Good Vibrations Success and Smile's Demise

[GhostyTMRS]

For the record, I'm not talking about their accounts of what happened. I was referring to Brian's apparent need to seek the approval of the hip LA scene when he was way beyond them to begin with. I DO think that people need to step back and consider that all of the principles involved were in their 20's and should cut them some slack for their behavior.

We'll disagree on Pet Sounds -vs- SMiLE. To me Pet Sounds is the masterwork with honest, raw and profound lyrics that have much more going for them VDP's, some of which I find wonderful while some come off as incredibly pretentious. Loved them all when I was younger, not so much at 45, whereas Pet Sounds still works on every level for me, if anything it becomes a richer listening experience as I get older (which I can't say for many albums I worshipped as a teenager). There's also the problem of SMiLE not being fully realized. I'm leaning more and more towards the idea of it being 6 or so completed songs that should've just been released as they were.

[The_Holy_Bee]

Some of which I find wonderful while some come off as incredibly pretentious.

I see the term 'pretentious' frequently employed on these boards, sometimes about other posters, but most often in reference to the lyrics or, indeed, speech/manner of Van Dyke Parks. One actual (and satisfactory) definition of that word: 'Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance or merit than is actually possessed.'

Is this actually what you mean when discussing the words for the SMiLE songs? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you if so, but if the term's going to be thrown about it'd be nice to know this is actually what you mean. At least then if there's going to be any debate over the merits of (and these are just examples - I do recognize you said you find some of his lyrics wonderful )  'She belongs there, left with her liberty' or - yes - 'Over and over, the crow cries uncover the cornfield', we'll understand the terms of that debate going in. Especially because you consider some of the lyrics to 'come off' as 'incredibly' attempting to impress by affecting greater importance or merit than is actually possessed. This strikes me as a bold line to take - even with the most esoteric verses he wrote - but I'm interested to read your arguments.

[filledeplage]

Woodward and Bernstein...that's a trick question. 

stumped

Carl Bernstein did not graduate.  Woodward - Yale, 1965

I can google. I'm just stumped where he's going with it.

Maybe Watergate? Woodward and Bernstein

But Bernstein (Leonard )was involved with Inside Pop.

We have a winner! Bernstein was a play on words/names with a dual meaning in tribute to Van Dyke Parks, who is in the photo. Woodward was a Navy man, and Carl Bernstein dropped out of college, a move which cost him good jobs at first but he eventually got in through his abilities as a journalist. But beyond that, these were also some of the college kids that came of age in the mid to late 60's and ended up changing the landscape in their respective fields.

Consider if that airport photo was a school class photo: We have key members of the Beach Boys, Three Dog Night, The Turtles, Jan & Dean, various published authors and musicians like Van Dyke Parks, we have a successful music exec in David Anderle, we have Michael Vosse who went on to win Emmy awards for his work in TV news...quite a class, in that photo, quite successful.

Where the notion comes from that these people were something other than successful on their own, or why that notion even exists, is beyond me.

Well - Thank you, GF - I don't win contests but surely won, when I fell in love with the BB's music with TLIOK in the mid 60's.  No doubt there are serious music luminaries among the class photo. I saw Mark Volman last summer as part of the Flo and Eddie tour.  They were at Disney as well at some point.  The missing students in the photo are those "medieval choirboys, the voices of the Beach Boys pealed (ing)in wordless prayer...chorale that reached upward to the vaulted stone ceilings of an empty cathedral lit by thousands of tiny votive candles melting at last into one small, pool that whispered a universal amen in a sigh without words."  (Jules) - and I agree with this characterization.

What runs though many thoughts in this thread, is this whole idea of "pretentiousness" with this compulsion surrounding "hipness" when the whole "hippie movement" was a purported rejection of "pretense and superficiality." Fashion conventions were dumped; men rejected the monthly visit to the barbershop, and women largely rejected beauty "parlors" and often did not use makeup and "foundation wear."  The natural look was in.  It was being yourself, authentically.  It seems sort of a contradiction to me.     

