Good Vibrations Success and Smile's Demise

[Emily]

FdP, regarding Jules Siegel, I would guess he was commissioned by the Saturday Evening Post to write the article. Most magazines just have a small staff of writers to do their regular columns; the features are usually either accepted by submission or, more often, commissioned. If this was the case with Siegel, he would've been working on assignment by the SEP.

Emily - look on the eBay link for the cover of the Aug. 12, 1967 edition. Maybe it is blocked in the UK as Andrew did not seem to be able to open it.  You will see the position of The Saturday Evening Post on the front page.  Maybe if he was "commissioned" as you suggest he may have been given a stipend for his "efforts" notwithstanding the story not being published.  I don't know.

That publication was not likely running an article that was contrary to it's editorial position or it's "version" of the (it's) truth.  

S/he who has the gold, rules. And that goes hand-in-hand, with what gets submitted as a final copy for publication.  

I'm not questioning why it wasn't published.  

Emily - now, there seems to be a divergence of accounts as to what went down.  That is a good thing.  

What I can now look at as lacking, is whether there was any independent fact finding which took place to verify the account of the storyteller, notwithstanding the editorial position of the TSEP.  

I'm sorry. I don't know what you're referring to in the red bold above. There's a divergence of accounts as to what went down regarding what? Regarding Smile, for sure. There seems to have been a divergence on that since 1967. Or do you mean regarding something else?

GF's account adding cred and a contrast to that which Jules wrote. 

huh. Maybe GuitarFool2002 can clarify, because I don't see a divergence between what he said and what Jules Siegel wrote.

[filledeplage]

There is some blatantly false information being posted in this discussion, and wherever it's coming from it should be researched a bit more prior to posting as fact.

One that stood out, to start: David Anderle was introduced to the band through a relative and mutual friend of some of the Beach Boys in early 1965, then in the next year became closer to Brian and began to be a more frequent guest at Brian's house and the like. Van Dyke Parks said the first time he was in Brian's company was when David Crosby invited him to join him as Brian was previewing the Sloop John B single. Then Van Dyke and Brian more formally met at a party with Terry Melcher when Brian got the idea Van Dyke could write lyrics with him.

In no way did Van Dyke Parks "bring David Anderle into the organization", wherever that came from it doesn't line up at all with the facts.

That's just one example out of a laundry list of inconsistencies and outright incorrect facts being posted in this thread.

Emily - what GF wrote in this post. 

[guitarfool2002]

What I will clarify is that Jules' article could have had a much more pointed personal bias, or even a grudge against Brian Wilson, but to his credit as a journalist and writer he didn't make that a part of his account. For the most part, especially the firsthand details about the studio sessions, events like the dinner party and listening sessions, and other events, Jules' account is accurate and lines up with what other participants saw and described. And it's also backed up by the audio proof we got through the years with the sessions.

I say he could have added more of a negative tone than he did because Jules was for a time in the inner circle with Brian. He's in the airport photo, he's prominently featured in the GV promo film, and he's heard on some of the tapes. It's just like he described in the article, he was involved with a lot of the activities as he was doing his piece, and to him, he became more than a reporter getting the story.

What he hints at was something Michael Vosse described later, and clarified. Jules was the one who was barred from attending the recording sessions at some point, and it was Vosse who blocked him, with the excuse given that it was Jules' girlfriend giving off negative vibes. That, according to Vosse and reading between the lines, was more of a red herring and an excuse. Jules' personality began to grate on the circle of friends, not the least of which was Brian himself, and they just got tired of his attitude and wanted him out. I know it's only one snapshot in time, but some of that can be heard on the old bootleg track called "Smile Era Party" where Jules decides to start a game called Lifeboat and it has a weird, negative tone to the whole thing that brings the whole "skit" down.

Again, his observations and reporting of the majority of events he witnessed is actually accurate and detailed, confirmed by others there (and there were not many others there). And credit to Jules, considering he basically got dumped from the inner circle which Vosse confirmed was more to do with him rubbing people the wrong way and not as much to do with his girlfriend's vibes, he still produced an article which ultimately helped boost the legend around Brian and Smile during that time. He could have made it a slam piece on Brian and the others considering they shut him out at some point in time and he was cut off to the point of being barred from the studio. But he didn't.

[Emily]

What I will clarify is that Jules' article could have had a much more pointed personal bias, or even a grudge against Brian Wilson, but to his credit as a journalist and writer he didn't make that a part of his account. For the most part, especially the firsthand details about the studio sessions, events like the dinner party and listening sessions, and other events, Jules' account is accurate and lines up with what other participants saw and described. And it's also backed up by the audio proof we got through the years with the sessions.

I say he could have added more of a negative tone than he did because Jules was for a time in the inner circle with Brian. He's in the airport photo, he's prominently featured in the GV promo film, and he's heard on some of the tapes. It's just like he described in the article, he was involved with a lot of the activities as he was doing his piece, and to him, he became more than a reporter getting the story.

What he hints at was something Michael Vosse described later, and clarified. Jules was the one who was barred from attending the recording sessions at some point, and it was Vosse who blocked him, with the excuse given that it was Jules' girlfriend giving off negative vibes. That, according to Vosse and reading between the lines, was more of a red herring and an excuse. Jules' personality began to grate on the circle of friends, not the least of which was Brian himself, and they just got tired of his attitude and wanted him out. I know it's only one snapshot in time, but some of that can be heard on the old bootleg track called "Smile Era Party" where Jules decides to start a game called Lifeboat and it has a weird, negative tone to the whole thing that brings the whole "skit" down.

