gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 06:10:55 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 43 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Awesome New Mike Love Article!!  (Read 185404 times)
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #175 on: February 14, 2016, 01:24:50 PM »

#teamBrian Grin
I will say that the Pamplin thread has made me more #teamBrian than anything else has. It really clarified for me how much he was hounded, actually forced, on all sides to perform as others wished and not as he did.
I wonder what Carl thought about with Brian back then? If he was pushing Brian as well, it seems Brian didn't hold it against him. He was even Brian's best man at his wedding. I think the relationships that these guys had with each other is much more complicated than what we want to believe. All the stuff that happened throughout the years between these guys, it has never stopped them from getting together when they want to. Look at the years in the not too distant past when Brian and Al had issues, even after touring together. To this day they still tour together. We don't fully understand their bonds with each other and we probably never will, as it should be.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #176 on: February 14, 2016, 01:28:01 PM »

#teamBrian Grin
I will say that the Pamplin thread has made me more #teamBrian than anything else has. It really clarified for me how much he was hounded, actually forced, on all sides to perform as others wished and not as he did.
I wonder what Carl thought about with Brian back then? If he was pushing Brian as well, it seems Brian didn't hold it against him. He was even Brian's best man at his wedding. I think the relationships that these guys had with each other is much more complicated than what we want to believe. All the stuff that happened throughout the years between these guys, it has never stopped them from getting together when they want to. Look at the years in the not too distant past when Brian and Al had issues, even after touring together. To this day they still tour together. We don't fully understand their bonds with each other and we probably never will, as it should be.
I agree. Their relationships are profoundly complex, as family relationships are. Theirs more so, because of the additional ties that continued to bind them in adulthood.
Eta: what I meant by my comment is that, due to that thread, BW has an infinite amount of empathy from me, not that I've gotten a hardened "anti" view of the other band members.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 01:31:44 PM by Emily » Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #177 on: February 14, 2016, 01:40:49 PM »


Where did this idea come from that Mike wasn't known as a lyricist for the BBs and his feelings were hurt?  

Dunno.  My error, I guess.  The list of amended credits from the lawsuit (I know some aren't much justified) is over 30 tracks, from the start up to Pet Sounds.   I wasn't aware there were many original listed credits for Mike.

I think the total set of songs, up to and including Pet Sounds, for which Mike was credited pre-trial was:
Surfin' Safari
Surfin'
The Shift
Catch A Wave
Surfers Rule
Our Car Club
A Young Man Is Gone
Custom Machine
Fun Fun Fun
In the Parkin' Lot
"Cassius" Love vs. "Sonny" Wilson
Warmth of the Sun
This Car of Mine
Little Honda
Please Let Me Wonder
And Your Dream Comes True

If one looks at the band with that as Mike's list of credits, Mike is basically an unimportant figure in the band's creative process, the fourth most important lyricist after Brian, Gary Usher, and Roger Christian. Most of those are filler album tracks and the couple of genuinely decent lyrics could be put down to the songs being cowritten by Brian (who, if the original credits are to be believed, wrote many lyrics solo that are much better than Mike's).
In fact the story looks like "Brian collaborates with various writers, like Gary Usher, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Roger Christian, to write albums based around different themes. He occasionally lets his cousin Mike, who co-wrote the first two singles with him, write the odd album track -- and once even let him co-write an actual single, Fun Fun Fun. Then, after Mike gets jealous and falls out with the latest lyricist, Van Dyke Parks, Brian decides to collaborate with Mike more, and around that time the band stops having hits."
When you add in the songs in the lawsuit, Mike suddenly becomes co-writer of one of the more substantial bodies of work of the rock era.
We can argue all we like about exactly how much of the current credit is deserved (I think it largely is, but some examples such as Wouldn't It Be Nice are clearly not deserved, and would have been struck off the list had Brian had even vaguely competent legal representation), but I don't think it unreasonable to think that Mike would have had at least a *slightly* better reputation had he had those credits from the beginning.
(Not even touching whether he should still, twenty-plus years after the credits were awarded, be complaining about them.)
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #178 on: February 14, 2016, 01:44:51 PM »


But it's "OK, Mike. You're right. Here are your songwriting credits. Oh, you still feel bitter? Then maybe this isn't REALLY about songwriting credits, is it?"

