BWPS: How much input did Brian have?

[Jeff Mason]

You would be a fool to deny Darian's key role or to claim that Brian did it all with Darian as secretary.  But some want to claim that Brian was told by management to finish Smile (gee, like that hadn't ever happened before -- sure made Brian do it then....) and so Brian foisted the task on Darian who did it all and then sent the travesty out on the road. 

My point is this -- there is no external objective evidence that says that Brian was a potted plant in this process, unless you hold previous disasters against him and assume the worst.  Every objective source claims Brian as a full creative partner in a 3 way process of him, VDP and Darian.  To see the evidence and still say that he is the pawn of Melinda and David Leaf is to ignore the facts for a negative picture based solely upon cynical conjecture.  It also ignores that the finished composition is amazing (even if there are some occasional arrangement/production flaws due to some decisions that Brian and co. made.), which a bastardized product would not have been.  It far exceeded what I was expecting, and I had heard all of the fragments used to make the final version before 2003.  To say that there wasn't some genius work in knitting the pieces together is to be numb to an amazing work IMO.

[Sheriff John Stone]

I think there are many intelligent, fair-minded observers - they won't post here, and who could blame them - who are familiar with Brian's years from 1967-1975, are familiar with the damage done by Landy, have heard Imagination and GIOMH, have seen Brian's recent interviews on TV and in print, AND have read Darian's and VDP's interviews - and could still have reservations about Brian's input to BWPS. Reservations, that's all.

That is what I mean by considering "everything". Some people can call their opinions foolish, ignorant, and cynical. I'm going to respect their opinions. For those who feel the other way, I'll respect their opinions too.

[Old Rake]

who are familiar with Brian's years from 1967-1975, are familiar with the damage done by Landy, have heard Imagination and GIOMH, have seen Brian's recent interviews on TV and in print, AND have read Darian's and VDP's interviews

...and who do not, presumably, know Brian personally, nor were they at any point privvy to first-hand witness to the creative process during the creation of Smile. In other words, they are speculating. In other other words, they really know nothing more than your average person other than being "familiar" with things. They are familiar with things and have done a lot of reading. Which makes them qualified to comment how, exactly?

This "everything" you are taking into consideration -- you're weighing the actual first-hand accounts of the participants and other band members who were present at various stages of the creative process as somehow LESS IMPORTANT than the words of these fans and speculators? Do I have that right?

You must be doing, to come to the conclusions you have, especially Van Dyke's, in your eyes, cynical reasons for participating.

[Jeff Mason]

Or else you are saying that Darian, Probyn, Paul M., and Jeff are flat out lying to perpetuate the deception of a coherent Brian Wilson.  Not to mention the Hollywood job in making Brian Wilson appear more lucid than he has in 37 years in the BD doc, regardless of what you think of it as a movie.  The cynical approach needs to be explicit -- people who believe that believe that all parties involved are deceptive and lying, at least those saying that Brian was a creator (and that includes those I listed above, as well as VDP).  Quite a conspiracy, that.

Again, not discounting the input of the others in the process.  But to remove Brian totally from the 2003 process of creation and to say that this is nothing more than Brian's Back 2004 is to basically call the whole lot of them liars.

[Wilsonista]

Darian has too much integrity. He would not have agreed to set his own musical career aside to basically serve Brian's vision if it was the sham that Stone thinks it is.

Argue till you're blue in the face, but that's fact, bud.

[Sheriff John Stone]

This "everything" you are taking into consideration -- you're weighing the actual first-hand accounts of the participants and other band members who were present at various stages of the creative process as somehow LESS IMPORTANT than the words of these fans and speculators? Do I have that right?

Almost right. I wouldn't say that I weigh the first-hand accounts as LESS IMPORTANT, but I don't give them the weight that you and some others do.

It's back to beating the proverbial dead horse again, but, since you asked, here you go...

In 1976, I witnessed the "Brian Is Back" campaign. There were so many people coming forward, credible people, band members, engineers, family members, journalists, people of character (so I thought), and they were all proclaiming that Brian was indeed "back". Well, now we know that he really wasn't back. Were those people lying. No, they weren't lying. I'm sure those people were well intentioned, and said what they thought Brian's fans wanted to hear.

Now, fast forward to 2004. Do I think the people in question today (circa 2003-04) were/are lying. No I don't. But here is my point, hopefully for the last time, again.

