be close friends, as well.

Excellent characterization. "Pretentious pseudo intellectuals, artistes..." 

Workers for hire or collaborators come and go, and don't get the status of membership in the band.  It appears to be topic-specific or project-specific.  Work for hire. 

[filledeplage]

I think I find VDP's claim is more credible maybe unless Brian and Carl mean it in some way I don't get.

“For example, Good Vibrations, the cello. The man played the fundamental to the chords, and this is Jesse Ehrlich, he came in and played the cello, see, to make it right. Now I couldn’t play the cello. Brian went into the talkback  in the control booth, the first string player that he had ever assailed of such veteran ability and he said 'Barko, Barko, the man played Good Vibrations, Sound Sound the studio sensation'. It was no longer the performance, something tremendously individual happened that only improved the value of the group, to enforce the performance. I have a feeling that Good Vibrations is what guides me…”  VDP [LLVS p. 68]


“I worked as a studio musician for Brian Wilson during Pet Sounds, playing what he dictated on keyboards and marimba. I've always been gratified he accepted my suggestion for the cello triplets on 'Good Vibrations', so it can be said that I made one  clear musical contribution.” VDP 12/25/98

"I suggested to Brian Wilson that he put a cello on 'Good Vibrations.' He did, and it became a signature sound of that song. I also suggested the triplet fundamentals in the music. I did that." VDP  http://www.newtimesla.com/issues/2000-04-06/music.html


“I didn't casually suggest the cello in "Good Vibrations". In fact, the triplets in this pedal point became a signature part of the production. There was nothing casual about it. And it worked.” VDP  http://www.l-m-c.org.uk/texts/parks.html

Those links might be obsolete now.

A lot of I, I, I in those quotes. Also funny how after Carl died he felt the need to claim credit. I was not there and don't care that much. I'm sure VDP had some input in Brian's use of the cello's in Good Vibrations. And I'm sure Carl did too. Bottom line is Brian is the one that made the decision to use them on HIS composition. Brian is the one that did take after take to get the sound HE wanted. In those quotes VDP comes off as if GV would not have been the smash it was without his input. That is laughable.

It was not until I saw Love and Mercy that it hit me that after Brian worked with Asher, and before Brian worked with Parks, it was Brian and Mike that had the smash hit. It really explains a lot.

Paul J B - correct with the "I, I, I."  If you go back to the "Daro thread pulled?" thread, another poster who, IIRC, claims to have been an "English Major," uses "I, I, I," beginning every paragraph thusly.  Seriously?   No problem " hanging on to their egos." Reply #263.

Never have seen an English major beginning paragraph after paragraph with "I." Yikes!

[Please delete my account]

I expect better than this of you filledeplage, however fiercely loyal to the band and all its members you are. Each of those sentences that begin with I are necessary to waht he is saying, and they all happen to be about him (who is the subject of the debate) so it is natural to commence so; it would be pointless to rephrase the sentences just so they didn't. It is not poor practice at all to begin lots of sentences with the first person singular pronoun, it is a matter of personal style. And in your other post you seem to be putting words in VDP's mouth regarding claiming more than his due.

[filledeplage]

I expect better than this of you filledeplage, however fiercely loyal to the band and all its members you are. Each of those sentences that begin with I are necessary to waht he is saying, and they all happen to be about him (who is the subject of the debate) so it is natural to commence so; it would be pointless to rephrase the sentences just so they didn't. It is not poor practice at all to begin lots of sentences with the first person singular pronoun, it is a matter of personal style. And in your other post you seem to be putting words in VDP's mouth regarding claiming more than his due.

Unreleased backgrounds - Paul J B picked up on something that "flew off the page" for me in January.  The use of the "I" which becomes "phased out" for second or third graders in the teaching of "creative writing."  It made me wonder what college or university gave him (Daro) a degree, in English, no less, with such writing.  Had he even been a Math major, he would still be required to take English Composition, for two semesters.  They "hold themselves out" as "experts." "Experts" represent themselves with what they write.

It is entirely unnecessary to use that personal pronoun, "I," especially for those who do lyric or other writing for a living or for those whose academic credentials include being an "English major." That is what we have other parts of speech such as nouns, verbs, conjunctions, prepositions, adverbs, and adjectives for.  Far be it from me to put words in either of their mouths. They can both "use their words."

That video as a Brian birthday greeting doesn't get a pass from me.  In my opinion it was calculated in its satirical context to be mean, hurtful and degrading to Brian and the members of the band. It represents them in an untoward light with those voice overs.  Unacceptable, on any level.  And, yet, the "two birds of a feather" appear to be getting a pass, from some posters.