I think that while it is in part about the credits, it's ultimately about a sense of entitlement that he must have, but it's difficult for him to specifically put that into words in an interview and say "I feel I deserve to write songs with Brian in a manner I see fit", or "I feel I have a right to derail a reunion if I don't get my way on this".  I can understand someone feeling that way - but only to a point, a point which Mike IMO crossed many moons ago.
Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #179 on: February 14, 2016, 01:46:28 PM »

#teamBrian Grin
I will say that the Pamplin thread has made me more #teamBrian than anything else has. It really clarified for me how much he was hounded, actually forced, on all sides to perform as others wished and not as he did.

Yep. Whatever else one thinks about the band members as people or their actions over the years, one can't help but feel for Brian when it comes to how he and his mental illness were treated in the 70s and 80s.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #180 on: February 14, 2016, 01:46:50 PM »


Where did this idea come from that Mike wasn't known as a lyricist for the BBs and his feelings were hurt?  

Dunno.  My error, I guess.  The list of amended credits from the lawsuit (I know some aren't much justified) is over 30 tracks, from the start up to Pet Sounds.   I wasn't aware there were many original listed credits for Mike.

I think the total set of songs, up to and including Pet Sounds, for which Mike was credited pre-trial was:
Surfin' Safari
Surfin'
The Shift
Catch A Wave
Surfers Rule
Our Car Club
A Young Man Is Gone
Custom Machine
Fun Fun Fun
In the Parkin' Lot
"Cassius" Love vs. "Sonny" Wilson
Warmth of the Sun
This Car of Mine
Little Honda
Please Let Me Wonder
And Your Dream Comes True

If one looks at the band with that as Mike's list of credits, Mike is basically an unimportant figure in the band's creative process, the fourth most important lyricist after Brian, Gary Usher, and Roger Christian. Most of those are filler album tracks and the couple of genuinely decent lyrics could be put down to the songs being cowritten by Brian (who, if the original credits are to be believed, wrote many lyrics solo that are much better than Mike's).
In fact the story looks like "Brian collaborates with various writers, like Gary Usher, Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, and Roger Christian, to write albums based around different themes. He occasionally lets his cousin Mike, who co-wrote the first two singles with him, write the odd album track -- and once even let him co-write an actual single, Fun Fun Fun. Then, after Mike gets jealous and falls out with the latest lyricist, Van Dyke Parks, Brian decides to collaborate with Mike more, and around that time the band stops having hits."
When you add in the songs in the lawsuit, Mike suddenly becomes co-writer of one of the more substantial bodies of work of the rock era.
We can argue all we like about exactly how much of the current credit is deserved (I think it largely is, but some examples such as Wouldn't It Be Nice are clearly not deserved, and would have been struck off the list had Brian had even vaguely competent legal representation), but I don't think it unreasonable to think that Mike would have had at least a *slightly* better reputation had he had those credits from the beginning.
(Not even touching whether he should still, twenty-plus years after the credits were awarded, be complaining about them.)


I can't help but think that California Girls not being credited to Mike is, without a doubt, the most egregious example in BB history of a person not getting credits for a song, compared to the amount they legitimately contributed. It's shocking, really.

I don't think that the public had any doubt that Mike was a lyricist in a big way for the band's material at that point though... I think he was known as the often lead singer, the corny guy doing the chicken dance/telling jokes, entertaining the audience as an emcee, as well as the guy who wrote the lyrics to many fun songs (and some deeper songs too).

So, while a huge hit like California Girls would have been a nice feather to add to Mike's cap, I think that the absence of his credits on that song (for example, because there were more songs too of course) couldn't have made *that* big a difference in terms of Mike's public perception... at least so I would think. (Doesn't mean I can't completely understand him feeling severely burned by not being credited on a huge hit like that, amongst other tunes too). Yet I don't think it would have given him really any more significant cred amongst Mike's peers, even though it's possible Mike today (and for decades) may feel the opposite - that a Cali Girls credit, for example, would have made him have more industry respect (and more money of course).