The people who know or work with Brian have something to lose, and that is their relationship with Brian. I'm not the first person to make this point. I have seen and read about many people in Brian's circle who are worried about losing their relationship with Brian. Maybe they want to stay as a collaborator. Maybe they want to stay in the band. Maybe they want to be recognized in liner notes. Maybe they just want to get a Christmas card from Brian. Does that mean that they would lie to preserve that relationship? Hopefully not. Does it mean that they could leave details out, exaggerate other details, and be very careful to make sure that Brian looks good? Possibly. Or in some cases, depending on the source, probably. Am I calling them liars? No, I am not. And I'm definitely not calling Darian or VDP liars. I just feel they fall into that category of people who are well-intentioned, don't want to offend Brian, and only want the best for Brian. Their opinions can't be considered objective. Because of their relationship with Brian, they have to be considered subjective.

This is nothing new. It happens, not just in rock & roll, not just with BW, but with life in general. People are careful to cover each others' backs. That's not always a bad thing. Sometimes it's almost like a mutual admiration society. Be nice, be positive, give credit. It's better than being negative, and sometimes, better than being brutally honest.

The reason I advocate people forming their own opinions (you can call it speculation if you like), is because I don't see the merits of pitting quotes against quotes. You might post a quote of Darian saying, "Brian contributed heavily to the completion of BWPS". Then I would respond with David Anderle and Ginger Blake's quotes that, "This isn't the real Brian, today. The old Brian is gone". And then you'd post a Peter Reum quote that Brian told him something in 1981. And then I'd dig out a quote saying that Brian was close to being institutionalized in 1981. And on and on. It just turns into a battle of quotes, like there has to be a winner and a loser. Besides, I like to read/hear others' OPINIONS. I really don't care if they have a quote to back it up. If I don't agree with, I'll just dismiss it and move on. I actually enjoy reading your opinions, Old Rake, even though you probably disagree with everything I just wrote...

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

In purely technical terms, yes, you could fit 30 minutes of music on one side of an LP - if it was folk, or acoustic, not the kind of dense compositions Brian was producing. The fidelity loss towards the end of the side would be catastrophic, something Brian would have been well aware of. I don't doubt for a minute that he'd originally envisaged a 3 movement piece, but my opinion - and it is just that - would be that he rapidly canned it as being unworkable in the strict technical sense.

I wonder if that too contributed to SMiLE being scrapped. Or maybe it would've came out as a double album...?

When somebody is interviewing Darian about his work with Brian, he has to be very aware of the consequences of what he says. Remember, Darian was/is a fan, and he knows all about Tony Asher, Don Was, Joe Thomas, and Andy Paley. Maybe Darian measures his words, maybe there are details he leaves out, and should leave out. There are things that are none of our business. Maybe he's protective of Brian. I know I would be.

Well, let's see what happens when Darian's Disney commitment is over; if he returns, or maybe "comes clean" about what "really" happened (in quotes because none of us know the truth except those who were there). 

I happen to think the truth is somewhere in the middle, but maybe that's just me.

I will say this, though...BD rubbed me the wrong way, esp. Melinda's reaction to Brian's condition during the early stages.

[Cam Mott]

This is sort of like the old days, where we theorize away and then riff evidence.

If Dumb Angel was the RIB-like "movement" period Brian erroneously suggested [or not depending on your adherence to whether RIB has movements] it would have been short lived indeed it seems to me and dumped well before the proposed December vote of the Boys. 

With Frank Holmes memory of when he was brought into the project tied to his beginning studies at Otis and with the help of Otis' registrar he has put it at within a week or few of mid-September and Dumb Angel was already past and SMiLE was already begun when Frank came on-board.  Frank wasn't sure but thought Van Dyke and Brian had started together within a few weeks of that, Don Richardson [VDP scholar] said he thought VDP had started around July 4, I've asked Van Dyke a few [?] years ago and he said then he may come into possession soon of material that might answer that question.  Haven't followed up, haven't heard anything from anyone else either does anyone know if that info became available?