Any poster, who is close to the college experience, or even high school. and who had term papers and graded poorly for the overuse of the personal pronoun, "I," might see this position.  Nice letter grade of "D"or worse.  

Sorry, we don't agree.

p.s. It would be "gentlemanly" to remove the video and apologize to Brian and rest the band.  It was beneath him. However, I won't hold my breath.

[Please delete my account]

What creative writing courses teach is subject to the vagaries of fashion. A true prose stylist has confidence in his or her own work enough not to be subject to arbitrary rules.

[Paul J B]

I think I find VDP's claim is more credible maybe unless Brian and Carl mean it in some way I don't get.

“For example, Good Vibrations, the cello. The man played the fundamental to the chords, and this is Jesse Ehrlich, he came in and played the cello, see, to make it right. Now I couldn’t play the cello. Brian went into the talkback  in the control booth, the first string player that he had ever assailed of such veteran ability and he said 'Barko, Barko, the man played Good Vibrations, Sound Sound the studio sensation'. It was no longer the performance, something tremendously individual happened that only improved the value of the group, to enforce the performance. I have a feeling that Good Vibrations is what guides me…”  VDP [LLVS p. 68]


“I worked as a studio musician for Brian Wilson during Pet Sounds, playing what he dictated on keyboards and marimba. I've always been gratified he accepted my suggestion for the cello triplets on 'Good Vibrations', so it can be said that I made one  clear musical contribution.” VDP 12/25/98

"I suggested to Brian Wilson that he put a cello on 'Good Vibrations.' He did, and it became a signature sound of that song. I also suggested the triplet fundamentals in the music. I did that." VDP  http://www.newtimesla.com/issues/2000-04-06/music.html


“I didn't casually suggest the cello in "Good Vibrations". In fact, the triplets in this pedal point became a signature part of the production. There was nothing casual about it. And it worked.” VDP  http://www.l-m-c.org.uk/texts/parks.html

Those links might be obsolete now.

A lot of I, I, I in those quotes. Also funny how after Carl died he felt the need to claim credit. I was not there and don't care that much. I'm sure VDP had some input in Brian's use of the cello's in Good Vibrations. And I'm sure Carl did too. Bottom line is Brian is the one that made the decision to use them on HIS composition. Brian is the one that did take after take to get the sound HE wanted. In those quotes VDP comes off as if GV would not have been the smash it was without his input. That is laughable.

It was not until I saw Love and Mercy that it hit me that after Brian worked with Asher, and before Brian worked with Parks, it was Brian and Mike that had the smash hit. It really explains a lot.

OK, but is there anything that rules out his claims? What about Carl's claim quoted earlier?

The timeline of his claims leaves me suspect. 30 years after the fact and no Carl to add his recollection. Also, the more recent claims imply the whole cello thing was totally his when you acknowledge Carl took claim as well. I don't doubt he had some suggestion about the cello's. To imply he was responsible for GV being as great as it was because of his idea is a load of nonsense. That IS the implication Cam. I like a ton of your posts but you seem to be playing devils advocate a lot lately.

When VDP started his foolishness about Darro that was pretty much it for me. Anyone that read through the Darro thread and believed even half of it as being truthful is either naive or just plain stupid. Then Parks makes sure to take a dig at Love and Mercy, and tweets to his handful of people that actually care what he thinks to see the Beautiful Dreamer documentary instead. Well, Beautiful Dreamer has plenty of BS and inaccuracies in it too.

I like what VDP added to some of Brian's songs nearly 50 years ago. But that is all. Smile is great due to Brian's music. The lyrics could have been about used refrigerator parts and it still would have sounded great. Some people here and elsewhere think the guy is all that. Fine. IMO he is a pretentious bore that wore out his welcome concerning Brian and the Beach boys a long time ago.

[clack]

VDP's lyrics were what the fashion of the times required in order for a work to be taken seriously, lyrics written in a style derived from the French Symbolists. They are of the time in a way that SMiLE's music, arrangements, and production are not. Those are timeless.

[Douchepool]

The lyrics could have been about used refrigerator parts and it still would have sounded great.

I'm gonna be round my crisper drawers
I'm gonna wash down my crisper drawers
I love you most of all
My favorite crisper drawer

It'll sell a million units.