But, ultimately Brian Wilson was/is the most unpretentious person on earth, seeking a truth in humanity, as evidenced in Til I Die, and other similar works that others can only strive to emulate.  So his uniqueness was perhaps put at risk with these events, in my opinion, notwithstanding the "classmates," he is/was Class President, where he remains, and without the name-tag of Class President. 

While I regard Smile as an operetta, I think the BB/BW power is in reaching the most people, in a manner that is not trendy but timeless and the vocal blend of the BB's that is the trademark.

But, I would use SMiLE in a Social Studies curriculum to teach the American Story.  You can teach almost anything through music.  But, Pet Sounds is the teenage symphony to God, or the process of self-actualization.  And Brian calls Him by name.   

Who knew that Pet Sounds would become both the standard and an anchor for those who want or need to reflect?   

[Cam Mott]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

[filledeplage]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Cam - I think part of the "unwieldiness" of SMiLE is and was the "book-cover" - and this is an observation and not a criticism.  I always ask myself, the question of how I would translate something for students. 

Had the book-cover or artwork been a map of the 50 United States, from "sea to shining sea" where there is a frame-of-reference built in, there is a place to start for instruction, and the place to unfold the American saga, with an explanation of what some of the lyric or music imaging was.  People get that, and it is all there but it isn't framed out to digest.  It leaves too much to figure out. And it becomes a teachable moment and a place to raise the bar with a huge impact.  This artist was certainly capable of illustrating this story of migration and even immigration as regards the United States to appeal to children and adults.         

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

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened to scrap the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did, not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

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

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Thank you.

Sorry Cam, but this apologism and whitewashing the feuding that was going on really doesnt fly when you consider the facts. We have Brian himself, VDP, Hutton, Siegel, Vosse, Anderle and probably others who all agree it was happening. Even Mike--tho he downplays it of course--admits to hating most of the lyrics in TSS. This shouldnt even be a debate. And none of those guys except maybe Parks have a reason to even bring it up. And when they do, theyre not incredibly hostile about it either. Most admit they understand where Mike was coming from and sympathize with his concerns and why hed be unsupportive. Theyre not trying to ruin him or present a fall guy, theyre just honestly relaying what they saw. To just dismiss the evidence of 7+ people, all with varying degrees of involvement and their own agendas which mostly dont overlap, and including the man youre defending, is ludicrous. It wasnt just some friendly disagreements, or part of the process. There was a lot of tension which according to Hutton is what was the biggest problem for Brian, according to Anderle what would make him unproductive for days at a time, and according to Brian himself is the #1 reason he didnt finish the album. Nobody is pushing the old Mike killed SMiLE narrative, but Im sick of seeing the pendulum shift so far the other way that now he was totally cooperative and supportive and everything was hunky dory. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Anyway, its undeniable that there was a good deal of friction and bickering between the Boys and Brian, its just unclear exactly how much an impact that played. Thats not speculation or opinion, thats fact. Thats something all the big articles--which you yourself essentially said I had to read to be able to speak on the subject--agree on. Once more, you cant have it both ways; either you believe what they say or you dont.

[filledeplage]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

CSM - there is a lot of truth there with the reality of the situation.  They had to perform those cuts from Smiley.  In August of 1967, they did GV, Heroes and Getting' Hungry.  This is around when Smiley came out.  In November for the Thanksgiving Tour, they were doing GV, but also Country Air and Wild Honey and which came out a little before Christmas.  Where the rubber meets the road, they had to perform those songs with maybe as few as 5-6 guys.  Those who had any philosophical differences did not have to present this music.    

[Emily]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

CSM - there is a lot of truth there with the reality of the situation.  They had to perform those cuts from Smiley.  In August of 1967, they did GV, Heroes and Getting' Hungry.  This is around when Smiley came out.  In November for the Thanksgiving Tour, they were doing GV, but also Country Air and Wild Honey and which came out a little before Christmas.  Where the rubber meets the road, they had to perform those songs with maybe as few as 5-6 guys.  Those who had any philosophical differences did not have to present this music.    

And this brings up a perfect example of the kind of things that divide BB fans: some gut responses to this will be
- the band is the main thing so Brian Wilson needed to put together music that could be performed live
and others will be
- Brian Wilson's artistry is the main thing so it's a shame he felt he needed to alter his work for the band.