Point being, recording of tracks had barely begun when DA became SMiLE by September and therefore BB vocals/invovement had not really begun [had they?] and even VDP didn't know about movements so it seems funny if the continually touring BBs did which doesn't seem to fit a December vote down of movements if movements were not in play even in September.  Album movements anyway, Brian was all about movements within individual songs though and VDP was well aware of that and so were the Boys having sung vocals for GV and having heard dubs of the tracking of GV and WC for instance. Yet the tracks with parts/movements march on from April through August and October and December and on into March '67 and beyond into Smiley even TE was in play thru December and even beyond [according to music press and Siegel] and other songs.  Curious or what am I missing?

[Bicyclerider]

I'm definitely confused.  Why would a vote on "movements" even come up - if Brian didn't feel compelled to tell Van Dyke about the movement idea, why would he have to tell the Beach Boys, before he had even recorded enough material to mix into a "movement?"  Seems to me he would record the songs, just as he was doing, then when he went to combine the songs into movements without spaces between tracks (the mixing stage), then the Beach Boys would become aware of the plan and be able to object or consent.  I'm reminded of Ray Davies' original plan with Face to Face, which was to have continuous sides with link tracks between songs, mostly sound effects stuff, which was vetoes by the record company (Pye) - so he had to rework the album tape, deleting some songs and adding some new ones, and cutting out most of the intros.  But he had already mixed most of the album before this idea was rejected.

[endofposts]

Van Dyke Parks didn't like everything in "Smile."  He's gone on record as not liking Vegetables, as well as Fire.  He also didn't like what went on at the sessions for Fire.  It was one of the things that made him leave.  He didn't like the direction of some aspects of the project, and he didn't like the way Brian was behaving.  A lot of people had problems with the way Brian was behaving, not just Van Dyke and the Beach Boys.  And that was all through 1966, including Brian's reaction to viewing "Seconds."  Though I don't doubt what was going on with Smile wasn't helping, it's a little bit like the chicken and the egg, which came first?  The lengthy, epic production of "Good Vibrations" also may have taken a lot out of Brian, which might have led to his difficulty on focusing on how to complete Smile.  Plus, the eventual blockbuster success of that single set the bar for Brian's future work that much higher,  while he was still working on that future work. 

I'd have to think what Carl did amounted to running interference with the record company.  It's hard to blame the Beach Boys entirely when Capitol Records fronted an astronomical amount of money for all those sessions with nothing to show for it.  And in the wake of the (relative) failure of Pet Sounds.  Maybe what Carl did was prevent the pulling of the plug entirely, whether or not the Beach Boys were vetoing the original idea.  After all, what exists of Smile are fragments.  There is no complete movements, no putting of it together, because Brian was nowhere near that stage yet.  It was still an idea, albeit with some well-executed and nearly complete components.  And Brian still had to integrate the Van Dyke Americana aspects with the principles of humor and "the elements."  So, dear Carl, a 20-year-old kid, had it placed on his shoulders to try to commercialize it for TPTB.  Maybe because of the reported Brian meeting where he went into Capitol with tape machines with loops for his answers (yeah, it's in the ABC miniseries, but reportedly true).  Plus, weren't the Beach Boys suing Capitol somewhere around that point?  In any case, the relations between Capitol and the band plus Brian were at a very low ebb.  They probably were not at all happy with "Smile" whether it be in three movments or 12 tracks.  And not really overjoyed with "Smiley Smile," but they were forced to put that out, after Brian scrapped all the music that Capitol had doubtless paid six figures for in session work. 

[absinthe_boy]

VDP has also gone on record to say he didn't hear the "fire" music until 2003, in Brian's music room with Brian and Darian.

So I seriously doubt that VDP left the project because he didn't like Fire, or because of what went on in those sessions....the man himself says he was pushed out (by Mike Love) before they even began work on the Elements suite.

[Cam Mott]

Also, if it just took a vote to usurp Brian's authority as producer and change the fundamental course of an album [which the Boys allegedly never liked anyway but Brian's soul depended on] why would Brian then later be able to fundamentally scrap the whole project [which the Boys allegedly now gained control of and endorsed but Brian was bullied to accept] over the objections of the Boys, to not fundamentally scrap SMiLE, to the point of nearly breaking up the group [Brian's 1967/68 words]?  Why didn't they just vote Brian down then?

I propose [again] it is because Brian didn't ask or care what the Boys [or VDP or Capitol or...] wanted, he did his thing over any objections and the Boys stood by his choices even as and after  those choices became increasingly affected by Brian's illness and addictions.