Again, his observations and reporting of the majority of events he witnessed is actually accurate and detailed, confirmed by others there (and there were not many others there). And credit to Jules, considering he basically got dumped from the inner circle which Vosse confirmed was more to do with him rubbing people the wrong way and not as much to do with his girlfriend's vibes, he still produced an article which ultimately helped boost the legend around Brian and Smile during that time. He could have made it a slam piece on Brian and the others considering they shut him out at some point in time and he was cut off to the point of being barred from the studio. But he didn't.

Thanks. Good job cross-referencing to piece together a bit of what was happening socially.

[Bicyclerider]

The worst lyrics on the album are Wind Chimes,

The best and credible sources, for me, are those who are "primary" sources; The Beach Boys themselves, not anyone else.  I want to hear what Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, Mike and Bruce have to say about their sessions.  (And, Dennis and Carl from whatever interviews are still available.) I like those best from the late 1960's and 70's where the band was "closer in time" to how things went down.  

Everyone else is a "secondary" source.  

 

Don't agree with this as Vosse, Anderle and Siegel were there throughout the project and its' unravelling and were privy to many interactions with Brian that the other Beach Boys were not present for, spent more time with Brian than any of the other Beach Boys - besides being sounding boards for Brian - he likely would share thoughts with them that he might not with the others.  They are primary sources as much  or more than say Al and Bruce who just showed up for vocal sessions when called.

[Emily]

The best and credible sources, for me, are those who are "primary" sources; The Beach Boys themselves, not anyone else.  I want to hear what Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, Mike and Bruce have to say about their sessions.  (And, Dennis and Carl from whatever interviews are still available.) I like those best from the late 1960's and 70's where the band was "closer in time" to how things went down.  

Everyone else is a "secondary" source.  

 

Don't agree with this as Vosse, Anderle and Siegel were there throughout the project and its' unravelling and were privy to many interactions with Brian that the other Beach Boys were not present for, spent more time with Brian than any of the other Beach Boys - besides being sounding boards for Brian - he likely would share thoughts with them that he might not with the others.  They are primary sources as much  or more than say Al and Bruce who just showed up for vocal sessions when called.

Of course that's true. They are primary sources for everything they experienced first-hand.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

The way I see the collapse of SMiLE (based on everything I've read) is that it was a combination of factors. Brian's psychological issues were tough enough for him to deal with but they were worsened by his drug abuse. In some ways, it's the same old rock-n-roll story: a creative leading light takes drugs to expand his mind and it works at first but eventually they only leave him confused. I think if he had stayed focused and sober we could've got something, but it was always going to be a tough road because of who these guys were.

I guess if there is a possible bias for Vosse/Anderle and Siegel it would be to downplay Brian's drug use. It makes sense they wouldnt go into that, and Im factoring that into this reply. All the same, I used to buy into that but now I think its at least slightly overblown as well. This idea of a big dramatic drug induced breakout. I think that was happening too, but in a less dramatic way, and yet the primary causes were...a million other things. Since we're focusing on the big 3 articles lately, Ill stick with them. And they all point to 3 or so big causes: VDP quitting, tension from the band and the whole legal limbo with Capitol. I think trying to do too much at once was also an issue, with Brother and going into films, etc. Anderle lists these as distractions even, because Brian was putting off doing anything on the album after VDP left. Im sure drugs and neurosis had their own part to play too. Brian just comes off as a very sensitive, eccentric guy especially in these articles. Anderle talks about how the vibes werent good with so much negativity around, and it was extremely hard to get Brian productive. I think the real key to the demise, is the Elements, and Ive said as much the past 2 years now. He hit a road block with that track, not knowing what to do with the other parts, fear of fire, and not knowing what to do without VDP.

I know that the group having doubts about the material or being abrasive is often keyed on as the main culprit in all of his. Frankly, I'm amazed The Beach Boys were able to get ANYTHING done right from the very beginning of their career. Session tapes reveal it was nearly impossible for Brian or anyone else to corral them. They sound like a bunch of rowdy teenagers...well, I guess they were, right? There's constant bickering, talking on top of each other, second-guessing each other, etc. I know if it were me, I would've had a nervous breakdown. I'm no fan of chaos.  It's like listening to a cacophony of voices that are never in sync, and as much as Brian is supposed to be in charge, he joins in as well, making him just as guilty. Sometimes listening to these sessions can be eye-opening fun but a little annoying (and The Beach Boys were never noted for their great wit, which is why listening to The Beatles engage in the same tomfoolery is more entertaining because at least they're funny). The main thing is, they DID the work and that includes SMiLE too, no matter if Mike or Carl questiond this or that...they sang the heck out of it.

I wasnt aware of that with their early sessions. Very eye opening. Yes, they sang the heck out of it. But again, Anderle mentions specifically how Mike sang one song but it wasnt quite how Brian wanted it...and they literally wasted the better part of a week rerecording that same song again and again until Brian decided to just do it himself. Its not a case of big bad Mike ruining everything so much as they were on such different wavelengths and Brian was such a perfectionist that they just couldnt communicate anymore. That and, I do believe Mike was jealous about being passed over yet again as lyricist. Anyway, I think the problem was with Brian as well as Mike; he was treating them like instruments rather than real people and it finally got to be too much.

I'm surprised that someone..anyone..either within the group or at Capitol didn't just sit the guys down and say "We need a record. Play me what's close to finished and we'll put that out next week". I know that sounds insensitive, but a LOT of money had spent. If there had been a record with just SMiLE versions of  "Heroes and Villains" "Wonderful", "Wind Chimes", Cabin-Essence" and "Surf's Up". Well, hell...that's a perfect album side right there! Who even cares what would've been on side 2? It would've been better than releasing bits and pieces over the years to bolster other albums.  

