New Examiner Article Link: "Brian Wilson's Musical Voices"

[bgas]

I bought into what I saw in the "Love & Mercy" biopic.  It showed us that Brian is brain-damaged.  I have heard many firsthand accounts directly associated with Brian's condition...particularly his behavior and condition at the 1990 ESQ convention.

I was under the impression the film told an accurate story.  Was I wrong?

If all of you feel good for taking shots at me because it's a slow news day, then keep at it...I'm enjoying the fodder.   "Kokomo Gazette" is hilarious.   A friend recently described "Kokomo" as a hell-scape, and then Carl shows up...it was a great LOL moment.  I don't agree, but who cares??

Regarding the article:  I did remove some content, because I felt -- when reading through the conniptions -- some valid points were made.  

Most of you hide behind anonymous names, so your opinion means squat.  As for Howie, someone I've always respected...well, he has made it clear he doesn't feel the same.  Opinions are like assholes, which is what this board is mostly comprised.  

And, before Bgas (Chris Woods) can chime in, I'll remind him that he once stated, if you don't have something good to say, don't say anything.

As for everyone here...write something better.  Maybe I'll actually have a reason to come back to this board and have something worthwhile to read.
 
Lastly, I was contracted to do the 2015 tour program, so I am not on the payroll.

  I post as Bgas, you post as esq editor; so what's that you say about  posting  anonymously??  and YOU'RE an Honored Guest?  I can see how that could have been extended to Lee Dempsey, but you? Not for anything that I've seen in the last ten years
I suppose that was a shot for me not to post?  Here's something good to say:  I'm glad you came on, once again to try and defend your ludicrously written articles, because it demonstrates how full of sh*t you really are.
 You believe Brian is "brain damaged" because you've heard stories (1990 is only 25 years ago, after all) and that was your takeaway from the movie? For a supposed BBs fan/historian/writer you have got to be one of the dumbest folks in the world. Evidently, in Brian's case the past over-rides the present.  
Perhaps it's time for you to take a break  from the BBs/Brian world.  
  From where I sit the only shots taken at you were for lousy writing/ understanding of the facts of Brian( and yeah, you don't seem to have any problems constantly pumping up Mike to Brian's detriment).  Most everyone on here isn't a "writer" per se, and with every article you publish on Examiner, it becomes more and more clear that neither are you. I've the feeling that won't stop you from posting more.
  Somehow I think there are very very few people that care whether you come here and see something you deem worthwhile to read.  OH!  That ESQ EDITOR saw something he liked!!!!!  

[CenturyDeprived]

It is plain to see that these articles are being proof read and approved by the Tahoe Bunker - either that, or the editor and writer of this garbage is nothing more than the greatest fluffer Mike Love ever had.

Tahoe Bunker... LOL!

But seemingly so true.

[ESQ Editor]

These are Brian Wilson articles.  

http://www.examiner.com/article/inside-the-recording-process-of-brian-wilson-s-no-pier-pressure

http://www.examiner.com/review/brian-wilson-no-pier-pressure-deluxe-edition-overview

http://www.examiner.com/article/brian-wilson-s-emotional-evocations

http://www.examiner.com/article/brian-wilson-takes-new-journey-on-upcoming-solo-album

[ESQ Editor]

...

[rab2591]

I bought into what I saw in the "Love & Mercy" biopic.  It showed us that Brian is brain-damaged.  I have heard many firsthand accounts directly associated with Brian's condition...particularly his behavior and condition at the 1990 ESQ convention.

I was under the impression the film told an accurate story.  Was I wrong?

The movie showed us that Brian is brain-damaged? When the hell does the movie do that? It shows Brian dealing with a plethora of mental problems, but the movie also ends casting light on how Brian has triumphed through it all.

This arm-chair diagnosis aside, calling him brain-damaged is a very tactless way for a supposed member of the media to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters.

If all of you feel good for taking shots at me because it's a slow news day, then keep at it...I'm enjoying the fodder.

Glad you're enjoying it. Personally I'd rather this entire thread/article didn't exist - it's tiresome to wake up every other day to read yet another Mike Love interview or David Beard article where Brian's mental illness and past drug use are ceaselessly brought up.