[Old Rake]

Also, if it just took a vote to usurp Brian's authority as producer and change the fundamental course of an album [which the Boys allegedly never liked anyway but Brian's soul depended on] why would Brian then later be able to fundamentally scrap the whole project [which the Boys allegedly now gained control of and endorsed but Brian was bullied to accept] over the objections of the Boys, to not fundamentally scrap SMiLE, to the point of nearly breaking up the group [Brian's 1967/68 words]?  Why didn't they just vote Brian down then?

I propose [again] it is because Brian didn't ask or care what the Boys [or VDP or Capitol or...] wanted, he did his thing over any objections and the Boys stood by his choices even as and after  those choices became increasingly affected by Brian's illness and addictions.

I have to say that is a very compelling point.

[Dr. Tim]

While I still stand by my rant back on page 11 about 2004:
"Are we supposed to think everyone's lying so soon after about how much Brian really did just to make Brian feel better?  Or to sell records?"
- Has it occurred to anyone that actually Peter, Cam and John are quite possibly 98% in agreement in discussing the events of 1966?  The points of view are not inconsistent.  It can be tied together if you remember what Peter said (and has said before): regardless of what really happened in Dec. 66, Brian came away with a certain feeling/perception, which he truly believed, and then acted upon (in the midst of otherwise coming unglued with the difficult behavior Cam describes).
The "decision" or "vote" may well have been in substance no more than "I think we can make three movements out of this..."  "Nah, let's not" (leaving out the other unpleasantnesses that no doubt took up a  lot of time).  (OR which might not have been said in so many words, but was perceived as such).  And keep in mind the movements idea might not have been fully formed when the writing began in the spring/summer, so Van Dyke would not be privy to it.  And that the other Boys' pushing back afterward was part of their effort to make sense of what was going on (with who was "right" or "wrong" being flame fodder for the old Male Ego board).
I'm not trying to join in the speculating, I'm just trying to  suss out what looks like a consistent conclusion one can reach from this discussion, which is a fascinating (though ultimately unknowable) anlysis of the history. 

[Jeff Mason]

Also, if it just took a vote to usurp Brian's authority as producer and change the fundamental course of an album [which the Boys allegedly never liked anyway but Brian's soul depended on] why would Brian then later be able to fundamentally scrap the whole project [which the Boys allegedly now gained control of and endorsed but Brian was bullied to accept] over the objections of the Boys, to not fundamentally scrap SMiLE, to the point of nearly breaking up the group [Brian's 1967/68 words]?  Why didn't they just vote Brian down then?

I propose [again] it is because Brian didn't ask or care what the Boys [or VDP or Capitol or...] wanted, he did his thing over any objections and the Boys stood by his choices even as and after  those choices became increasingly affected by Brian's illness and addictions.

I have to say that is a very compelling point.

Yep -- that is a definite and crucial inconsistency in Peter's account.

[Cam Mott]

While I still stand by my rant back on page 11 about 2004:
"Are we supposed to think everyone's lying so soon after about how much Brian really did just to make Brian feel better?  Or to sell records?"
- Has it occurred to anyone that actually Peter, Cam and John are quite possibly 98% in agreement in discussing the events of 1966?  The points of view are not inconsistent.  It can be tied together if you remember what Peter said (and has said before): regardless of what really happened in Dec. 66, Brian came away with a certain feeling/perception, which he truly believed, and then acted upon (in the midst of otherwise coming unglued with the difficult behavior Cam describes).
The "decision" or "vote" may well have been in substance no more than "I think we can make three movements out of this..."  "Nah, let's not" (leaving out the other unpleasantnesses that no doubt took up a  lot of time).  (OR which might not have been said in so many words, but was perceived as such).  And keep in mind the movements idea might not have been fully formed when the writing began in the spring/summer, so Van Dyke would not be privy to it.  And that the other Boys' pushing back afterward was part of their effort to make sense of what was going on (with who was "right" or "wrong" being flame fodder for the old Male Ego board).
I'm not trying to join in the speculating, I'm just trying to  suss out what looks like a consistent conclusion one can reach from this discussion, which is a fascinating (though ultimately unknowable) anlysis of the history. 

I agree there are some consistencies between the competing speculations but there are also fundamental disagreements in the consistencies.  Whos' on second? I don't know.