I'm not saying those are the only interpretations. I'm also not saying this, right here, pin-points anything about the demise of Smile. I'm just saying that the point FilledePlage makes illustrates where BB fans' thinking sometimes diverges, I think.

[filledeplage]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

CSM - there is a lot of truth there with the reality of the situation.  They had to perform those cuts from Smiley.  In August of 1967, they did GV, Heroes and Getting' Hungry.  This is around when Smiley came out.  In November for the Thanksgiving Tour, they were doing GV, but also Country Air and Wild Honey and which came out a little before Christmas.  Where the rubber meets the road, they had to perform those songs with maybe as few as 5-6 guys.  Those who had any philosophical differences did not have to present this music.    

And this brings up a perfect example of the kind of things that divide BB fans: some gut responses to this will be
- the band is the main thing so Brian Wilson needed to put together music that could be performed live
and others will be
- Brian Wilson's artistry is the main thing so it's a shame he felt he needed to alter his work for the band.

I'm not saying those are the only interpretations. I'm also not saying this, right here, pin-points anything about the demise of Smile. I'm just saying that the point FilledePlage makes illustrates where BB fans' thinking sometimes diverges, I think.

Emily - when the band was formed they all travelled and maybe did some of the writing on the road.  So the work product would be in sync with what would be performed.  When Brian came off the road, it seemed the expectation was for Brian to be at home writing so that the group would continue in the same fashion and perform the work.   

If the "artistry" or special arrangement doesn't work on the stage with fewer orchestral musicians (as was the case) you have to have a product that will work or the touring part of the deal does not work.  It was "their" band.  Brian traveled and performed what they wrote together or when home, and off they were free to write and bring in others to help with special themes such as cars, but all subject to scheduling.  I think that some forget there was a world before Pet Sounds and Smiley. 

They had to promote the work while on tour or it doesn't work.  So, for that Thanksgiving Tour, which I saw and some versions are on Youtube which I highly recommend you have a listen to. It will give you a sense of what was going on in the setlists, relative to the new releases.  There may be some commentary on the youtube from late fall 1967, where you can hear among the banter, the promos for Wild Honey, so they are ushering in those songs as well. You can hear them do a little promo of the LP.  They are a really fun listen.  So that is the time between two albums.  And the band always would tell the audience that Brian was home writing for the band, so they could keep bringing new music  to their concertgoers. 

[Emily]

Emily - when the band was formed they all travelled and maybe did some of the writing on the road.  So the work product would be in sync with what would be performed.  When Brian came off the road, it seemed the expectation was for Brian to be at home writing so that the group would continue in the same fashion and perform the work.    

If the "artistry" or special arrangement doesn't work on the stage with fewer orchestral musicians (as was the case) you have to have a product that will work or the touring part of the deal does not work.  It was "their" band.  Brian traveled and performed what they wrote together or when home, and off they were free to write and bring in others to help with special themes such as cars, but all subject to scheduling.  I think that some forget there was a world before Pet Sounds and Smiley.  

They had to promote the work while on tour or it doesn't work.  So, for that Thanksgiving Tour, which I saw and some versions are on Youtube which I highly recommend you have a listen to. It will give you a sense of what was going on in the setlists, relative to the new releases.  There may be some commentary on the youtube from late fall 1967, where you can hear among the banter, the promos for Wild Honey, so they are ushering in those songs as well. You can hear them do a little promo of the LP.  They are a really fun listen.  So that is the time between two albums.  And the band always would tell the audience that Brian was home writing for the band, so they could keep bringing new music  to their concertgoers.  

That's a great elucidation of the first response. Thanks.
And it's a perfectly valid point of view. I think both are.

[Cam Mott]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Thank you.