But it got me thinking... in the early to mid sixties, Mike's proper crediting - interspersed with some slightly/moderately/very surprising instances of non-crediting - then more proper crediting happening, then the very egregious California Girls snub... it doesn't make a lot of sense how this could have happened if Brian didn't do the specific California Girls snub for some reason in particular. I wonder if perhaps at this point in 1965, it was a passive-aggressive move to let Mike know that he didn't want to keep writing with Mike? Perhaps an egregious instance of non-verbal communication?

It seems obvious that Brian was having the itch to move into other musical territory and not have a guy (who he often creatively clashed with, despite some remarkable results like Today Side B) dragging his feet and making things more difficult for him during songwriting, not to mention trying to make sure he keeps getting to be the main collaborator. Brian must have felt stuck.

Not that Brian snubbing Mike for California Girls would necessarily logically equate to some magic world where Mike just recedes into the background and ceases being a thorn in Brian's side... but it just seems too big a song for this to have happened by accident. Maybe Brian hoped that Mike would be discouraged from wanting to so badly be the primary co-writing partner if he was gonna get treatment like this. Which I would think would have possibly, in part, come as a reaction to where Brian felt pressured by Mike. It's the inconsistent crediting pattern that makes me scratch my chin and try to deduce a reason for. I am not saying that Mike is responsible for himself not being credited, just that this may have been a contributing factor in the mind of Brian - perhaps.  

Not that Brian knew for sure it was gonna be a monster hit when he wrote it and left Mike's name off the credits... but when you have a guy experiencing mental illness, coupled with a propensity for passive-aggressive moves, I do wonder if this theory holds any possible water. It may of course be totally bunk too.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 01:57:09 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Fire Wind
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 299



View Profile
« Reply #181 on: February 14, 2016, 01:49:48 PM »

I think the total set of songs, up to and including Pet Sounds, for which Mike was credited pre-trial was:

I was just scrambling about trying to find such a list, so thanks!
Logged

I still can taste the ocean breeze...
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #182 on: February 14, 2016, 01:56:47 PM »

Thank you for posting this.  I love Mike, always have, always will.


He's dead right about some things, dead wrong about other things, that's just who he is.  I can't hate him for it, just like I can't hate Brian for being dead wrong about a lot too.  Just wish the two of them would put down the battle axes and get back together.


Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #183 on: February 14, 2016, 01:58:08 PM »


I don't think that the public had any doubt that Mike was a lyricist in a big way for the band's material at that point though... I think he was known as the often lead singer, the corny guy doing the chicken dance/telling jokes, entertaining the audience as an emcee, as well as the guy who wrote the lyrics to many fun songs (and some deeper songs too).

So, while a huge hit like California Girls would have been a nice feather to add to Mike's cap, I think that the absence of his credits on that song (for example, because there were more songs too of course) couldn't have made *that* big a difference in terms of Mike's public perception... at least so I would think. (Doesn't mean I can't completely understand him feeling severely burned by not being credited on a huge hit like that, amongst other tunes too). Yet I don't think it would have given him really any more significant cred amongst Mike's peers, even though it's possible Mike today (and for decades) may feel the opposite - that a Cali Girls credit, for example, would have made him have more industry respect (and more money of course).

But it got me thinking... in the early to mid sixties, Mike's proper crediting - interspersed with some slightly/moderately/very surprising instances of non-crediting - then more proper crediting happening, then the very egregious California Girls snub... it doesn't make a lot of sense how this could have happened if Brian didn't do the specific California Girls snub for some reason in particular. I wonder if perhaps at this point in 1965, it was a passive-aggressive move to let Mike know that he didn't want to keep writing with Mike? Perhaps an egregious instance of non-verbal communication?

But -- assuming the list of songs in the lawsuit to be correct for now, California Girls *wasn't* a specific snub, more a general pattern. Looking at the albums from the year or so before that, Mike co-wrote seven songs on All Summer Long, including the massive hit I Get Around, and was only credited for Little Honda. Mike co-wrote three songs on the Christmas album and was credited for none. Mike co-wrote every original on Today! (including the big hits Dance Dance Dance, Help Me Rhonda, and When I Grow Up) and was only credited for Please Let Me Wonder. Mike co-wrote eight of the eleven originals on Summer Days, and was only credited for And Your Dream Comes True.
The question, if the post-lawsuit credits are accurate, isn't why Mike was suddenly "snubbed" on California Girls, but why he was actually credited on And Your Dream Comes True, Please Let Me Wonder, and Little Honda, and only those tracks, over a four-album period where he was the primary lyricist.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #184 on: February 14, 2016, 01:59:00 PM »