The clear implication from Vosse and Anderle is that Brian will do what he wants to do. You cant make him do the album if hes not feeling it. Which, actually, is why I think the Smiley aesthetic was his idea. That and the crucial "dont think youre god, just be a cool guy" lyric in Wonderful. Plus, with the legal wrangling going on, Capitol probably wasnt in much of a position to order him around. Again, according to Anderle, he went to all the legal meetings for Brian. I get the idea Brian wouldve just blown Capitol off. The Beach Boys bossing him around wouldve just caused more strife. I agree that an album of what was done by, say, April wouldve been preferable to Smiley and then leaking the rest out piece by piece over the years. Wouldve been better for their careers and the musical world. He had enough material to release a kickass record at that point. Maybe not the exact one he imagined, but still. And the unfinished songs are mostly unfinished because of lyrics. Those couldve been done in a week if Brian either lowered his standards just a bit or did them himself. BUT thats the key, I think. He realized his expectations were too high and he was doing everything himself. I really think thats why we got Smiley; he decided it was more important to do a laid back fun album as a group than this pretentious (not that I think that, but y'know) symphony to God that he essentially made all by himself.

I think maybe we have over emphasized some things and under emphasized other things.  As I remember one of the examples of the Boys so called resistance was "arguing" around the Boys doing endless takes that Brian would just junk because it wouldn't be happening for him and "fighting" over Brian telling them their parts and the Boys "excuses" for not wanting to sing it that way or wanting to sing this way. Just sounds like the band's normal process maybe.

Any way, that quote is from KHJ's History of Rock and Roll. According to Bill Mouzis, the production and audio engineer, the thing was put together in the 60 days before airing so the interview was probably sometime from the last week of December 1968 into February 1969. There is a misleading incomplete version in LLVS.......(crickets).........(tumbleweeds).............but I forgot to look up the page number.  The ellipsis represent announcer and music breaks as I remember.

"Early 1967, I had planned to make an album entitled SMILE.  I was working with a guy named Van Dyke Parks, who was collaborating with me on the tunes, and in the process we came up with a song called 'Surf’s Up,' and I performed that with just a piano on a documentary show made on rock music.  The song 'Surf’s Up' that I sang for that documentary never came out on an album, and it was supposed to come out on the SMILE album, and that and a couple of other songs were junked ... because I didn't feel that they ... I don't know why, I just didn't, for some reason, didn't want to put them on the album ... and the group nearly broke up, actually split up for good over that, that one ... the decision of mine not to put a lot of the things that we'd cut for the album SMILEY SMILE on the album, and so for like almost a year, we're just now kind of getting back together ... because I didn't think that the songs really were right for the public at the time, and I didn't have a feeling, a commercial feeling, about some of these songs that we've never released, and ... maybe I ... some people like to hang onto certain things and ... just as their own little songs that they've written almost for themselves. And a lot of times, you know, a person will write and will realize later that they're ... it's not commercial, you know, but what they've written is nice for them, but a lot of people just don't like it."
-Brian Wilson, 1968

Even if it was their normal process, it wasnt helpful at a time when the record company was against them, Brian was getting a million ideas at once, they were trying to branch off into producing and filmmaking too, Carl was drafted, the music scene was quickly changing, etc. No one is saying it was the only or even the main factor. But it WAS a factor. I think to wave it away as "Mike only asked about CE innocently the one time"/"that was just their normal process" is just not respecting all the sources. Not just the three we're all creaming over right now, but what VDP, Asher and even Brian's earlier collaborators have said, where they felt very unwelcome and challenged by the other guys--particularly Mike. To ignore this strife thats so well documented isnt being intellectually honest--tho i agree it has been overemphasized in the past, but my issue is, I think we're starting to see the pendulum shift too far the other way now.

Thanks for that quote. It definitely sounds like a man divided. One who knows hes got some good material there but has his doubts too since its so different, and almost certainly had those magnified by the negative reception of the group.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Mujan - I just went through that article and found what I saw as any relationships between and among the parties "as retold by Jules."  And only within that context only and not as truth or fiction.

Bias is inherent if someone is your family, a person who hired you or any other kind of relationship where a benefit has been conferred.  Now, GF has cleared those details.  And, I'm very glad.  So, now we can look at as we should every article with a critical eye.  

And "gospel truth" is just an expression and can be religiously neutral. This has nothing to do with whether they cared for Brian or not.  It seems they did but it is all second hand "hearsay" and why I like to rely on the "primary" sources rather than "secondary" sources.  That is too soap-opera-ey for me.  The interviews from the late 60's and 70's by band members are those that hold the true story are those that I look at with more cred.  Anyone else can believe whatever they like.  I generally pick just two things: the music and the band members reflections and interviews in their words.    

It has nothing to do with whether VDP was his favorite or not.  It is what was written by Jules, as VDP having Anderle as manager, and the chain of people involved in the project, "as reported by Jules."  

    

These guys ARE primary sources. Id be really interested to hear if other people who were there have given notable interviews/written articles about it tho.

To limit yourself to just the band is intellectually dishonest. Surely you can see how they have a clear bias too (in Mikes case, to downplay what was happening and the new lyrics) and how they were kept in the dark thru all this. Sure, their recollections have merit too, but they werent even there for most of the sessions and to limit yourself to just them is missing over half the story. 

[Emily]

I think maybe we have over emphasized some things and under emphasized other things.  As I remember one of the examples of the Boys so called resistance was "arguing" around the Boys doing endless takes that Brian would just junk because it wouldn't be happening for him and "fighting" over Brian telling them their parts and the Boys "excuses" for not wanting to sing it that way or wanting to sing this way. Just sounds like the band's normal process maybe.

Any way, that quote is from KHJ's History of Rock and Roll. According to Bill Mouzis, the production and audio engineer, the thing was put together in the 60 days before airing so the interview was probably sometime from the last week of December 1968 into February 1969. There is a misleading incomplete version in LLVS.......(crickets).........(tumbleweeds).............but I forgot to look up the page number.  The ellipsis represent announcer and music breaks as I remember.