Melinda asking her father, or anyone who has access asking Al or Bruce, if there was ever a vote to change Brian intentions for SMiLE or otherwise take control from him as their producer or bend his muse or crush his soul, unintensionslly or otherwise, in regtards to any production or creation would be good start toward making unknowable a little less unknown.  [batting my doe-like eyes. Not Andrew-Doe-like...well...maybe]

I'm wagering a donut that the answer will be a resounding "no" and "as if". After all, Al and Bruce have said they even lumped their humiliation over the demands Brian was making of them in how they "sang".  Mike wondered about a line of lyrics yet he lumped it and sang 'em. Bri bagged 10s [maybe 100s] of 1000s of dollars of tracking for SMiLE, over their objections, and they lumped it.

I think we ought to quit dreaming up ways to make B-dub a victim, while appreciating his struggle against his illness and addictions, and put more effort into appreciating the sacrifices the Boys, Marilyn, et al, made out of love for Brian. But, that's just me.

[SMiLEY]

I agree to a certain extent. However, all one has to do is look at BD and see how obviously disturbing it was for Brian to reconnect with the SMiLE music. He felt it necessary to check himself into a hospital! I don't think anyone's TRYING to make him a victim, more like we're trying to figure out what the hell happened, because, again obviously, it had an effect on the guy that lasted for decades.

There was baggage galore for him to deal with, and deal with it he did, but for it to have been so painful is a real indicator of it's importance to him personally, and professionally. It was his crucible.

Man, this thread is a big deja vu, all over again!!! Paging Dan Lega!!!

[Sheriff John Stone]

Also, if it just took a vote to usurp Brian's authority as producer and change the fundamental course of an album [which the Boys allegedly never liked anyway but Brian's soul depended on] why would Brian then later be able to fundamentally scrap the whole project [which the Boys allegedly now gained control of and endorsed but Brian was bullied to accept] over the objections of the Boys, to not fundamentally scrap SMiLE, to the point of nearly breaking up the group [Brian's 1967/68 words]?  Why didn't they just vote Brian down then?

I propose [again] it is because Brian didn't ask or care what the Boys [or VDP or Capitol or...] wanted, he did his thing over any objections and the Boys stood by his choices even as and after  those choices became increasingly affected by Brian's illness and addictions.

I have to say that is a very compelling point.

Yep -- that is a definite and crucial inconsistency in Peter's account.

Is it possible that the group, including Brian, simply made a BUSINESS decision?

Smiley Smile has always served as Exhibit A in the case against Brian scrapping SMiLE because of resistance from the group. Why would the guys object to Brian's "crazy", non-commercial music and ideas on SMiLE, then agree to record even weirder, and I believe inferior versions of the songs on Smiley Smile?

I always thought (just a theory - yes, I'm speculating!) that there was an official end of SMiLE. I believe there was some kind of discussion/meeting in May 1967, with the group and maybe Derek Taylor in attendance, where Brian announced that he couldn't finish SMiLE in a timely fashion. Maybe Brian told the guys that he only had 7-8 songs that were completed, and that he needed another 9-12 months to complete the rest, enough to fill an album, movements or no movements.

Maybe Brian offered them an alternative. He could take them into the studio, record enough songs to fill an album, but in order to unify the album, the available SMiLE songs would have to be reworked. After they get that album out, Brian could resume working on SMiLE to the appropriate completion.

Now, the group, including Brian, is thinking: It's been over a year since their last album (Pet Sounds - and in those days, 1 year was like the equivalent of 3-4 years in today's market), all these great groups and albums are coming out - The Beatles (mainly), The Doors, Hendrix, The Stones, Love, Jefferson Airplane, etc.), they want to get back in the game, sell some albums, make some money, get the record company off their back, and basically just move on.

Well, we know what has always driven the Beach Boys - money - even back then. Maybe the guys succumbed to the record "business", and maybe made a purely business decision. So, the group agrees to getting a "new" album out, product if you will, and thus we have Smiley Smile. Other than an occasional Brian interview, I have never read where any of The Beach Boys praised Smiley Smile. But, in the summer of 1967, it served a purpose.

  l

[Cam Mott]

Could have been a business decision but my first thought is if getting something out and maximizing assets were the concern and especially if the proposed notion that the Boys were taking control was in effect it seems counter-productive that they would delay and throw good money after bad especially to repeat different versions of songs on 2 albums.