[buddhahat]

I expect better than this of you filledeplage, however fiercely loyal to the band and all its members you are. Each of those sentences that begin with I are necessary to waht he is saying, and they all happen to be about him (who is the subject of the debate) so it is natural to commence so; it would be pointless to rephrase the sentences just so they didn't. It is not poor practice at all to begin lots of sentences with the first person singular pronoun, it is a matter of personal style. And in your other post you seem to be putting words in VDP's mouth regarding claiming more than his due.

Unreleased backgrounds - Paul J B picked up on something that "flew off the page" for me in January.  The use of the "I" which becomes "phased out" for second or third graders in the teaching of "creative writing."  It made me wonder what college or university gave him (Daro) a degree, in English, no less, with such writing.  Had he even been a Math major, he would still be required to take English Composition, for two semesters.  They "hold themselves out" as "experts." "Experts" represent themselves with what they write.

It is entirely unnecessary to use that personal pronoun, "I," especially for those who do lyric or other writing for a living or for those whose academic credentials include being an "English major." That is what we have other parts of speech such as nouns, verbs, conjunctions, prepositions, adverbs, and adjectives for.  Far be it from me to put words in either of their mouths. They can both "use their words."

That video as a Brian birthday greeting doesn't get a pass from me.  In my opinion it was calculated in its satirical context to be mean, hurtful and degrading to Brian and the members of the band. It represents them in an untoward light with those voice overs.  Unacceptable, on any level.  And, yet, the "two birds of a feather" appear to be getting a pass, from some posters.

Any poster, who is close to the college experience, or even high school. and who had term papers and graded poorly for the overuse of the personal pronoun, "I," might see this position.  Nice letter grade of "D"or worse.  

Sorry, we don't agree.

p.s. It would be "gentlemanly" to remove the video and apologize to Brian and rest the band.  It was beneath him. However, I won't hold my breath.

Filledeplage, I'm sorry to say I often find your posts somewhat inarticulate (in no small part due to your excessive use of quotation marks) and find it ironic to say the least that you are calling VDP out on his grammar.

I think this and other supposedly snide or snarky remarks from Parks are very innocuous. I realise I may be biased in favour of him just as many of you are biased against him- because I do love the lyrics of Smile, perhaps as much as the music. But whether you like or dislike him or his work I think he's earnt the right to be given the benefit of the doubt and left alone.

Some interesting detours in this discussion, though.

As for VDP's tweet, I'm inclined to agree with the above. It just seems like a slightly irreverent bit of fun to me. Granted, he has been a bit more negative about Brian and the BBs recently but I have no idea what has gone on between these guys behind the scenes. I certainly wouldn't dream of passing judgement on that which I know nothing about.

[filledeplage]

I expect better than this of you filledeplage, however fiercely loyal to the band and all its members you are. Each of those sentences that begin with I are necessary to waht he is saying, and they all happen to be about him (who is the subject of the debate) so it is natural to commence so; it would be pointless to rephrase the sentences just so they didn't. It is not poor practice at all to begin lots of sentences with the first person singular pronoun, it is a matter of personal style. And in your other post you seem to be putting words in VDP's mouth regarding claiming more than his due.

Unreleased backgrounds - Paul J B picked up on something that "flew off the page" for me in January.  The use of the "I" which becomes "phased out" for second or third graders in the teaching of "creative writing."  It made me wonder what college or university gave him (Daro) a degree, in English, no less, with such writing.  Had he even been a Math major, he would still be required to take English Composition, for two semesters.  They "hold themselves out" as "experts." "Experts" represent themselves with what they write.

It is entirely unnecessary to use that personal pronoun, "I," especially for those who do lyric or other writing for a living or for those whose academic credentials include being an "English major." That is what we have other parts of speech such as nouns, verbs, conjunctions, prepositions, adverbs, and adjectives for.  Far be it from me to put words in either of their mouths. They can both "use their words."

That video as a Brian birthday greeting doesn't get a pass from me.  In my opinion it was calculated in its satirical context to be mean, hurtful and degrading to Brian and the members of the band. It represents them in an untoward light with those voice overs.  Unacceptable, on any level.  And, yet, the "two birds of a feather" appear to be getting a pass, from some posters.

Any poster, who is close to the college experience, or even high school. and who had term papers and graded poorly for the overuse of the personal pronoun, "I," might see this position.  Nice letter grade of "D"or worse.  

Sorry, we don't agree.

p.s. It would be "gentlemanly" to remove the video and apologize to Brian and rest the band.  It was beneath him. However, I won't hold my breath.