"Early 1967, I had planned to make an album entitled SMILE.  I was working with a guy named Van Dyke Parks, who was collaborating with me on the tunes, and in the process we came up with a song called 'Surf’s Up,' and I performed that with just a piano on a documentary show made on rock music.  The song 'Surf’s Up' that I sang for that documentary never came out on an album, and it was supposed to come out on the SMILE album, and that and a couple of other songs were junked ... because I didn't feel that they ... I don't know why, I just didn't, for some reason, didn't want to put them on the album ... and the group nearly broke up, actually split up for good over that, that one ... the decision of mine not to put a lot of the things that we'd cut for the album SMILEY SMILE on the album, and so for like almost a year, we're just now kind of getting back together ... because I didn't think that the songs really were right for the public at the time, and I didn't have a feeling, a commercial feeling, about some of these songs that we've never released, and ... maybe I ... some people like to hang onto certain things and ... just as their own little songs that they've written almost for themselves. And a lot of times, you know, a person will write and will realize later that they're ... it's not commercial, you know, but what they've written is nice for them, but a lot of people just don't like it."
-Brian Wilson, 1968

Even if it was their normal process, it wasnt helpful at a time when the record company was against them, Brian was getting a million ideas at once, they were trying to branch off into producing and filmmaking too, Carl was drafted, the music scene was quickly changing, etc. No one is saying it was the only or even the main factor. But it WAS a factor. I think to wave it away as "Mike only asked about CE innocently the one time"/"that was just their normal process" is just not respecting all the sources. Not just the three we're all creaming over right now, but what VDP, Asher and even Brian's earlier collaborators have said, where they felt very unwelcome and challenged by the other guys--particularly Mike. To ignore this strife thats so well documented isnt being intellectually honest--tho i agree it has been overemphasized in the past, but my issue is, I think we're starting to see the pendulum shift too far the other way now.

Thanks for that quote. It definitely sounds like a man divided. One who knows hes got some good material there but has his doubts too since its so different, and almost certainly had those magnified by the negative reception of the group.

hmmm... just throwing this out, I haven't thought it through, but one reading of that quote that's completely new to me conceptually but fits with other bits and pieces, would be:

-"a person will write and will realize later that they're ... it's not commercial"
Brian became convinced that much of the Smile work, including Surf's Up ( ) was not commercially viable and that they needed a more commercially viable album at that time (one hitch with this idea is how did he think Smiley Smile would be commercially viable?).
My guess, based on a lot of quotes over the years, would be that Mike Love would agree with that.

-"and the group nearly broke up, actually split up for good over that, that one ... the decision of mine not to put a lot of the things that we'd cut for the album SMILEY SMILE on the album, and so for like almost a year, we're just now kind of getting back together ... because I didn't think that the songs really were right for the public at the time, and I didn't have a feeling, a commercial feeling, about some of these songs that we've never released"
I've heard Dennis Wilson really liked the Smile work and obviously Carl Wilson later insisted on putting Surf's Up on an album, so maybe there were intra-Beach Boys struggles over what to put on Smiley Smile and tempers flared enough that they almost broke up. Brian takes responsibility for the final decision, but that doesn't mean everyone in the group disagreed with him; possibly only that some did (Dennis and Carl maybe?) and they felt strongly enough about it that the band almost broke up.

-what they've written is nice for them, but a lot of people just don't like it
Brian never-the-less seems to think that some of that work is good, to him anyway, but he seems convinced that the public en masse wouldn't be into it.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

What I will clarify is that Jules' article could have had a much more pointed personal bias, or even a grudge against Brian Wilson, but to his credit as a journalist and writer he didn't make that a part of his account. For the most part, especially the firsthand details about the studio sessions, events like the dinner party and listening sessions, and other events, Jules' account is accurate and lines up with what other participants saw and described. And it's also backed up by the audio proof we got through the years with the sessions.

I say he could have added more of a negative tone than he did because Jules was for a time in the inner circle with Brian. He's in the airport photo, he's prominently featured in the GV promo film, and he's heard on some of the tapes. It's just like he described in the article, he was involved with a lot of the activities as he was doing his piece, and to him, he became more than a reporter getting the story.

What he hints at was something Michael Vosse described later, and clarified. Jules was the one who was barred from attending the recording sessions at some point, and it was Vosse who blocked him, with the excuse given that it was Jules' girlfriend giving off negative vibes. That, according to Vosse and reading between the lines, was more of a red herring and an excuse. Jules' personality began to grate on the circle of friends, not the least of which was Brian himself, and they just got tired of his attitude and wanted him out. I know it's only one snapshot in time, but some of that can be heard on the old bootleg track called "Smile Era Party" where Jules decides to start a game called Lifeboat and it has a weird, negative tone to the whole thing that brings the whole "skit" down.

Again, his observations and reporting of the majority of events he witnessed is actually accurate and detailed, confirmed by others there (and there were not many others there). And credit to Jules, considering he basically got dumped from the inner circle which Vosse confirmed was more to do with him rubbing people the wrong way and not as much to do with his girlfriend's vibes, he still produced an article which ultimately helped boost the legend around Brian and Smile during that time. He could have made it a slam piece on Brian and the others considering they shut him out at some point in time and he was cut off to the point of being barred from the studio. But he didn't.