Sorry Cam, but this apologism and whitewashing the feuding that was going on really doesnt fly when you consider the facts. We have Brian himself, VDP, Hutton, Siegel, Vosse, Anderle and probably others who all agree it was happening. Even Mike--tho he downplays it of course--admits to hating most of the lyrics in TSS. This shouldnt even be a debate. And none of those guys except maybe Parks have a reason to even bring it up. And when they do, theyre not incredibly hostile about it either. Most admit they understand where Mike was coming from and sympathize with his concerns and why hed be unsupportive. Theyre not trying to ruin him or present a fall guy, theyre just honestly relaying what they saw. To just dismiss the evidence of 7+ people, all with varying degrees of involvement and their own agendas which mostly dont overlap, and including the man youre defending, is ludicrous. It wasnt just some friendly disagreements, or part of the process. There was a lot of tension which according to Hutton is what was the biggest problem for Brian, according to Anderle what would make him unproductive for days at a time, and according to Brian himself is the #1 reason he didnt finish the album. Nobody is pushing the old Mike killed SMiLE narrative, but Im sick of seeing the pendulum shift so far the other way that now he was totally cooperative and supportive and everything was hunky dory. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Anyway, its undeniable that there was a good deal of friction and bickering between the Boys and Brian, its just unclear exactly how much an impact that played. Thats not speculation or opinion, thats fact. Thats something all the big articles--which you yourself essentially said I had to read to be able to speak on the subject--agree on. Once more, you cant have it both ways; either you believe what they say or you dont.

Sorry Mujan, I am considering the facts, we just don't agree on some of it.  

The pendulum has not swung too far the other way imo, it hasn't even swung back to the middle yet, it is still approaching the middle.

[Cam Mott]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Or those are the songs he thought were non-commercial and whose lyrics he thought were too sophisticated.  I wonder if it wasn't because they don't really fit the intents he expressed for the album in the early interviews, maybe because some of them are sort of a preachy history lesson or something.  

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

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Or those are the songs he thought were non-commercial and whose lyrics he thought were too sophisticated.  I wonder if it wasn't because they don't really fit the intents he expressed for the album in the early interviews, maybe because some of them are sort of a preachy history lesson or something.  

I definitely think the Americana direction was largely VDP's push--it seems to be his schtick, as does incorporating covers in a unique, originally way. But we must remember H&V was Brian's idea and one of his first songs of the period. VDP didnt turn that into a Cowboy song either, it was Brian's idea. If he decided against that concept, its not necessarily a dig at VDP. And really, I think the other theories presented here are just as likely.

[Cam Mott]

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Or those are the songs he thought were non-commercial and whose lyrics he thought were too sophisticated.  I wonder if it wasn't because they don't really fit the intents he expressed for the album in the early interviews, maybe because some of them are sort of a preachy history lesson or something.  

I definitely think the Americana direction was largely VDP's push--it seems to be his schtick, as does incorporating covers in a unique, originally way. But we must remember H&V was Brian's idea and one of his first songs of the period. VDP didnt turn that into a Cowboy song either, it was Brian's idea. If he decided against that concept, its not necessarily a dig at VDP. And really, I think the other theories presented here are just as likely.

Hasn't VDP said the Western theme was his idea, the tune making him think of a Marty Robbins song.

"He did the melodies. The melody to "Heroes and Villains" -- every note has a sound syllable to it. It sounded like a Marty Robbins tune, like a ballad, so I thought it would be a good idea to have it: "I've been in this town so long that back in the city I've been taken for gone and unknown for a long time / Fell in love years ago with an innocent girl from the Spanish and Indian home of the heroes and villains." All those words. I was working like a son of a bitch. And then he would say, "That's good." And then he would say, "Let's call it `Heroes and Villains,' " and I would say, "That's grand. Let's do."  VDP

[Chownow]

I just listened to"Smile" for the first time, and I have to agree with the ghost. The lyrics are distracting, they don't seem to go with the music at all, in my opinion.

We'll disagree on Pet Sounds -vs- SMiLE. To me Pet Sounds is the masterwork with honest, raw and profound lyrics that have much more going for them VDP's, some of which I find wonderful while some come off as incredibly pretentious. Loved them all when I was younger, not so much at 45, whereas Pet Sounds still works on every level for me, if anything it becomes a richer listening experience as I get older (which I can't say for many albums I worshipped as a teenager). There's also the problem of SMiLE not being fully realized. I'm leaning more and more towards the idea of it being 6 or so completed songs that should've just been released as they were.