I wonder what Carl thought about with Brian back then? If he was pushing Brian as well, it seems Brian didn't hold it against him. He was even Brian's best man at his wedding. I think the relationships that these guys had with each other is much more complicated than what we want to believe. All the stuff that happened throughout the years between these guys, it has never stopped them from getting together when they want to. Look at the years in the not too distant past when Brian and Al had issues, even after touring together. To this day they still tour together. We don't fully understand their bonds with each other and we probably never will, as it should be.

I agree.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #185 on: February 14, 2016, 02:05:41 PM »

Are there any contemporary interviews with Brian or Mike in which they discuss the writing of the songs? Do we see Brian actively lying about or actively acknowledging Mike's authorship in the years before the lawsuit? Or Mike bringing the issue up? Do we know the process of registering authorship? Was it generally Murry or someone else who did it? Did Brian actively engage with Sea of Tunes or was he passive and it was actively handled exclusively by Murry?
It is really egregious and also odd. How did it happen that it sat there uncontested for so many years?
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 02:07:04 PM by Emily » Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #186 on: February 14, 2016, 02:11:56 PM »

Are there any contemporary interviews with Brian or Mike in which they discuss the writing of the songs? Do we see Brian actively lying about or actively acknowledging Mike's authorship in the years before the lawsuit? Or Mike bringing the issue up? Do we know the process of registering authorship? Was it generally Murry or someone else who did it? Did Brian actively engage with Sea of Tunes or was he passive and it was actively handles exclusively by Murry?
It is really egregious and also odd. How did it happen that it sat there uncontested for so many years?
I've heard audio interviews from Brian in the Landy years where he says things like "Mike is mad at me because I left his name off California Girls" or "Mike is mad at me because my dad left his name off California Girls" -- I'm pretty sure I've heard both those. (I've only specifically heard him mention that one song, which I think is one reason that one gets brought up more than the others). I can't cite specific interviews, I'm afraid.
There's also a passage in the Gaines book (which I no longer have a copy of) where Tony Asher talks about being surprised to hear Brian claiming to have co-written lyrics which Asher wrote on his own, and Van Dyke Parks has talked in interviews about pulling Brian up about his name not being on Wonderful in the mid-90s.
In one recent thread on this subject on this board, someone linked to some Mike interviews from (IIRC) the late 70s, where he talks about it a bit.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #187 on: February 14, 2016, 02:15:00 PM »

Somewhere on the net there's a blow by blow of the court case from someone who sat in the gallery.  Essentially Brian has always acknowledged that to the best of his memory Mike's correct about his assessments, or Brian just doesn't remember that particular song.   He even basically admitted to it on the stand several times.  Mike also was on record in court as saying he didnt' want to sue Brian and wanted to settle for a token amount (and having the name added) but that Brian's handlers wanted to take it to court.  Brian basically never personally contested it.   
Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #188 on: February 14, 2016, 02:15:37 PM »

As a matter of fact, I have no desire see either this year. Mike was here in NJ last night for 2 shows and I didn't go. Last week I passed up pre-sale tix for Brian's show in September. Honestly, I've lost the desire to see any of them, anymore. You guys have made it clear that it sucks to be a Beach Boys fan. That we have to take sides and only enjoy the side that was picked.

That's incredibly sad to hear, and I wish petty squabbles on a message board weren't spoiling your enjoyment so much. Personally, I'm going to go and see two Brian/Al/Blondie shows in May, and I'm certain I'll enjoy them (hopefully as much as the 2002 Pet Sounds shows, since it's Pet Sounds again). And if Mike and Bruce (and maybe Dave) announce any UK shows this year, I'll go to some of those, too, and enjoy them. And if anyone wants to revoke my Brianista and/or Kokomaoist cards for that, let them.
I hope to see both this year too (thanks to your persuasion!). I haven't seen live music in about two decades.
Eta: well, I've seen random musicians in subway stops and bars and the like.