Exactly. Anderle and Vosse couldve done the same since they were unceremoniously fired, but they kept their tones very reverent of Brian and were really in awe of what he was trying to do even a year later. That, to me, negates any accusations of bias. I mean, yes, everyone is biased in their accounts, but the point is these guys were no more or less than anyone else. The idea that Anderle was VDP's manager would lead me to believe his bias would be to make VDP look as good as possible--possibly at Brian's expense--but he doesnt. He says what their relationship was and what happened, and his account is backed up by Vosse, the parties themselves and later accounts. VDP and Brian both come off looking sympathetic and endearing. He couldve blamed it all on Mike too, especially if he heard of the CE incident. And while he acknowledges there was a lot of fighting, again, so does everyone including Vosse, Siegel, VDP and Brian themselves. But he goes out of his way to say he doesnt blame them, he understand why they didnt like what was happening, and makes them look sympathetic too. The only account that differs on these points it Mike, and hey, speaking of biases. Who has a clear Bias to make themselves out to look good? Especially considering how much praise SMiLE has gotten, and Brian has gotten along with empathy for his condition, he doesnt want to admit to being antagonistic.

Ugh, that Lifeboat tape. Thats the only PS skit Ive only listened to once and never again. I agree, there is a distinctly negative vibe about it. You can tell Brian was pissed/upset, and nobody was really having much fun. I always thought the voice on the recording doing the describing was really obnoxious sounding too--and thats not bias against Siegel because I had no idea who it was until later.

[filledeplage]

What I will clarify is that Jules' article could have had a much more pointed personal bias, or even a grudge against Brian Wilson, but to his credit as a journalist and writer he didn't make that a part of his account. For the most part, especially the firsthand details about the studio sessions, events like the dinner party and listening sessions, and other events, Jules' account is accurate and lines up with what other participants saw and described. And it's also backed up by the audio proof we got through the years with the sessions.

I say he could have added more of a negative tone than he did because Jules was for a time in the inner circle with Brian. He's in the airport photo, he's prominently featured in the GV promo film, and he's heard on some of the tapes. It's just like he described in the article, he was involved with a lot of the activities as he was doing his piece, and to him, he became more than a reporter getting the story.

What he hints at was something Michael Vosse described later, and clarified. Jules was the one who was barred from attending the recording sessions at some point, and it was Vosse who blocked him, with the excuse given that it was Jules' girlfriend giving off negative vibes. That, according to Vosse and reading between the lines, was more of a red herring and an excuse. Jules' personality began to grate on the circle of friends, not the least of which was Brian himself, and they just got tired of his attitude and wanted him out. I know it's only one snapshot in time, but some of that can be heard on the old bootleg track called "Smile Era Party" where Jules decides to start a game called Lifeboat and it has a weird, negative tone to the whole thing that brings the whole "skit" down.

Again, his observations and reporting of the majority of events he witnessed is actually accurate and detailed, confirmed by others there (and there were not many others there). And credit to Jules, considering he basically got dumped from the inner circle which Vosse confirmed was more to do with him rubbing people the wrong way and not as much to do with his girlfriend's vibes, he still produced an article which ultimately helped boost the legend around Brian and Smile during that time. He could have made it a slam piece on Brian and the others considering they shut him out at some point in time and he was cut off to the point of being barred from the studio. But he didn't.

Exactly. Anderle and Vosse couldve done the same since they were unceremoniously fired, but they kept their tones very reverent of Brian and were really in awe of what he was trying to do even a year later. That, to me, negates any accusations of bias. I mean, yes, everyone is biased in their accounts, but the point is these guys were no more or less than anyone else. The idea that Anderle was VDP's manager would lead me to believe his bias would be to make VDP look as good as possible--possibly at Brian's expense--but he doesnt. He says what their relationship was and what happened, and his account is backed up by Vosse, the parties themselves and later accounts. VDP and Brian both come off looking sympathetic and endearing. He couldve blamed it all on Mike too, especially if he heard of the CE incident. And while he acknowledges there was a lot of fighting, again, so does everyone including Vosse, Siegel, VDP and Brian themselves. But he goes out of his way to say he doesnt blame them, he understand why they didnt like what was happening, and makes them look sympathetic too. The only account that differs on these points it Mike, and hey, speaking of biases. Who has a clear Bias to make themselves out to look good? Especially considering how much praise SMiLE has gotten, and Brian has gotten along with empathy for his condition, he doesnt want to admit to being antagonistic.

Ugh, that Lifeboat tape. Thats the only PS skit Ive only listened to once and never again. I agree, there is a distinctly negative vibe about it. You can tell Brian was pissed/upset, and nobody was really having much fun. I always thought the voice on the recording doing the describing was really obnoxious sounding too--and thats not bias against Siegel because I had no idea who it was until later.

Mujan - from the article..."With that flank covered, Brian was ready to deal with some of the other problems of trying to become hip, the most important of which was how he was going to get in touch with some really hip people.  In effect the dinner party at the house was the first social event, and the star of the evening, so far as Brian was concerned was Van Dyke Parks' manager David Anderle, who showed up with a whole group of very hip people. 

Elegant, cool and impossibly cunning, Anderle was an artist who somehow found himself in the record business for MGM Records, where he had earned himself a reputation as a genius by purportedly think up the million dollar movie-TV-record offer that briefly lured Bob Dylan to MGM from Columbia until everybody had a change of heart and Dylan decided to go back home to Columbia."

So, everything I cited was directly from Jules' article. Word for word.  I think it is from page four or five.

And, the whole issue of "primary sources."  The Beach Boys: Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, Mike, Bruce and David are "principals." They are the "primary" sources. 

Others, who are eyewitnesses are "secondary" as far as I am concerned.  Sorry to have omitted David in the earlier post.  He is an original BB.   

[Cam Mott]

There is some blatantly false information being posted in this discussion, and wherever it's coming from it should be researched a bit more prior to posting as fact.

