Mike Love \

[Needleinthehay]

I posted this in another thread but it got buried i think...in the recent rolling stone article there was a line about Mike probably also having a  child out of wedlock (shawn). And if you goto the rolling stone article now on their website, the line has been removed.  Obviously, Mike must have asked them to take it out, or maybe even threatened legal action.  I think it's safe to assume there will also be no mention of her (or anything else that makes Mike come off unfavorably) in the book....It will be more "Regrets? Yeah that the Wilsons did drugs" like recent interviews.

At least he doesn't try and hide that he's an egotistical asshole tho? I mean, what's worse, this kind of stuff or being like that but hiding behind false "I'm just grateful to have been able to help out" bullshit like a lot of people? At least he's honest about who he is, i suppose

[bachelorofbullets]

Mike literally was telling the truth here, he didn't sugar coat it hide behind anything.  We may choose to have a certain level of disdain for how he chose to articulate or convey his thoughts but let me ask this question.  Can we really disagree with what Mike is saying?

I think we can.  Since about 1963 Brian has pretty much been saying he doesn't want to write songs with Mike anymore.  Yet Mike refuses to acknowledge this, instead he tries to shift the blame to others.  It's classic Narcissist behavior.

[CenturyDeprived]

It's amazing. Like clockwork. Just when I try to cut Mike some slack, to play *up* the good parts of his contributions to the band in another thread, he lays another interview, predictably, that stirs up all the same emotions where he pisses me off, and makes me less likely to have any particular desire to defend him about legit things that he is unfairly maligned about.  

[18thofMay]

Mike literally was telling the truth here, he didn't sugar coat it hide behind anything.  We may choose to have a certain level of disdain for how he chose to articulate or convey his thoughts but let me ask this question.  Can we really disagree with what Mike is saying?

No he was not, mostly made up.
Yes we can disagree.
A steaming pile of excrement again.

[Cam Mott]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

http://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/08/17/mike-love-beach-boys-preview/88770362/

“Brian’s life is controlled completely," he said. "It has been since Gene Landy, and it still is. And he’s medicated. If he says something about Mike Love unsolicited, he’ll say things like, ‘He’s my favorite lyricist.’ If and when we do see each other, we revert back to childhood, which is great. So if it were just he and I, I don’t think there would be any problems. We would work through them. I know that for a fact. But that is not the way it is. So let’s just leave it at that.”

That is a load of crap

[CenturyDeprived]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

None of us have walked in Mike's shoes, yes. But let's not pretend that it's out of the realm of possibility for a person to attempt to twist facts, intentionally overlook other facts, or just basically put a false spin on things, in order to make themselves look better.

Have you ever known anyone personally (on a deep personal level), like a relative (from whom you cannot exactly exit the relationship) or a lover, who is a habitual causer of the relationship being a toxic one, with you on the receiving end of the toxicity? I have. And that toxic person never owning up to their role in causing the toxicity, and having an irresistible, insatiable urge to shift blame from their own actions?

Until you have walked in the shoes of being the receiving end of something like that, for years, (and maybe you have, I don't know), I think it's impossible to have any kind of perspective to understand that this type of stuff DOES ACTUALLY HAPPEN. I'll concede I've of course not been in the shoes of these specific people...  but let's not pretend that this type of thing is simply nonexistent in the world (regardless of how you think it applies to these guys).

It does happen.

</rant>

[Cam Mott]

You may pretend whatever you like.

[CenturyDeprived]

You may pretend whatever you like.

Thanks for completely ignoring my post, and my actual, legit query of you. Much like your hero, you are not using any particular nuance when looking at a complex situation.

[SMiLE Brian]

It's a Mott thang....

[Chocolate Shake Man]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

It's a Mott thang....

That's a six wooter, SB!   

[Cam Mott]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

I would not, I wouldn't presume to know what Mike knows of Brian's experience. Do you know?

[Gerry]

There is no such word as "irregardless".  Sorry I just couldn't resist.

[Lee Marshall]

  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[CenturyDeprived]

There is no such word as "irregardless".  Sorry I just couldn't resist.

Fixed 

[CenturyDeprived]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Come to think of it, perhaps "I Went to Sleep" was written as the future theme song for Mike's history rewriting attempts.

[HeyJude]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

I would not, I wouldn't presume to know what Mike knows of Brian's experience. Do you know?

That's pretty specious reasoning. We don't know what's rolling around in Mike's brain, therefore, what? We can't judge anything he says one way or the other? Based on that reasoning, we shouldn't be commenting on Mike and Mike shouldn't be commenting on Brian.

Mike is definitely being presumptuous about Brian, not the least when he says something like this:

So if it were just he and I, I don’t think there would be any problems. We would work through them. I know that for a fact.


What a convenient and unverifiable assumption.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

I would not, I wouldn't presume to know what Mike knows of Brian's experience. Do you know?

I do feel comfortable saying that Brian knows his own experiences more than Mike.

Are you arguing the opposite or do you have an explanation for your double standard?

[Dave in KC]

Mike's writing prowess has dried up. Pisces Brother proved that. No point in hoping for another collaboration with Brian.

[CenturyDeprived]

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

I would not, I wouldn't presume to know what Mike knows of Brian's experience. Do you know?

That's pretty specious reasoning. We don't know what's rolling around in Mike's brain, therefore, what? We can't judge anything he says one way or the other? Based on that reasoning, we shouldn't be commenting on Mike and Mike shouldn't be commenting on Brian.