Just to keep the speculative riffing going: Seems much more likely to me that Brian didn't want SMiLE and therefore bagged it, inspite of what anyone else wanted and spent more money regardless of what anyone else wanted, to satisfy his muse. 

Another riff: I'm even thinking Van Dyke got elbowed out by Brian as Brian lost interest in SMiLE: soon after lyrics done Van Dyke seemingly becomes more distant till absent [me], Brian seems to begin to fiddle stuff [me], Van Dyke is getting tired of Brian's ways [Parks] and feeling music is to simple [Anderle], Brian is feeling music is too elaborate [Brian, Anderle] and old-fashioned  [Brian/Taylor] and lyrics are too arty [Brian and Anderle] and needing explanation [after Feb 28: Parks], can't work together [Anderle], Van Dyke signs with Warners instead of Brother [Parks or Vosse?] and Brian quickly stops work on all but H&V [me] and eventually bags many of the songs they had written together and recorded for SMiLE inspite of objections of rest of group [Brian]. 

[Sheriff John Stone]

Just to keep the speculative riffing going: Seems much more likely to me that Brian didn't want SMiLE and therefore bagged it, inspite of what anyone else wanted

I'm sure you have addressed this question at least once (hahaha - I wasn't around then and would like to know your opinion), but why do you think Brian "didn't want SMiLE and therefore bagged it"? Also, why do you think he REVISITED some SMiLE songs on Smiley Smile, instead of moving directly to Wild Honey? Do you think it was the time constraint and/or a lack of enough new material to fill Smiley Smile? Not disagreeing with your premise in any way (I appreciate different theories), just curious...

[endofposts]

That's not quite true.  Van Dyke felt guilty about leaving Brian.  Van Dyke was feeling under pressure, but it was his choice to walk away.  And he was disturbed by Brian's behavior, as well as the Beach Boys.  He didn't listen to "Fire" because he didn't want to hear it.  He knew what went down at the Fire session;  he chose to stop attending sessions because of Brian's behavior.   Van Dyke was one of the reasons work was stopped, but not the only reason.   This was stated in an interview in ESQ and elsewhere.  He may have felt abused by Brian's erratic behavior, as were others in that circle at the time.  They really didn't have a clue about mental health issues anymore than Brian's family did.  They thought he was being selfish, acting weird, and on too many drugs (or couldn't handle drugs, which was a character flaw among people that did drugs with few apparent after-effects).

You also have to realize that Brian was taking too long for everybody, including the label and the band.  It's now not uncommon for people to take years to work on an album, but back then, especially for someone as prolific as Brian, it was making people nervous.

VDP has also gone on record to say he didn't hear the "fire" music until 2003, in Brian's music room with Brian and Darian.

So I seriously doubt that VDP left the project because he didn't like Fire, or because of what went on in those sessions....the man himself says he was pushed out (by Mike Love) before they even began work on the Elements suite.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

If Van Dyke stopped going to sessions, and he did, I don't think it was because of Brian's behaviour at the sessions specifically, because according to the session tapes, he was completely professional at all the tracking sessions.  So I think it was probably more in general that Van Dyke tried to avoid Brian, well, not Brian but perhaps the "Brian-scene."

I have a question:  If Brian was routinely dropping old best friends for new best friends, was there a new best friend to replace Van Dyke at some point?  Or was there a gap?

[king of anglia]

Wasn't it Danny Hutton after Van Dyke?

[Peter Reum]

I think it is important to acknowledge two very important factors in this discussion. First, several albums were proposed during the Smile Era. It is not a leap to see that there were at least three Smile albums. First, the one with movements, second the one organized more traditionally with 12 tracks, and finally Smiley Smile.

The Beach Boys were ALWAYS about money. While their art is admirable, they enjoyed the fruit of the work, and they wanted to keep it going. Their business,American Entertainment, was a family business.

It is also important that Brian's feelings are his reality, just as each of the other members of the group's were theirs. I do not believe that the group was happy with the growing difficulty of performing the music onstage, and I think that they communicated this to Brian when they came off tour in 1966. Brian has said this to me and to other people as well.

Another point is that The Beach Boys felt comfortable as a singles band, and when their first attempt at album rock didn't "sell" according to Capitol, they got queasy about more stuff like this.