One that stood out, to start: David Anderle was introduced to the band through a relative and mutual friend of some of the Beach Boys in early 1965, then in the next year became closer to Brian and began to be a more frequent guest at Brian's house and the like. Van Dyke Parks said the first time he was in Brian's company was when David Crosby invited him to join him as Brian was previewing the Sloop John B single. Then Van Dyke and Brian more formally met at a party with Terry Melcher when Brian got the idea Van Dyke could write lyrics with him.

In no way did Van Dyke Parks "bring David Anderle into the organization", wherever that came from it doesn't line up at all with the facts.

That's just one example out of a laundry list of inconsistencies and outright incorrect facts being posted in this thread.

David told PW in the Outlaw Blues interview: "DAVID: I'm not sure really how that happened. My involvement with Brian when Van Dyke entered the picture was still on a very social level. I remember one night talking to someone, and someone said Van Dyke has been up to Brian's house and they're gonna work together. And I thought, Wow! Man, that's gonna be unbelievable. And I was perplexed as to how the two of them came together."

[filledeplage]

There is some blatantly false information being posted in this discussion, and wherever it's coming from it should be researched a bit more prior to posting as fact.

One that stood out, to start: David Anderle was introduced to the band through a relative and mutual friend of some of the Beach Boys in early 1965, then in the next year became closer to Brian and began to be a more frequent guest at Brian's house and the like. Van Dyke Parks said the first time he was in Brian's company was when David Crosby invited him to join him as Brian was previewing the Sloop John B single. Then Van Dyke and Brian more formally met at a party with Terry Melcher when Brian got the idea Van Dyke could write lyrics with him.

In no way did Van Dyke Parks "bring David Anderle into the organization", wherever that came from it doesn't line up at all with the facts.

That's just one example out of a laundry list of inconsistencies and outright incorrect facts being posted in this thread.

David told PW in the interview: "DAVID: I'm not sure really how that happened. My involvement with Brian when Van Dyke entered the picture was still on a very social level. I remember one night talking to someone, and someone said Van Dyke has been up to Brian's house and they're gonna work together. And I thought, Wow! Man, that's gonna be unbelievable. And I was perplexed as to how the two of them came together."

For me this whole Jules article is getting "curiouser and curiouser" - "Out in the studio, the musicians for the session were unpacking their instruments.  In sport shirts and slacks, they looked like insurance salesmen and used-car dealers, except for one blond female percussionist who might have been stamped out by a special machine that supplied plastic mannequin housewives for detergent commercials."

This is roughly at paragraph 7.  Is Jules referring to Carol Kaye?  And was she a percussionist or a guitar player? Was there another woman doing session work that we don't know about?  

And, if it is she, (Carol Kaye) alongside the disparaging characterization of what I only assume to be some or all male Wrecking Crew members, being referred to in a similar disparaging tone, what is up with this nastiness?  

 

[Andrew G. Doe]

Not Kaye: she only played guitar or bass.

[filledeplage]

Not Kaye: she only played guitar or bass.

OK - then is it known about whom Jules is speaking?

And if there was a female percussionist, would that mean that Hal Blaine was not there?

And this is the description of the actual (or an actual) percussionist?

Maybe non drummer, on bells, or whatever?

[Cam Mott]

Whoops, mis-post.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

What I will clarify is that Jules' article could have had a much more pointed personal bias, or even a grudge against Brian Wilson, but to his credit as a journalist and writer he didn't make that a part of his account. For the most part, especially the firsthand details about the studio sessions, events like the dinner party and listening sessions, and other events, Jules' account is accurate and lines up with what other participants saw and described. And it's also backed up by the audio proof we got through the years with the sessions.

I say he could have added more of a negative tone than he did because Jules was for a time in the inner circle with Brian. He's in the airport photo, he's prominently featured in the GV promo film, and he's heard on some of the tapes. It's just like he described in the article, he was involved with a lot of the activities as he was doing his piece, and to him, he became more than a reporter getting the story.

What he hints at was something Michael Vosse described later, and clarified. Jules was the one who was barred from attending the recording sessions at some point, and it was Vosse who blocked him, with the excuse given that it was Jules' girlfriend giving off negative vibes. That, according to Vosse and reading between the lines, was more of a red herring and an excuse. Jules' personality began to grate on the circle of friends, not the least of which was Brian himself, and they just got tired of his attitude and wanted him out. I know it's only one snapshot in time, but some of that can be heard on the old bootleg track called "Smile Era Party" where Jules decides to start a game called Lifeboat and it has a weird, negative tone to the whole thing that brings the whole "skit" down.

Again, his observations and reporting of the majority of events he witnessed is actually accurate and detailed, confirmed by others there (and there were not many others there). And credit to Jules, considering he basically got dumped from the inner circle which Vosse confirmed was more to do with him rubbing people the wrong way and not as much to do with his girlfriend's vibes, he still produced an article which ultimately helped boost the legend around Brian and Smile during that time. He could have made it a slam piece on Brian and the others considering they shut him out at some point in time and he was cut off to the point of being barred from the studio. But he didn't.

Exactly. Anderle and Vosse couldve done the same since they were unceremoniously fired, but they kept their tones very reverent of Brian and were really in awe of what he was trying to do even a year later. That, to me, negates any accusations of bias. I mean, yes, everyone is biased in their accounts, but the point is these guys were no more or less than anyone else. The idea that Anderle was VDP's manager would lead me to believe his bias would be to make VDP look as good as possible--possibly at Brian's expense--but he doesnt. He says what their relationship was and what happened, and his account is backed up by Vosse, the parties themselves and later accounts. VDP and Brian both come off looking sympathetic and endearing. He couldve blamed it all on Mike too, especially if he heard of the CE incident. And while he acknowledges there was a lot of fighting, again, so does everyone including Vosse, Siegel, VDP and Brian themselves. But he goes out of his way to say he doesnt blame them, he understand why they didnt like what was happening, and makes them look sympathetic too. The only account that differs on these points it Mike, and hey, speaking of biases. Who has a clear Bias to make themselves out to look good? Especially considering how much praise SMiLE has gotten, and Brian has gotten along with empathy for his condition, he doesnt want to admit to being antagonistic.