Yeah, with Pet Sounds the emotion in the music and the emotion in the lyrics match up beautifully.  There's emotion in the music of Smile, but the words are just getting in the way and don't connect at all.

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

I just listened to"Smile" for the first time, and I have to agree with the ghost. The lyrics are distracting, they don't seem to go with the music at all, in my opinion.

We'll disagree on Pet Sounds -vs- SMiLE. To me Pet Sounds is the masterwork with honest, raw and profound lyrics that have much more going for them VDP's, some of which I find wonderful while some come off as incredibly pretentious. Loved them all when I was younger, not so much at 45, whereas Pet Sounds still works on every level for me, if anything it becomes a richer listening experience as I get older (which I can't say for many albums I worshipped as a teenager). There's also the problem of SMiLE not being fully realized. I'm leaning more and more towards the idea of it being 6 or so completed songs that should've just been released as they were.

Yeah, with Pet Sounds the emotion in the music and the emotion in the lyrics match up beautifully.  There's emotion in the music of Smile, but the words are just getting in the way and don't connect at all.

Personally I disagree, but I can totally understand why Pet Sounds' more straightforward and relatable lyrics would be preferred by most people.

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

Does anyone else find it telling what Brian dumped from SMiLE?  He didn't dump everything.  Isn't that the indication of what Brian thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial and all of the other reasons Brian gave at the time?

I know Siegel was gone around Christmas, Anderle and Vosse seem to concentrate on the same period, December just after the tour, in regards to their witness of sessions involving the Boys. It seems to me those sessions were mostly for H&V and that was not dumped.  Doesn't that sort of argue toward Brian having the problems he has given with the songs he actually dumped and and away the Boys' activities, like having little if any explanation from Brian but still wanting to sing it but sing it in a different way or sing it beautifully for endless takes before having your product dumped or your lead yanked or asking for the meaning of the lyric you are singing/sung, being so pivotal (since the song mostly of those sessions was finished)?  Things can be said to be resistance even if no one is resisting.

Whoops, forgot the OT: I don't doubt that GV's success was a revelation to Brian and may have caused him to dump what he already thought was too sophisticated and non-commercial etc. and his other reasons. The timing seems right.

Yes, but could it not also be possible he just so happened the least completed songs (Worms, CE, etc) and kept the most completed (Wonderful, He Gives Speeches--which have the most Parksian lyrics of all next to Surfs Up) ? Or else, couldnt it be theorized he scrapped the songs he did not because he didnt believe in them or Parks' style, but because those also got the most blowback from the Beach Boys? Seems just as plausible. I dont really think you can prove anything definitively that way.

Also likely was that he discarded the most grandiose high-production in songs in favour of material that The Beach Boys could play together as a band. That Brian was looking to get rid of the sophisticated Parks numbers just doesn't wash when you consider that he included, what, four of them on Smiley Smile?

Or those are the songs he thought were non-commercial and whose lyrics he thought were too sophisticated.  I wonder if it wasn't because they don't really fit the intents he expressed for the album in the early interviews, maybe because some of them are sort of a preachy history lesson or something.  

I definitely think the Americana direction was largely VDP's push--it seems to be his schtick, as does incorporating covers in a unique, originally way. But we must remember H&V was Brian's idea and one of his first songs of the period. VDP didnt turn that into a Cowboy song either, it was Brian's idea. If he decided against that concept, its not necessarily a dig at VDP. And really, I think the other theories presented here are just as likely.

Hasn't VDP said the Western theme was his idea, the tune making him think of a Marty Robbins song.

"He did the melodies. The melody to "Heroes and Villains" -- every note has a sound syllable to it. It sounded like a Marty Robbins tune, like a ballad, so I thought it would be a good idea to have it: "I've been in this town so long that back in the city I've been taken for gone and unknown for a long time / Fell in love years ago with an innocent girl from the Spanish and Indian home of the heroes and villains." All those words. I was working like a son of a bitch. And then he would say, "That's good." And then he would say, "Let's call it `Heroes and Villains,' " and I would say, "That's grand. Let's do."  VDP

I concede you could be right about this. I dont have a source handy, but the narrative I always heard was Brian introduced him to H&V and said it was supposed to be a Western.