And, before Bgas (Chris Woods) can chime in, I'll remind him that he once stated, if you don't have something good to say, don't say anything.

It's a shame not everyone follows this philosophy, otherwise this article wouldn't exist right now.

As for everyone here...write something better.

Thing is, we're not the ones calling ourselves journalists. We don't have to say anything. You are the one who writes for the Examiner, you are the one who flaunts this opinion ad nauseam about Brian's mental illness in a media outlet. We are merely spectators to what you release. If you disagree with our opinions, fine. You're a journalist, back up your statements with fact, and don't call the majority of us assholes because we aren't privy to the insider information about Brian's brain condition that you supposedly have.

Maybe I'll actually have a reason to come back to this board and have something worthwhile to read.

Not if your articles keep popping up here.

[rab2591]

These are Brian Wilson articles.  

http://www.examiner.com/article/inside-the-recording-process-of-brian-wilson-s-no-pier-pressure

http://www.examiner.com/review/brian-wilson-no-pier-pressure-deluxe-edition-overview

http://www.examiner.com/article/brian-wilson-s-emotional-evocations

http://www.examiner.com/article/brian-wilson-takes-new-journey-on-upcoming-solo-album

Yet curiously the initial 'The Right Time' review is missing from this list. Ya know, that review that had 3 sentences about the music itself (yes I counted) and the rest of the paragraphs were about defending Mike and Bruce.

[Doo Dah]

David, you're using a moniker as well - Mr. ESQ Editor. Instead of using the tired 'opinions are like...' argument, perhaps you can get off your high horse and consider some of what's been said.

We use monikers for fun. For fun, fun, fun. My real name is Ched Stanisic. I'm friends with Mikie, Susan Lang (of the old Cabinessence board) and many others in Beach Boys world. My opinions are my own however, and I own up to them. Now don't be so defensive when someone points out the inherent bias in your work. And excuse me for questioning your unquestioned standing in the literary world.

[ontor pertawst]

...and poof, it's gone! So it was all a dream... brought on by undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of an underdone, brain-damaged potato... No doubt.

[rab2591]

...and poof, it's gone! So it was all a dream... brought on by undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of an underdone, brain-damaged potato... No doubt.

Odd that the opinions of a bunch of "assholes" could bring down such a solid piece of American journalism.

[CenturyDeprived]

This arm-chair diagnosis aside, calling him brain-damaged is a very tactless way for a supposed member of the media to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters.

+1.

I think it's safe to say that if Mike Love wasn't constantly saying stuff like that... if Mike was somehow a person who never talked that way about Brian's illness and spoke with great tact and restraint (the way people like Carl and Al have/had pretty much always done, for example)... that such tactless terminology would be less "normalized" and "acceptable" for anyone to think of just casually uttering about Brian. It would then be much more shocking, don't you think?

I feel that years and years of Mike spewing Love-based negativity regarding Brian's condition, regardless from whatever place in Mike's heart that these words are coming from (which many people would debate), have somehow lowered the bar of what is acceptable language for other people (who are big fans of Mike) to also say when referring to Brian. Kind of how certain once-shocking profanities, when they become more used over and over and over again in pop culture (or particularly by celebrities of a certain stature), thus become more normalized for many people to just think it's ok to throw similar language out with abandon. It's called desensitization. It's like... "well, Mike says stuff like that all the time, so it's acceptable, right? And Mike is related to Brian, so it must be ok."

I'm no prude, and I can curse like a sailor when I want to, but contextually in a piece purporting to be journalism, it seems not cool to say stuff like that.  

It's Brian's own place to speak of himself in such terms if he so desires, but it's way uncool for others to just throw terms like that out casually and nonchalantly to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters. Just IMHO.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

This arm-chair diagnosis aside, calling him brain-damaged is a very tactless way for a supposed member of the media to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters.

+1.

I think it's safe to say that if Mike Love wasn't constantly saying stuff like that... if Mike was somehow a person who never talked that way about Brian's illness and spoke with great tact and restraint (the way people like Carl and Al have/had pretty much always done, for example)... that such tactless terminology would be less "normalized" and "acceptable" for anyone to think of just casually uttering about Brian. It would then be much more shocking, don't you think?