Glad to hear it. I'm absolutely certain you'll love both bands, and I can't think of many better reintroductions to the world of live music.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #189 on: February 14, 2016, 02:16:35 PM »

Are there any contemporary interviews with Brian or Mike in which they discuss the writing of the songs? Do we see Brian actively lying about or actively acknowledging Mike's authorship in the years before the lawsuit? Or Mike bringing the issue up? Do we know the process of registering authorship? Was it generally Murry or someone else who did it? Did Brian actively engage with Sea of Tunes or was he passive and it was actively handles exclusively by Murry?
It is really egregious and also odd. How did it happen that it sat there uncontested for so many years?
I've heard audio interviews from Brian in the Landy years where he says things like "Mike is mad at me because I left his name off California Girls" or "Mike is mad at me because my dad left his name off California Girls" -- I'm pretty sure I've heard both those. (I've only specifically heard him mention that one song, which I think is one reason that one gets brought up more than the others). I can't cite specific interviews, I'm afraid.
There's also a passage in the Gaines book (which I no longer have a copy of) where Tony Asher talks about being surprised to hear Brian claiming to have co-written lyrics which Asher wrote on his own, and Van Dyke Parks has talked in interviews about pulling Brian up about his name not being on Wonderful in the mid-90s.
In one recent thread on this subject on this board, someone linked to some Mike interviews from (IIRC) the late 70s, where he talks about it a bit.
Certainly sounds like a frown-worthy pattern.
Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #190 on: February 14, 2016, 02:19:10 PM »

Somewhere on the net there's a blow by blow of the court case from someone who sat in the gallery.  Essentially Brian has always acknowledged that to the best of his memory Mike's correct about his assessments, or Brian just doesn't remember that particular song.   He even basically admitted to it on the stand several times.  Mike also was on record in court as saying he didnt' want to sue Brian and wanted to settle for a token amount (and having the name added) but that Brian's handlers wanted to take it to court.  Brian basically never personally contested it.   

That link is http://www.surfermoon.com/essays/lovevwilson1.html
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
Ang Jones
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 559



View Profile
« Reply #191 on: February 14, 2016, 02:27:30 PM »

If anyone wants to discuss or opine about this: "Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike" instead of diverting and accusing and insulting I'll be around (no need to call me out).

OK,  I'll answer this. In consideration of the history, what right has Mike to hurt feelings? Mike has received financial reparation, he got the chance to have a reunion (and ended that... badly), he has repeatedly dragged up Brian's drug abuse and mental problems, the way Mike behaved at the R&RHOF, 'Your husband had better write a big hit because he is going to have to write me a big cheque'...... Things like this do not present him in a sympathetic light and therefore people are not inclined to feel sorry for him.

Mike is an extremely wealthy man who seems to enjoy his career.

Brian had an abusive father, mental health issues, Landy and the litigation from Mike to endure. And despite these things has hardly ever been publicly rude to Mike. It's a no brainer.

So the topic is feelings and you deflect to  finance. The topic is Mike and wrongs done him and you deflect to Brian and "wrongs" done him that aren't Mike's doing or were reactions to wrongs done Mike (except the 2004 suit). And I'm the deflector?

I think you just illustrated my point too.

You asked why people are outraged by Mike's hurt feelings rather than by the people who supposedly caused them. I explained why IMO this was the case. Putting it even more simply for you, because they consider Mike's hurt feelings have inadequate justification or at least inadequate justification for the level of his 'hurt'.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 02:31:26 PM by Ang Jones » Logged
Empire Of Love
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 574



View Profile WWW
« Reply #192 on: February 14, 2016, 02:28:32 PM »

Thank you for posting this.  I love Mike, always have, always will.


He's dead right about some things, dead wrong about other things, that's just who he is.  I can't hate him for it, just like I can't hate Brian for being dead wrong about a lot too.  Just wish the two of them would put down the battle axes and get back together.




Could you help us understand the battle axe Brian needs to put down?  I think most here have a hard time seeing where Brian is still fighting.  And as it seems he isn't still fighting Mike, one must ask what motivation he has to get back together with someone who continues to be aggressive toward him?

EoL
Logged

Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #193 on: February 14, 2016, 02:39:04 PM »

Thank you for posting this.  I love Mike, always have, always will.