[Cam Mott]

First I love and admire VDP's SMiLE lyrics.

In my opinions, H&V was and is more sort of boy/girl and sort of goofy rather than preachy history about how awful the White man was (not that we don't deserve it). Wonderful is sort of more boy/girl dreamy romance, no accusatory history lesson required.  Vegetables is pure D health and humor. Windchimes, dreamy, romantic, no history. 

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I think Brian was fairly clear about why he got rid of what he got rid of. He thought the Smile music (that is, what he and Van Dyke both created) had become too personal. I'm not convinced that he didn't like Van Dyke's lyrics (though I know their perspective on what the project was began changing maybe as early as December '66). Rather, I think he began to think that the music became too much about the artist (or artists) and not enough about making a connection with an audience . Part of that had to do with sophistication but not simply with Van Dyke's lyrics but with the production and complexity of some of the songs too. I see nothing to suggest that he specifically had a problem with the historical/preachiness aspect. Let's not forget he also dumped the word-less Our Prayer and Fire, where there was very little Van Dyke involvement. And furthermore, he moved the "just see what you've done" from the discarded DYLW into the re-make of H&V, making it more preachy rather than less. If his problem was merely with the sophistication of Van Dyke's lyrics then it makes no sense why he would choose to re-record a bunch of songs he wrote with him, rather than, say, have Mike write new lyrics to the songs that he already had in the can, like Cabinessence or Surf's Up or Wonderful, etc. By 1967, Brian's issues with Smile ran far deeper than the sophistication of the lyrics, or the thematic content, or with Van Dyke. He has said as much.

[Theydon Bois]

Aside: On the topic of whether or not Brian cares for accusatory history-based lyrics...

From the Facebook Q&A on 3.26.15
Q: what do you think of carl's song the trader?
Brian: I loved that song, he had a great vocal and great lyrics

[filledeplage]

I think Brian was fairly clear about why he got rid of what he got rid of. He thought the Smile music (that is, what he and Van Dyke both created) had become too personal. I'm not convinced that he didn't like Van Dyke's lyrics (though I know their perspective on what the project was began changing maybe as early as December '66). Rather, I think he began to think that the music became too much about the artist (or artists) and not enough about making a connection with an audience . Part of that had to do with sophistication but not simply with Van Dyke's lyrics but with the production and complexity of some of the songs too. I see nothing to suggest that he specifically had a problem with the historical/preachiness aspect. Let's not forget he also dumped the word-less Our Prayer and Fire, where there was very little Van Dyke involvement. And furthermore, he moved the "just see what you've done" from the discarded DYLW into the re-make of H&V, making it more preachy rather than less. If his problem was merely with the sophistication of Van Dyke's lyrics then it makes no sense why he would choose to re-record a bunch of songs he wrote with him, rather than, say, have Mike write new lyrics to the songs that he already had in the can, like Cabinessence or Surf's Up or Wonderful, etc. By 1967, Brian's issues with Smile ran far deeper than the sophistication of the lyrics, or the thematic content, or with Van Dyke. He has said as much.

CSM - it is interesting that you mention the "preachy" aspect of the lyrics.  It is likely the first BB song to question or wonder about US policies, indirectly via music; "Just see what you've done."  The more I think about this, albeit, so long after-the-fact, they were telling the American story but, out-of-order, in the chronological sense.  

Plymouth Rock images are the first in the American journey, in 1620, ultimately with images of Little Pad in Hawaii, which did not become a state until August 21, 1959, the 50th, not so far in a time context to the Smile project.  We went from a country with the 48, to 49 states in the "union" in 1958, so the flag makers were busy making American flags.  One with 49, for Alaska, then 50 for Hawaii,  in a short amount of time. People had to get rid of their 48 star flags and then the 49 star flags (one star for each state, and the 13 stripes represent the 13 original states from the independent colonies in the U.S.)