I feel that years and years of Mike spewing Love-based negativity regarding Brian's condition, regardless from whatever place in Mike's heart that these words are coming from (which many people would debate), have somehow lowered the bar of what is acceptable language for other people (who are big fans of Mike) to also say when referring to Brian. Kind of how certain once-shocking profanities, when they become more used over and over and over again in pop culture (or particularly by celebrities of a certain stature), thus become more normalized for many people to just think it's ok to throw similar language out with abandon. It's called desensitization. It's like... "well, Mike says stuff like that all the time, so it's acceptable, right? And Mike is related to Brian, so it must be ok."

I'm no prude, and I can curse like a sailor when I want to, but contextually in a piece purporting to be journalism, it seems not cool to say stuff like that. 

It's Brian's own place to speak of himself in such terms if he so desires, but it's way uncool for others to just throw terms like that out casually and nonchalantly to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters. Just IMHO.

+2

Perfectly said CD!

"Mr. Positivity" is constantly spewing negativity! As you point out, Mike is forever saying these things in interviews. He is is own worst enemy! Then he goes into his TM bragging crap. Then he drops "All I can say is that love transcends all the bull". If he were really a truly spiritual being he would never talk like this.

His recent "Q&A: Mike Love's Half-Century With The Beach Boys"  interview is a prime example (http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22573.0.html):

"Q: Pretty much anyone who has heard of the Beach Boys knows the group has had its ups and downs and is aware of the split between you and Brian Wilson years ago. You reunited with Wilson for the 50th anniversary tour and then went your separate ways again. And now there is the new movie about him, "Love and Mercy." What caused the estrangement? And do you think the fence can ever be permanently mended?

A: Brian did himself a lot of damage and that was a horrible thing for me to witness as the years went by. When we started out he was doing great music but then got into drugs and that didn't do him any favors. All I can say is that love transcends all the bull because we are family and grew up together. We went to high school football games together, loved the Everly Brothers together, and sang doo-wop before the band was formed. We wrote all the great songs together and were successful together. As far as performing with Brian again, I have nothing but love for that cousin of mine and would love to get into the studio with him again."

[CenturyDeprived]

This arm-chair diagnosis aside, calling him brain-damaged is a very tactless way for a supposed member of the media to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters.

+1.

I think it's safe to say that if Mike Love wasn't constantly saying stuff like that... if Mike was somehow a person who never talked that way about Brian's illness and spoke with great tact and restraint (the way people like Carl and Al have/had pretty much always done, for example)... that such tactless terminology would be less "normalized" and "acceptable" for anyone to think of just casually uttering about Brian. It would then be much more shocking, don't you think?

I feel that years and years of Mike spewing Love-based negativity regarding Brian's condition, regardless from whatever place in Mike's heart that these words are coming from (which many people would debate), have somehow lowered the bar of what is acceptable language for other people (who are big fans of Mike) to also say when referring to Brian. Kind of how certain once-shocking profanities, when they become more used over and over and over again in pop culture (or particularly by celebrities of a certain stature), thus become more normalized for many people to just think it's ok to throw similar language out with abandon. It's called desensitization. It's like... "well, Mike says stuff like that all the time, so it's acceptable, right? And Mike is related to Brian, so it must be ok."

I'm no prude, and I can curse like a sailor when I want to, but contextually in a piece purporting to be journalism, it seems not cool to say stuff like that.  

It's Brian's own place to speak of himself in such terms if he so desires, but it's way uncool for others to just throw terms like that out casually and nonchalantly to describe one of the world's greatest songwriters. Just IMHO.

+2

Perfectly said CD!

"Mr. Positivity" is constantly spewing negativity! As you point out, Mike is forever saying these things in interviews. He is is own worst enemy! Then he goes into his TM bragging crap. Then he drops "All I can say is that love transcends all the bull". If he were really a truly spiritual being he would never talk like this.

His recent "Q&A: Mike Love's Half-Century With The Beach Boys"  interview is a prime example (http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22573.0.html):

"Q: Pretty much anyone who has heard of the Beach Boys knows the group has had its ups and downs and is aware of the split between you and Brian Wilson years ago. You reunited with Wilson for the 50th anniversary tour and then went your separate ways again. And now there is the new movie about him, "Love and Mercy." What caused the estrangement? And do you think the fence can ever be permanently mended?