He's dead right about some things, dead wrong about other things, that's just who he is.  I can't hate him for it, just like I can't hate Brian for being dead wrong about a lot too.  Just wish the two of them would put down the battle axes and get back together.




Could you help us understand the battle axe Brian needs to put down?  I think most here have a hard time seeing where Brian is still fighting.  And as it seems he isn't still fighting Mike, one must ask what motivation he has to get back together with someone who continues to be aggressive toward him?

EoL

Oh please.  Open your eyes.  I'm not going to break out the crayons and construction paper for you. 
Logged
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #194 on: February 14, 2016, 02:48:49 PM »

The issue here for me is this: Mike is great. Awesome singer and frontman and great songwriting partner to Brian. I am 39 years old, I've lived long enough to have suffered betrayal, cheating, went to through the difficulties of life just like anybody. Now, grudges are part of life. Mike is entitled to his. Why shouldn't he hold grudges? Who on this board has co-written a smash hit song and not been credited for it. How about 4 or 5 massive hit songs? We assume these guys are just pawns in our pre-conceived or learned view of this group. But they are suffering individuals. Heck, Dennis held a grudge through the late 1970s since he learned that Brian had to be convinced by their mother to include him in the group.

I think ultimately too you can't underestimate the fact that Mike sees addiction as a weakness that can just be willed out of your life.  He also sees mental illness this way.  He's completely wrong.... but that's how he sees life. 

To him, Brian never being able to get back to "old-school Brian" has never made any sense.  After all, Mike thinks he personally is everything he ever was.  Hey, want to hear my new song?  Did you know I still write?  Don't I look thin just like before?  I've worn these hats for 50 years!  etc. etc.

So ultimately what you have is Brian is a fraction of what he once was in Mike's eyes, and Mike can't figure out why Brian doesn't just act normal, so he comes up with 15 different explanations and 15 different things to be pissed off about when it comes to Brian.

Most of us wouldn't hold grudges for 50 years; no matter how bad the slight was.  First off, Mike is the type that can hold a grudge forever, and second, Brian's illness prohibits him from ever fully accepting repsonsibility for what Mike feels Brian did.  Mike seems incapable of realizing that Mike is completely sane but also can't accept responsibility for the things he's done to Brian. 

It'll never be resolved, but hopefully they can each bite their lip long enough to work together for the fans.  Like you alluded to, though, most normal humans (you, I) don't hold grudges for 50 years because we're able to eradicate those we hold grudges against from our lives.  Brian and Mike are forever joined at the hip, even more than families often are because they're famous and most of the world views them as cousins. 

Logged
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #195 on: February 14, 2016, 02:59:17 PM »

The issue here for me is this: Mike is great. Awesome singer and frontman and great songwriting partner to Brian. I am 39 years old, I've lived long enough to have suffered betrayal, cheating, went to through the difficulties of life just like anybody. Now, grudges are part of life. Mike is entitled to his. Why shouldn't he hold grudges? Who on this board has co-written a smash hit song and not been credited for it. How about 4 or 5 massive hit songs? We assume these guys are just pawns in our pre-conceived or learned view of this group. But they are suffering individuals. Heck, Dennis held a grudge through the late 1970s since he learned that Brian had to be convinced by their mother to include him in the group.

I think ultimately too you can't underestimate the fact that Mike sees addiction as a weakness that can just be willed out of your life.  He also sees mental illness this way.  He's completely wrong.... but that's how he sees life. 

To him, Brian never being able to get back to "old-school Brian" has never made any sense.  After all, Mike thinks he personally is everything he ever was.  Hey, want to hear my new song?  Did you know I still write?  Don't I look thin just like before?  I've worn these hats for 50 years!  etc. etc.

So ultimately what you have is Brian is a fraction of what he once was in Mike's eyes, and Mike can't figure out why Brian doesn't just act normal, so he comes up with 15 different explanations and 15 different things to be pissed off about when it comes to Brian.

Most of us wouldn't hold grudges for 50 years; no matter how bad the slight was.  First off, Mike is the type that can hold a grudge forever, and second, Brian's illness prohibits him from ever fully accepting repsonsibility for what Mike feels Brian did.  Mike seems incapable of realizing that Mike is completely sane but also can't accept responsibility for the things he's done to Brian. 