I see what The Beach Boys told Brian on December 7 or 8, 1966 as being framed in the overall discussion of the band's next album, and Brian's movement vision. It appears that Brian heard this as them saying "we don't trust your instincts commercially, Brian." After several gold albums and top ten singles, this must have sounded like a vote of no confidece to Brian. The lyrics were an issue, but the bigger issue was "do we become an fm album band, or do we keep making am single hits a our focus?"

It appears that this decision really did hit Brian hard. I don't say this to make him sound lie a victim. I state it because the aftershocks WERE felt in May of 1967 when Brian gave up the idea of the 12 track Smile lp, and later that fall when he and the group had a falling out over Redwood and he stopped working on Wild Honey as a producer in retaliation.

Brian went on working on the 12 track Smile for about two weeks in 12/66 before the next single became the focus. In February he heard SFF/Penny Lane, and he got even more queasy about his ideas for the future.

I think it was the doubt of The Beach Boys over Smile that inspired the great Marilyn Wilson quote about The Beach Boys "wearing Brian down."

As for the Brian quote from 68, I think Brian was talking about when he bagged the 12 track album, not the initial concept of movements. I think Dumb Angel and later the movement type Smile became quite important as a symbol to Brian of his lost sanity. I think he saw that time as a turning point in his mental health, and in his music, for the worse.  

[MBE]

My take is that there is a lot of conjecture here and little facts to support it.  I am happy to be proven wrong if there is evidence. 

Smile is out and done Brian took part in it. Could he of done it alone? No. Did he really want to do it, who knows? What we have on the LP or CD or on stage is fine and far better then we could have hoped for at this point. Brian did a good job on it whatever his input was. It sounds like a real Brian Wilson record to me and that's all I care about.

We can't change what he did or didn't do in 1966-7. He may not have gotten full support, but he was the boss. If he felt 100 percent confident in the music he would have stuck to it no matter what. Pet Sounds is proof of this. Besides The Beach Boys did a lot work on Smile. As late as May 67 even Mike was expecting it to come out. Read the articles and interviews of the era, the rest is hearsay. Never heard of this meeting before now. Wouldn't of Domenic jumped all over it in his book if it happened in such a dramatic fashion. They were fighting with each other as early as August.

This idea that the Beach Boys wanted to overthrow Brian is crazy. The fact that so much was done to encourage him to work from 67 on tells me that the Beach Boys always wanted Brian to work with them and direct them, at least until the 80s Landy era. Not counting half of 20-20 Brian was central to everything The Beach Boys recorded until So Tough. Even the Surf's UP LP.  Brian was too strong before Murry died to do anything he didn't want to do. If he felt like playing live he did, if he felt like recording he did. If not he didn't. Sure he was depressed before Murry died, he was depressed in 1964. The point is Brian could and did produce who ever he wanted. Ron Wilson, Spring, Fred Vail, Kalinich, The Honeys were all done by Brian in the late 60s early 70s. He did not change all that much at first after Smile. Why would Redwood have been a real problem? Mike was doing the Pickle Brothers, Bruce this Amy singer. Perhaps Mike didn't want to give Redwood a fair contract, but maybe Mike was telling the truth when he said Brian tinkered too much for the groups liking. I mean they never did go back to the sound of Time To Get Alone did they? I don't really buy the Al and Mike forces Brian to leave a session tale. Brian spoke very proudly of albums like Wild Honey to me. He stressed how well The Beach Boys worked together as a group in the late 60s early 70s.

Brian was taking pills for years, who is to say when he became an addict. Nobody has ever claimed Brian was a full-blown cokehead in 67-9. Nobody has claimed he was even on coke until late 68. 'Til I Die is being taken too literally. Brian has said it’s about being humble, what that have to do with coke. It's no more depressing then She Knows Me Too Well. Brian was always insecure, and he wrote beautifully about it. He wasn't on medication in 67 or diagnosed with anything until 1975. Carl claimed in an interview that Brian didn't have a coke problem until around the time of So Tough. That makes a lot more sense. Murry didn't hate Pet Sounds or Good Vibrations! Read the interviews he gave in Europe in 67 and in Rolling Stone in 1971 he bubbles over with pride about Brian and his music. In fact the things Murry says about Pet Sounds are among the best things I ever read about the LP.