Ugh, that Lifeboat tape. Thats the only PS skit Ive only listened to once and never again. I agree, there is a distinctly negative vibe about it. You can tell Brian was pissed/upset, and nobody was really having much fun. I always thought the voice on the recording doing the describing was really obnoxious sounding too--and thats not bias against Siegel because I had no idea who it was until later.

Mujan - from the article..."With that flank covered, Brian was ready to deal with some of the other problems of trying to become hip, the most important of which was how he was going to get in touch with some really hip people.  In effect the dinner party at the house was the first social event, and the star of the evening, so far as Brian was concerned was Van Dyke Parks' manager David Anderle, who showed up with a whole group of very hip people. 

Elegant, cool and impossibly cunning, Anderle was an artist who somehow found himself in the record business for MGM Records, where he had earned himself a reputation as a genius by purportedly think up the million dollar movie-TV-record offer that briefly lured Bob Dylan to MGM from Columbia until everybody had a change of heart and Dylan decided to go back home to Columbia."

So, everything I cited was directly from Jules' article. Word for word.  I think it is from page four or five.

And, the whole issue of "primary sources."  The Beach Boys: Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, Mike, Bruce and David are "principals." They are the "primary" sources. 

Others, who are eyewitnesses are "secondary" as far as I am concerned.  Sorry to have omitted David in the earlier post.  He is an original BB.   

I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not doubting Anderle was VDP's manager or Brian wanted to be hip. What I don't agree with you on is this bullying narrative, where the hip crowd came in and forced Brian in a direction he didn't want. Maybe he changed his mind later, but SMiLE was his decision. It was his show all the way. And I'm saying for someone who'd have a vested interest in making VDP look amazing and Brian and/or the other beach boys bad, Anderle didn't. He's incredibly reverent to Brian and the project as well as sympathetic to the Beach Boys. It could've been a "VDP was responsible for everything good about SMiLE, Brian was a drug addled imbecile and the other BBs bullied us out of the picture" type hit piece--which the media would've loved. But it wasn't. I think you're taking this bias complex a bit far.

Also a primary subject in any topic is someone who witnessed something first-hand. So that absolutely means Vosse and Anderle. They were there with Brian on a daily basis watching the album unfold. They are eye witnesses. The other Beach Boys are not. They weren't there until what was it...Nov or Dec...possibly even Jan? I don't recall. But they weren't privy to the day to day operations, the creative process or the Wrecking Crew sessions. Brian didn't tell them his plans when they got back, he said "sing this part" and that's it. They're not good sources on SMiLE. Period. Their input has value, sure, but it's extremely limited because they weren't there for so much of the period. Also, you're neglecting that they have their own biases too. Itd be in their interests to downplay their antagonism and possibly even downplay how great the music was so they don't look like jerks who ruined (or, didn't help with) such an amazing album.

The principles here are Brian and to a lesser extent VDP. Both resent the album and being asked about it and one is a notoriously bad interview with a faulty memory.

[Mitchell]

The Smile Party tape may warrant a more in-depth listening because (going on memory) it sounds like Brian is directing the negative vibes (similar to the Vegetables arguments).  Like the Mike Love H&V narration, it may behoove further study to confirm Brian's intentions for the recording.

[Emily]

Vosse Siegel never claimed Van Dyke Parks introduced Anderle. Guitarfool2002 was pointing out "inconsistencies and outright incorrect facts being posted in this thread," not in the Siegel article. That one of those errors of fact was born out of a misreading of Siegel's article does not discredit Siegel.
The only error pointed out so far in Siegel's story is that he mistakes Carol Kaye as a percussionist. Big deal^{(TM-RangeRoverA1)}.
Also, "primary source" and "secondary source" are terms of art with specific meanings. If one chooses to use them otherwise, that's of course their choice, but it might be confusing to their readers.

edit - in the original post I accidentally said "Vosse" every time I meant "Siegel"

[Andrew G. Doe]

Not Kaye: she only played guitar or bass.

OK - then is it known about whom Jules is speaking?

And if there was a female percussionist, would that mean that Hal Blaine was not there?

And this is the description of the actual (or an actual) percussionist?

Maybe non drummer, on bells, or whatever?

The personnel are listed online. It's possible Siegel is mistaking Kaye for someone else.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

The Smile Party tape may warrant a more in-depth listening because (going on memory) it sounds like Brian is directing the negative vibes (similar to the Vegetables arguments).  Like the Mike Love H&V narration, it may behoove further study to confirm Brian's intentions for the recording.

Thats an interesting point, and since I havent listened to it except the one time, maybe I should go back and do so. My impression listening the first time was Siegel and possibly a few other people, were being annoying and possibly mean to Brian and some of the other people there, and Brian was getting noticeably upset as it went on.

[filledeplage]

Not Kaye: she only played guitar or bass.

OK - then is it known about whom Jules is speaking?

And if there was a female percussionist, would that mean that Hal Blaine was not there?

And this is the description of the actual (or an actual) percussionist?

Maybe non drummer, on bells, or whatever?

The personnel are listed online. It's possible Siegel is mistaking Kaye for someone else.

No Andrew - I don't agree - that is not good enough.  Nor an excuse for an article that was not proofread by someone who knew Carol Kaye was clearly not the percussionist.  You would know in 5 seconds who the only woman was and what her job was.  She was not behind a set of drums.