A: Brian did himself a lot of damage and that was a horrible thing for me to witness as the years went by. When we started out he was doing great music but then got into drugs and that didn't do him any favors. All I can say is that love transcends all the bull because we are family and grew up together. We went to high school football games together, loved the Everly Brothers together, and sang doo-wop before the band was formed. We wrote all the great songs together and were successful together. As far as performing with Brian again, I have nothing but love for that cousin of mine and would love to get into the studio with him again."

Lets just say, if Mike had the tact of Carl, and had the same sensitive barometer for what is "appropriate" (and what isn't) that Carl had, this type of language would be far from the norm for other interviewers to use.

If only everyone was more like Carl.

[The Shift]

In a way this thread has been kinda unifying, which makes a nice change around here

[ESQ Editor]

...

[phirnis]

The "payroll" talk on this board is getting tedious.

No. This is tedious:

"We don't wait for new Brian Wilson music because of who Brian is today, we wait because of the amazing music Wilson created between 1962-1970 as a member of The Beach Boys. That's the truth..."
"Is he brain-damaged? Yes."
"Mike was praising his cousin and waxing nostalgic on the music they created together. He misses the young man he created those songs with, and wishes he was the same. Unfortunately, Brian isn’t the same."
"With Brian, we go to see the legend. He sits behind the piano, and on occasion, when he’s finds the inspiration, he will join in and sing along with his band"

All from David Beard articles written in the last year. And frankly I could care less that these quotes are surrounded with high praise for Brian....these are some pretty tactless statements no matter how you look at it.

I do agree with some of these assessments--to a certain extent that is. Brian did some amazing music right after 1970, some of which even qualifies as some of his best ever, like 'Til I Die, Love You, or even some of the stuff on BW88. BWRG was pretty inspired too. Brain-damaged? I don't care, he's brilliant anyway. Do we go to his concerts in order to "see the legend"? In a certain way, yes, of course, but it's also great to hear his voice and see him perform, even when he does have a "bad day". He may not be a natural performer, but that's perfectly fine with me. He's charismatic even when he does just sit there and join in occasionally--the Knebworth footage comes to mind, where Brian singing his part on Surfer Girl is the highlight of the entire show. Is Brian the same guy he used to be in 1965? Of course not, just as I'm not the same guy I used to be in 1995 or whatever. That's life. In short, I do not feel David Beard is completely off the mark but from my point of view, there's no need to talk down Brian's remarkable achievements past 1970.

[ESQ Editor]

I hope this better reflects my feelings of Brian's show in Atlanta.

Best,
David

http://www.examiner.com/review/brian-wilson-concert

[rab2591]

The "payroll" talk on this board is getting tedious.

No. This is tedious:

"We don't wait for new Brian Wilson music because of who Brian is today, we wait because of the amazing music Wilson created between 1962-1970 as a member of The Beach Boys. That's the truth..."
"Is he brain-damaged? Yes."
"Mike was praising his cousin and waxing nostalgic on the music they created together. He misses the young man he created those songs with, and wishes he was the same. Unfortunately, Brian isn’t the same."
"With Brian, we go to see the legend. He sits behind the piano, and on occasion, when he’s finds the inspiration, he will join in and sing along with his band"

All from David Beard articles written in the last year. And frankly I could care less that these quotes are surrounded with high praise for Brian....these are some pretty tactless statements no matter how you look at it.

I do agree with some of these assessments--to a certain extent that is. Brian did some amazing music right after 1970, some of which even qualifies as some of his best ever, like 'Til I Die, Love You, or even some of the stuff on BW88. BWRG was pretty inspired too. Brain-damaged? I don't care, he's brilliant anyway. Do we go to his concerts in order to "see the legend"? In a certain way, yes, of course, but it's also great to hear his voice and see him perform, even when he does have a "bad day". He may not be a natural performer, but that's perfectly fine with me. He's charismatic even when he does just sit there and join in occasionally--the Knebworth footage comes to mind, where Brian singing his part on Surfer Girl is the highlight of the entire show. Is Brian the same guy he used to be in 1965? Of course not, just as I'm not the same guy I used to be in 1995 or whatever. That's life. In short, I do not feel David Beard is completely off the mark but from my point of view, there's no need to talk down Brian's remarkable achievements past 1970.