Is the context of "Do You like Worms?" a reference to digging worms for fishing line, to use as bait for the colonists to feed themselves from the bounty of the North Atlantic Ocean?  And Plymouth Rock of course is the landmark to commemorate the survival of the crossing.  

But the history is not "in time" in an historically specific time-iine, but jumping all over the place, perhaps causing wonder and maybe confusion among the listeners.  

  

[Cam Mott]

I think Brian was fairly clear about why he got rid of what he got rid of. He thought the Smile music (that is, what he and Van Dyke both created) had become too personal. I'm not convinced that he didn't like Van Dyke's lyrics (though I know their perspective on what the project was began changing maybe as early as December '66). Rather, I think he began to think that the music became too much about the artist (or artists) and not enough about making a connection with an audience . Part of that had to do with sophistication but not simply with Van Dyke's lyrics but with the production and complexity of some of the songs too. I see nothing to suggest that he specifically had a problem with the historical/preachiness aspect. Let's not forget he also dumped the word-less Our Prayer and Fire, where there was very little Van Dyke involvement. And furthermore, he moved the "just see what you've done" from the discarded DYLW into the re-make of H&V, making it more preachy rather than less. If his problem was merely with the sophistication of Van Dyke's lyrics then it makes no sense why he would choose to re-record a bunch of songs he wrote with him, rather than, say, have Mike write new lyrics to the songs that he already had in the can, like Cabinessence or Surf's Up or Wonderful, etc. By 1967, Brian's issues with Smile ran far deeper than the sophistication of the lyrics, or the thematic content, or with Van Dyke. He has said as much.

I agree, preachy wouldn't have been the only reason imo. OMP presumably didn't have VDP lyrics. We don't even know that the Elements had lyrics. We don't even know what the lyrics were, if any, for CIFOTM.  IIGS doesn't seem to have been preachy as far as we know. It wasn't only VDP's preachy lyrics. From Brian's comments he seems to have agreed with Mike, that VDP's lyrics were poetic but they weren't necessarily right for a BBs album at the time. 

I also agree that Brian was getting away from his own previous song production and complexity. Imo Derek Taylor characterized it as “BUT ALAS…
Brian Wilson began to stare at the glittering ships of tape and as the day of the launch became nearer than a date on the never-never calendar, he gazed at his plans and he turned his mind’s ear inwards and the longer he stared and the more he heard, the clearer it became that he was now in his jet age, building steamships." And he said they wanted a different mood and approach etc., etc.. Brian had many issues with the SMiLE album.

I disagree on H&V, if anything he de-preached that lyric from "Bicycle rider, just see what you’ve done-done to the church of the American Indian!" to the generic/universal "Heroes and Villains: Just see what you done-done".

[Paul J B]

We'll disagree on Pet Sounds -vs- SMiLE. To me Pet Sounds is the masterwork with honest, raw and profound lyrics that have much more going for them VDP's, some of which I find wonderful while some come off as incredibly pretentious. Loved them all when I was younger, not so much at 45, whereas Pet Sounds still works on every level for me, if anything it becomes a richer listening experience as I get older (which I can't say for many albums I worshipped as a teenager). There's also the problem of SMiLE not being fully realized. I'm leaning more and more towards the idea of it being 6 or so completed songs that should've just been released as they were.

I agree with most of this. I consider Pet Sounds Brian's masterpiece, and Smile reaching a step too far by trying to out do his masterpiece.  Track for track some Smile tracks were creatively better than certain Pet Sounds tracks, but overall I really don't think you can take a masterpiece and try to do yourself one better. 

As far as the "pretentious" reference, Parks has a pretentious personality. I have thought that ever since I first saw him on that Beach Boys special in 1976. Mike Love has an "antagonistic" personality.  I don't really care either way about personalities, I like Mike and think he was good for the Beach Boys, I think Parks had some good lyrics with Brian, but in hindsight he was not the right match for Brian.  Brian clowned around his entire life in the 60s, even on TSS you can hear him, what do you think the humor thing was all about.  When I watch that 1976 special, it's really puzzling when you hear Brian say as he's lying in bed, that Parks is his favorite collaborator, then when you see Parks talking and his pretentious manner, you think really...hmmm.  At least I did and still do.