It'll never be resolved, but hopefully they can each bite their lip long enough to work together for the fans.  Like you alluded to, though, most normal humans (you, I) don't hold grudges for 50 years because we're able to eradicate those we hold grudges against from our lives.  Brian and Mike are forever joined at the hip, even more than families often are because they're famous and most of the world views them as cousins. 

See, this is why I *don't* want them to "bite their lip long enough to work together for the fans". They spent decades doing that, and it didn't make either of them very happy people, from what I can tell. They're in their seventies, and should do whatever's best for *them*, not us. Much as I loved the reunion tour, and artistically would have liked to see it continue, I don't want to see them spending whatever time they have left doing things they don't want to do.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
Debbie KL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 817


View Profile
« Reply #196 on: February 14, 2016, 02:59:25 PM »

Please explain this further, Andrew.  I guess I need the crayons and construction paper.  Yet, I'm out of the house for probably 12 hours, so will have to search your reply then. Sorry, but I will look tomorrow.

Mike got a settlement for song credits a long time ago, that Brian either was oblivious to, or didn't fight with his father about.  Mike seemed to take a very long time to contest the credits (well, until after Brian got some money from A&M).  Then he got his apparently generous settlement.  Then, several years later he made some pretty intense statements about Brian's involvement with the BBs after the mid-60's, that obviously don't add up.  But we're burying that little item, aren't we?  Good job.  

That "borderline frivolous lawsuit" also included a truly awful description of Brian and his band that clearly wasn't justified by the reviews, nor Brian's contemporary artists who were clearly delighted, and an attack on Al Jardine that seemed to have nothing to do with the lawsuit.  Sorry, but there's something wrong here.
Logged
Empire Of Love
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 574



View Profile WWW
« Reply #197 on: February 14, 2016, 03:12:09 PM »

Thank you for posting this.  I love Mike, always have, always will.


He's dead right about some things, dead wrong about other things, that's just who he is.  I can't hate him for it, just like I can't hate Brian for being dead wrong about a lot too.  Just wish the two of them would put down the battle axes and get back together.




Could you help us understand the battle axe Brian needs to put down?  I think most here have a hard time seeing where Brian is still fighting.  And as it seems he isn't still fighting Mike, one must ask what motivation he has to get back together with someone who continues to be aggressive toward him?

EoL


Oh please.  Open your eyes.  I'm not going to break out the crayons and construction paper for you. 

Enlighten us.  He won't go into the room with Mike?  Mike wasn't the hero of Love & Mercy?  What is the battle axe?  If you mean that Brian doesn't want to write with Mike anymore then your symbol of a battle axe is completely inappropriate for the point you are trying to communicate.  Mike continually belittles Brian -and his wife- and harasses him through the legal system.  Brian just kind of takes it, says mostly nice things, didn't bother to put up a fight in court, and doesn't want to spend a lot of time with a person who, in various forms, abuses him.  That's called wisdom, not a battle axe.  Mike carries a battle axe, as this article proves once again.  So please enlighten us with the crayons and construction paper.  Explain to is the battle axe of Brian Wilson.

EoL
Logged

SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #198 on: February 14, 2016, 03:14:59 PM »

Exactly, Mike is a bully and possible "trigger" for BW if he pushes BW too hard as usual.
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Empire Of Love
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 574



View Profile WWW
« Reply #199 on: February 14, 2016, 03:18:44 PM »

Maybe we don't get to tell the Boys how to feel because we haven't walked in their shoes.

We are only having a discussion, we can't dictate or make a bandmember feel a certain way if they're not going to feel that way.

I haven't walked in Landy's shoes, yet I can "tell" the ghost of Landy that he was being super sh*tty by taking advantage of Brian, and I think you'd probably agree. And you're able to call Brian out on sh*tty behavior (as I too am), like the songwriting snubbing, but somehow you cannot say the same about Mike at any point.

I will say that Brian snubbing Mike over, California Girls, for example, was not excusable, it was not right. Can you bring yourself to say the same about any action from Mike to Brian? That Mike ever did something to Brian that Cam would qualify as simply wrong, not right, f*cked up?

It's not in Mike's DNA to take responsibility for the wrongs he has committed and somehow he seems to have passed this DNA on to his biggest fans.

EoL
Logged

gfx
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 43 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.358 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!