He reportedly or "self-reportedly" spent "months" according to Rolling Stone, in their presence, and as I see it, knew or should have know that Hal Blaine was the percussionist, which does not give him proper attribution for his work, and cleverly crafts a way to insult both Carol Kaye and Marilyn Wilson, in a gender specific way. The Rolling Stone article was adapted from the original 1967 article.

This is while Jules speaks of himself in the third person (omniscient - I do not think so)

First, Jules refers to Carol, as "one female percussionist who might have been stamped out of a sequel machine that supplied plastic mannequin housewives for detergent commercials."  I realize that she may have some inaccuracies in whether she played on this song or that, but she did not deserve this. Even in the mid-1960's.  It is a gender-based statement of intolerance.

Second, Marilyn.  "Marilyn sat nervously painting her fingernails as Brian..." Jules did not need to be in Marilyn's home, and comment about Brian's wife painting her nails as though she was a completely self-absorbed wife who did nothing else.  

There is a certain respect for privacy when you are doing a story, while you are in someone's home or whether this "female musician," (Marilyn) should have been accorded a little more respect with the backhanded observation about the wallpaper in Brian's bedroom as "red-imitation-velvet-wallpapered..." and likely was referring to a type of wallpaper, known IIRC as "flock-and-foil." Of course it was "imitation."  Real cotton velvet would be highly flammable.  Who needs to know what kind of wallpaper there is?  This is about a gifted musician who opened his door for this person.  

This board prides itself in accuracy and I find this article not only inaccurate (as corrected by GF) but lacking in a type of loyalty that should have accompanied his extraordinary "access" to this era which is precious to many of us, for this tremendous gift of music that has inspired and comforted us.  It is and was bad enough to see BB/BW criticism coming from the outside, but I find it particularly vexatious to see it coming from the inside.  

And...as regards making them "hip" - what is "hipper" than having a plane with your name on the side?    

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Not Kaye: she only played guitar or bass.

OK - then is it known about whom Jules is speaking?

And if there was a female percussionist, would that mean that Hal Blaine was not there?

And this is the description of the actual (or an actual) percussionist?

Maybe non drummer, on bells, or whatever?

The personnel are listed online. It's possible Siegel is mistaking Kaye for someone else.

No Andrew - I don't agree - that is not good enough.  Nor an excuse for an article that was not proofread by someone who knew Carol Kaye was clearly not the percussionist.  You would know in 5 seconds who the only woman was and what her job was.  She was not behind a set of drums.

He reportedly or "self-reportedly" spent "months" according to Rolling Stone, in their presence, and as I see it, knew or should have know that Hal Blaine was the percussionist, which does not give him proper attribution for his work, and cleverly crafts a way to insult both Carol Kaye and Marilyn Wilson, in a gender specific way. The Rolling Stone article was adapted from the original 1967 article.

This is while Jules speaks of himself in the third person (omniscient - I do not think so)

First, Jules refers to Carol, as "one female percussionist who might have been stamped out of a sequel machine that supplied plastic mannequin housewives for detergent commercials."  I realize that she may have some inaccuracies in whether she played on this song or that, but she did not deserve this. Even in the mid-1960's.  It is a gender-based statement of intolerance.

Second, Marilyn.  "Marilyn sat nervously painting her fingernails as Brian..." Jules did not need to be in Marilyn's home, and comment about Brian's wife painting her nails as though she was a completely self-absorbed wife who did nothing else.  

There is a certain respect for privacy when you are doing a story, while you are in someone's home or whether this "female musician," (Marilyn) should have been accorded a little more respect with the backhanded observation about the wallpaper in Brian's bedroom as "red-imitation-velvet-wallpapered..." and likely was referring to a type of wallpaper, known IIRC as "flock-and-foil." Of course it was "imitation."  Real cotton velvet would be highly flammable.  Who needs to know what kind of wallpaper there is?  This is about a gifted musician who opened his door for this person.  

This board prides itself in accuracy and I find this article not only inaccurate (as corrected by GF) but lacking in a type of loyalty that should have accompanied his extraordinary "access" to this era which is precious to many of us, for this tremendous gift of music that has inspired and comforted us.  It is and was bad enough to see BB/BW criticism coming from the outside, but I find it particularly vexatious to see it coming from the inside.  

And...as regards making them "hip" - what is "hipper" than having a plane with your name on the side?    

Honestly, I think youre just looking for things to complain about. Yeah, there are some very slight inaccuracies but thats the case in all kinds of professional journalism/reports. Not excusing it, but at the same time thats no reason to throw Siegel and this article in the dump.

We can argue about what makes a person hip all day but its irrelevant. Point is, Brian thought he had to please the hipsters and made a conscious effort to do so. If you think that was a bad decision, blame him, not the hipsters. They were just trying to help him realize HIS vision, which he HIRED them to do.

I think youve made up your mind already about these people and are reaching for whatever you can to prove the conclusion youve already decided upon. Speaking of bias

[Cam Mott]

The Smile Party tape may warrant a more in-depth listening because (going on memory) it sounds like Brian is directing the negative vibes (similar to the Vegetables arguments).  Like the Mike Love H&V narration, it may behoove further study to confirm Brian's intentions for the recording.

That's my memory too, can't be bothered to listen.    

Is it that the tape where Brian is directing people that "we have to have an argument so we can..." something, something, - "make up" or some such?

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

The Smile Party tape may warrant a more in-depth listening because (going on memory) it sounds like Brian is directing the negative vibes (similar to the Vegetables arguments).  Like the Mike Love H&V narration, it may behoove further study to confirm Brian's intentions for the recording.

That's my memory too, can't be bothered to listen.    

Is it that the tape where Brian is directing people that "we have to have an argument so we can..." something, something, - "make up" or some such?

No it isnt. I dont remember which PS skit that is, but I can say with 100% confidence its NOT lifeboat tape