Filledeplage, I'm sorry to say I often find your posts somewhat inarticulate (in no small part due to your excessive use of quotation marks) and find it ironic to say the least that you are calling VDP out on his grammar.

I think this and other supposedly snide or snarky remarks from Parks are very innocuous. I realise I may be biased in favour of him just as many of you are biased against him- because I do love the lyrics of Smile, perhaps as much as the music. But whether you like or dislike him or his work I think he's earnt the right to be given the benefit of the doubt and left alone.

Some interesting detours in this discussion, though.

As for VDP's tweet, I'm inclined to agree with the above. It just seems like a slightly irreverent bit of fun to me. Granted, he has been a bit more negative about Brian and the BBs recently but I have no idea what has gone on between these guys behind the scenes. I certainly wouldn't dream of passing judgement on that which I know nothing about.

Buddahat - here is the difference...it was not my insulting and offensive YouTube posted with regard Brian Wilson/The Beach Boys as a Birthday greeting.  It is hardly "a bit more negative."

Quotes are there for a contextual purpose, or direct quote from another, whether you agree or not.  I am calling out VDP/Daro on his/their egocentric use of "I" at the beginning of a sentence. It is primitive and defensive. 

And while you have every right to characterize the tweet as "irreverent fun," - it it "fun" at "another's expense." And that is notwithstanding whatever went down between and among them all.  What happens in Vegas...

[marcusb]

As for VDP's tweet, I'm inclined to agree with the above. It just seems like a slightly irreverent bit of fun to me. Granted, he has been a bit more negative about Brian and the BBs recently but I have no idea what has gone on between these guys behind the scenes. I certainly wouldn't dream of passing judgement on that which I know nothing about.

Isn't that the point though- if he has a beef with Brian, keep it in private and not in public?

[Cam Mott]

The timeline of his claims leaves me suspect. 30 years after the fact and no Carl to add his recollection. Also, the more recent claims imply the whole cello thing was totally his when you acknowledge Carl took claim as well. I don't doubt he had some suggestion about the cello's. To imply he was responsible for GV being as great as it was because of his idea is a load of nonsense. That IS the implication Cam. I like a ton of your posts but you seem to be playing devils advocate a lot lately.

What's wrong with devil's advocating when discussing BBs' "history"?

I don't pick up the implication that you do but I'm skeptical of both of their accounts although as of now VDP's seems slightly more credible to me. I was trying to instigate someone to do a little fact finding about what happened when and who was where at what time because I'm lazy.

[Please delete my account]

Sorry if I'm not been reading carefully enough but what if both Carl and Van Dyke independently suggested cellos to Brian and he let them both think they were the only one who suggested it?

[Autotune]

In any case, it doesn't make sense that Van's apparent grudge with Brian for the last 10 years or so is because Van resents not being credited for the cello on GV. There have to be other issues there. Wider and deeper. Under the influence Brian insulted Van publically about 20 years ago. Who knows what kind of relationship these two have had. I still think that if he's going to be public, Van should speak up or quit the indirect stabs. It's hard to imagine what wrong could Brian or the BBs have made to VDP's career or life.

[Mike's Beard]

That Smiley couldn't break the top 40 is a good indication that Smile wouldn't have sold huge amounts.

  No. SMILE would have been released in Jan, right after "Good Vibrations" hit #1. SMILEY came out in Sept: the world had shifted in radical fashion those intervening months.

Smile was never really due to come out in Jan'67. Brian said he would deliver the album by January to Capitol but the reality is he didn't have anything close to a finished album by that point. It was either (a) wishful thinking on Brian's part or (b) an empty promise by Brian to get the label off his back. Good Vibrations took over 6 months to fashion, for Brian to make an entire album of songs using the same modular recording approach in as many months was realistically never going to happen.

[Cam Mott]

Sorry if I'm not been reading carefully enough but what if both Carl and Van Dyke independently suggested cellos to Brian and he let them both think they were the only one who suggested it?

I think that is a possibility although from what is in this thread VDP seems to be suggesting his idea was early while Carl seems to suggest his was late. I could be reading it wrong or it just went down in a way that both felt the idea was theirs. Brian's memory would tip it toward Carl but he has also said the Theremin was Mike's idea so....I wonder how that would have played out?

[CenturyDeprived]

 Van Dyke and Mike should go in a room to write songs. Maybe they don't need old Brian Wilson.  

They definitely need to screw and get it over with.

Nah... The screwjob happened many moons ago; Mike should just cut Van a check for a few mil, out of the goodness of his heart, as an apology for partially derailing SMiLE.