On Brian's music output post 70s - totally agree that he's put out gems since, BWRG is one of my favorites, this man has done things all through his career that make me want to hear more from him.

On Brian being brain-damaged - Is it an honest assessment? Who knows - I'm not a doctor. But again it's just something a journalist should never say about someone of that stature.

On Brian occasionally joining in to sing along when he wants - I wasn't at the concert David went to, maybe Brian was in and out of it, but it didn't at all reflect the Brian I saw in concert not even a month ago. And since David used the term "We" in the context of his point, he seemed to lug all the concerts Brian has done together...which, given what I saw at the Philly show, I felt was unfair considering Brian was on point and sang through the majority of the concert - not just when he was "inspired" on "occasion".

On Brian not being the same person - I'm not disputing that Brian is a different person (who would be after 50 years?), just curious why David thinks it's unfortunate that Brian is the person he is today ("Unfortunately, he isn't the same"...a question which I've still yet to get an answer to.

You know the drill: First, someone says or does something politically incorrect. Next, mobs of wild-eyed, unhinged keyboard cops swoop in to judge, shame, excoriate, and issue over-the-top condemnations ... After performing this ritual cleansing, one assumes, those involved feel slightly better about themselves. This sense of inner peace and superiority has not yet been scientifically measured, but it lasts, alas, for only a few fleeting days. That’s when it’s time to find a new World’s Most Despicable Person.

Let me make that more realistic for you:

You know the drill: First, a journalist says or does something offensive about America's most popular songwriter ad nauseam article after article. Next, fans of this songwriter get offended and call the journalist out. After doing this they're called "assholes" by said journalist who can't seem to take any criticism about his work. We don't feel better about ourselves because in a month we'll probably get another Examiner led Mike Love interview where both the interviewer and interviewee relentlessly gab about Brian's mental illness and past drug use. The article, as the ritual seems to go, will be pulled after common sense takes over and the journalist realizes the article serves no purpose to the actual fans.

[Howie Edelson]

Rab -- you took the words right out of my mouth.

[18thofMay]

You know the drill: First, someone says or does something politically incorrect. Next, mobs of wild-eyed, unhinged keyboard cops swoop in to judge, shame, excoriate, and issue over-the-top condemnations ... After performing this ritual cleansing, one assumes, those involved feel slightly better about themselves. This sense of inner peace and superiority has not yet been scientifically measured, but it lasts, alas, for only a few fleeting days. That’s when it’s time to find a new World’s Most Despicable Person.

So Nelson Bragg and myself pull you up on a few comments and you post this?

[Lonely Summer]

Actually, I think the comment that "we await new Brian Wilson music because of the incredible music he made from 62-70" is pretty accurate. I can't think of one Brian project in those years that has received all out raves like PS and SMiLE do. Sure, some fans love Love You, but an equal amount hate it. BW88 got near unanimous raves upon release; today, it is criticized for its 80s production and Brian's shouted vocals. GIOMH is universally scorned; TLOS might be the one album that seems to get the best reviews. Oh sure, everyone loves NPP right now, but give it another year or two, and it will get the same kind of revisionist scorn some are throwing at TWGMTR.

[rab2591]

Actually, I think the comment that "we await new Brian Wilson music because of the incredible music he made from 62-70" is pretty accurate. I can't think of one Brian project in those years that has received all out raves like PS and SMiLE do. Sure, some fans love Love You, but an equal amount hate it. BW88 got near unanimous raves upon release; today, it is criticized for its 80s production and Brian's shouted vocals. GIOMH is universally scorned; TLOS might be the one album that seems to get the best reviews. Oh sure, everyone loves NPP right now, but give it another year or two, and it will get the same kind of revisionist scorn some are throwing at TWGMTR.

It's accurate for him and accurate for a lot of people I'm sure - but he shouldn't lug us all into the "we" category and then say "that's the truth" because it's not considering a lot of us have varying opinions on the matter.

[Jim V.]