And that, my friend, was your totally-out-of-the-blue dig at Mike Love of the day.  

Um... I don't think what I mentioned is so very out of the blue. The thread topic is Van and why he may be resentful and currently acting out (in admittedly childish ways) at this time, but I think it's part of a larger picture of Van feeling screwed over for decades, and having had to live frugally and not achieve his fullest artistic potential, not entirely dissimilar to Mike's acting out likely in part to the trauma caused by the songwriting screwjob that he himself suffered (though in Mike's case, he had a money-machine super successful touring band paycheck to fall back on, unlike Van). Do you not think that Van has thought many, many times over the years how furious he was at Mike for being part of Smile's demise? (And I'm not trying to debate what YOU think about the reasons for Smile's demise, I'm talking about what Van probably thinks or has thought over the years).

One cannot realistically divorce the wheeling and dealing behind the parameters of C50, Mike's "room" situation, etc. from Mike/Brian issues of decades earlier, anymore than one can realistically divorce Van being bitter these days from being a part of an overall series of feeling disrespected (probably at various times over the years by both Mike and Brian). And I believe one of the issues in the grand scheme of why Van is resentful on the whole probably has to do with who he (Van) sees as a (not necessarily "the") culprit in Smile falling apart, which is Mike. Van (much like Mike) unfortunately seems to be a guy who gets his feelings very hurt, and stews in his resentment in not the best of ways. I bet it pisses Van off to see Mike, who he probably views as less talented than himself, get to continue living as a mega rich multimillionaire, while he himself has to resort to session work on Summer in Paradise to pay the bills, which is why I made my comment, which is admittedly partly facetious, though I wouldn't be surprised if that thought has actually gone through Van's head at some point.

As to why Van is currently pissed and going on Twitter rants? Probably something to do with compensation/credits/broken promises that came from Brian's camp in recent times, or so I'd imagine. Pure speculation of course (though that's what we do). In the overall picture: Van for decades has probably been resentful at the band and Mike in particular, which is why I brought it up, and I think that Mike's actions in no small part colored how much of a resentful person Van is today. Thanks for trying to be the Mike Love Dig Police though.

[Mike's Beard]

You make it sound like Van is destitute! Also Mike Love doesn't owe him a living.

[CenturyDeprived]

You make it sound like Van is destitute! Also Mike Love doesn't owe him a living.

Mike apparently doesn't "owe" Van airplane fair either.  

I think it's quite possible that at some points over the years, that Van has had to live quite frugally. Doing SIP session work might be seen as a desperation move, I don't know if it was also a (failed) attempt to mend fences too.  I think Van currently feels shortchanged (monetarily and respect-wise) to the max for whatever reason(s), but I think at least part of why he probably feels that way is pretty obvious. And no, Mike doesn't "owe" anybody anything, though sometimes people do things simply out of the goodness of their heart. I happen to have said what I said in part out of being facetious, but in part because I also think Van himself probably thought it at some point in his decades-long stewing.

[Mike's Beard]

I'm not sure if Van has been stewing for decades - he's worked with Brian on several notable occasions since Smile fell apart. This grudge he seems to have now seems to stem from something much more recent.

[CenturyDeprived]

I'm not sure if Van has been stewing for decades - he's worked with Brian on several notable occasions since Smile fell apart. This grudge he seems to have now seems to stem from something much more recent.

Absolutely agreed that this grudge seems to stem from something much more recent; disagree that Van hasn't had a probable undercurrent of resentment for decades pertaining to the SMiLE project (less directed at Brian, more directed at Mike).  He and Mike seem to have one thing very much in common: being resentful fellows.

[Autotune]

I'm not sure if Van has been stewing for decades - he's worked with Brian on several notable occasions since Smile fell apart. This grudge he seems to have now seems to stem from something much more recent.

Absolutely agreed that this grudge seems to stem from something much more recent; disagree that Van hasn't had a probable undercurrent of resentment for decades pertaining to the SMiLE project (less directed at Brian, more directed at Mike).  He and Mike seem to have one thing very much in common: being resentful fellows.

Hm. Van has been very verbal when addressing his issues with ML. Many times in an uncalled-for fashion, bringing his name up in a fixation-type manner (little like some of your posts). There are issues with Brian, or Brian's people, since the day of TLOS. Also probably Van doesn't like/understand some of Brian's issues... There is this quote from the 70s where he says that Brian isn't crazy but needs some spanking (can't find the exact quote but I think I read it initially in Leaf's book).