You know, one thing that I think is overlooked is that David Beard owes Mr. Brian Wilson an apology. Not to any of us or anything. But for him to basically say Brian is brain damaged or talk about him like he's the gold medal winner in the Special Olympics. I've noticed it a little lately. Kind of like, "hey, he's really messed up, but still, you gotta appreciate that he's tryin', the sad little sack."

And whatever your opinion of Brian and his latest tunes and concert performances, it's become pretty apparent lately that Brian isn't "performing well by his recent standards." He's performing well by anybody's standards. The concert my wife and I saw last month was beautiful. And his singing on No Pier Pressure is absolutely gorgeous. Dare I say it, better than Mike Love. Better than Paul McCartney. Better than Al Jardine (okay.... maybe not as good as Al these days). So to have the falsehoods like the fact that Brian only occasionally joins in stated by an "insider" is just kinda sh*t. Sorry to say it.

Also pretty rich is that the guy who posted a thread about "opinions on ESQ" would then tell us we are assholes for having opinions.

And I gotta say, it is interesting that after the C50 breakup, there were a few of us on here saying that perhaps ESQ and Mr. Beard should indeed have been a bit more pointed with the group about controversial topics and get us some better info rather than public relations fluff. And to an extent, we kinda got what we wished for. But instead of getting tough on controversial things like the C50 breakup, instead we've seen more attention paid to the fact that Brian is apparently only a somewhat sporadic participant in his own concerts (which really is untrue even on what I would say was a "not-so-good" night for him). Or a lot of hard hitting asides about how Brian's not the same guy he used to be (well no sh*t! Neither is Mike Love! Or you, or me, or anyone).

Unfortunately, instead of Mr. Beard pressing Mike Love about why the group never got back together after "giving it a rest for a year" or asking why they didn't try to capitalize on the success of C50 as a group, instead we get PR fluff, like "everybody is back doing what they like doing, and golly, isn't that great!"

But lastly, I'm also gonna say ESQ is pretty neat. Quite a few cool little issues. And I've been wanting to order the issue about L.A. (Light Album) but just haven't found the funds to do it lately.

[Wirestone]

The thing is, would you call someone who had a stroke "brain-damaged"? Would you say that to Kirk Douglas or Garrison Keillor or Ray Bradbury -- all of whom had strokes and then kept on doing public appearances? I mean, that is the definition of what a stroke does -- it damages your brain!

But no, people understand that a stroke might affect someone's speech, and might slow them down in certain ways, but if they're lucky enough and have quality care, they can resume most of their lives.

No one would call them brain-damaged, even though it's literally true, because the term is pejorative. Pure and simple.

[Jim V.]

The thing is, would you call someone who had a stroke "brain-damaged"? Would you say that to Kirk Douglas or Garrison Keillor or Ray Bradbury -- all of whom had strokes and then kept on doing public appearances? I mean, that is the definition of what a stroke does -- it damages your brain!

But no, people understand that a stroke might affect someone's speech, and might slow them down in certain ways, but if they're lucky enough and have quality care, they can resume most of their lives.

No one would call them brain-damaged, even though it's literally true, because the term is pejorative. Pure and simple.

Yeah, but as David Beard pointed out, remember the "brain damage scene" in the Love & Mercy movie??

Oh wait, neither do I.

[rab2591]

The thing is, would you call someone who had a stroke "brain-damaged"? Would you say that to Kirk Douglas or Garrison Keillor or Ray Bradbury -- all of whom had strokes and then kept on doing public appearances? I mean, that is the definition of what a stroke does -- it damages your brain!

But no, people understand that a stroke might affect someone's speech, and might slow them down in certain ways, but if they're lucky enough and have quality care, they can resume most of their lives.

No one would call them brain-damaged, even though it's literally true, because the term is pejorative. Pure and simple.

Exactly! And it brings up another interesting point: would anyone have the gall to make such a comment in the presence of Brian Wilson? Hell no. Doesn't surprise me in the least that it was published though. This was like the fourth article this week that attempted to delegitimize Brian and build up Mike into some sort of saintly figure - it seems like the most unorganized/unsubtle PR campaign ever.

...Now back to our regularly scheduled programming of the Mike apologists incessantly bringing up the postponed UK tour and claiming Brianistas hate SIP only because Brian wasn't on it