Mike is definitely being presumptuous about Brian, not the least when he says something like this:

So if it were just he and I, I don’t think there would be any problems. We would work through them. I know that for a fact.


What a convenient and unverifiable assumption.

It's also a pretty uncool and crass thing to publicly say, especially considering that Brian has historically had a hard time saying "no" and avoids confrontation. Crass/uncool because this is a known thing, AND Mike knows it's a known thing. Yet somehow, Mike has it figured out... he's implied over and over again that many other collaborators/close persons in Brian's life (except Mike) have been manipulating Brian, yet Mike never, ever would think for one moment that Mike himself could possibly be capable of that. And the reader is simply expected to go along with this. How does that mindset work exactly? If I'm missing something, maybe someone can chime in.

Just because Mike truly, honestly doesn't *think* he is capable of manipulating Brian or bringing toxicity to a relationship, doesn't make it a fact... because people who do those things often refuse to acknowledge it. Mike obviously knows Brian is susceptible to manipulation by others (some truth to that, yes), but somehow, Mike... who undeniably wants something out of Brian (the sadly dysfunctional duality of both a hit song + an actual loving familial relationship)  is magically immune from ever being manipulative?

Mike will never address this topic in his book, of that we can be sure. The sad thing is that it's not entirely removed from the Landy situation. Landy was far and away the biggest creep in the BB saga, but I have a hunch that Landy himself honestly may not have consciously thought he was trying to manipulate Brian in a harmful way, for the sole reason that Landy had zero self-awareness and was nuts and mentally ill himself. Mike is way, way less nuts, and way, way less of a negative person in the BB story... but that said, his own lack of self-awareness about the similarities about his own INADVERTENTLY (giving Mike the benefit of the doubt here) manipulative behavior is one of the biggest elephants in the room for all time with regards to The BBs. Brian would hardly say a bad thing - even about Landy - until he was urged to do so by Melinda; why is it farfetched to think that Brian may have bad thoughts about Mike which are similarly emotionally held in? The problem is that Mike in turn believes Mike is never the cause of any problem, as Brian probably often keeps silent to Mike about hurt feelings caused by Mike. IMO this has warped Mike's mindset royally for decades.

If it were "just he and I"... that's exactly how Mike likes it. If Mike had his way, I assume that Mike would try to find a way to get Brian into a position to write songs about Mike-centric subjects. And eye rolls/mimed finger gunshot blasts to the head for ideas approaching the last few songs on TWGMTR. No need for pesky people who might play defense for Brian. Because Cousin Mike knows best: one-on-one is how it must be. And most especially (but of course Mike must never say this in an interview): supportive, well-intentioned spouses can go f*ck off.

And remind me again, why exactly would anyone think that Mike is so great at working through problems? Mike straight up fired Al/squeezed him out for having a dissenting opinion to Mike. Mike has many, many ex-wives. Mike got the group a (supposedly impartial) shrink that in actuality was in Mike's own back pocket.  In over three decades, Mike refuses to publicly acknowledge his own daughter/grandson from even existing on this planet.  Mike wants people to NOT know these things when they read the article. Mike (surprisingly and fortunately) recently publicly admitted to an anger management problem, and for cryin' out lout, everyone and their momma knows how truly, deeply scarred Brian is from dealing with angry alpha-males of Wilson lineage... but this could never apply to known angry demand-maker Mike?  People can have faults, I understand... but to make such a far-reaching claim in an interview - without also acknowledging that Mike himself could EVER be part of the BW/ML relationship problem - I just can't stop shaking my head. Mike must really think the article's readers are simpletons.

But yeah... Mike and Brian have a "special" bond that makes them able to get through any and all problems, healthily and in a non-toxic manner... and this is known for a FACT.

It's a  ***FACT***!!!

The only fact is that Mike knows that the only way Mike would ever get industry cred/respect again at this point is to write a hit song with Brian, without any other co-writers involved. It ain't gonna happen because he tried to force it to instantly happen in 2012. It might have happened post-TWGMTR, maybe an album or two later, if Mike had gone along with things and let things happen naturally/organically, with the BBs back together, without Mike demand after Mike demand. Mike HAS to know this deep inside, but won't admit it because it's just easier to blame Melinda. Mike got used to blame-shifting years ago, and he can't stop himself. That's Mike's addiction. Not drugs and alcohol. But almost as bad in its own way, because he has found a way to enable himself and *always* absolve himself from any/all responsibility for any number of destructive actions.  At least publicly.

And yeah... blame Brian for the reunion ending. It's ALL on Brian. Yep. Get that into the interwebs and repeat it enough so that some low-information people actually believe it. It's all just so sad and maddening to see every ounce of goodwill that people give Mike - including my own goodwill and honest praise - get trampled on by Mike running his mouth over and over again. Mike's contributions to Warmth of the Sun + Please Let Me Wonder are and will always be rad to the max. That changes nothing about this article consisting of pure poopoo.

[Rick5150]

If Brian's "handlers" are interested in Brian's well being AND they are keeping Brian away from Mike, doesn't that say something about the Brian/Mike relationship being bad for Brian? This never gets addressed.

There may very well be some truth to Mike being Brian's favorite collaborator. But I have many leather jackets and I choose one that is the right one for me at any given point. I rarely wear my favorite one. It is broken in and comfortable but does not fit with today's styles and does not make the statement I want it to make. Favorite does not equal best.

In the many iterations of the Pet Sounds music, is it possible that Mike did sing on (almost) all of the songs in some manner, but just not all of the released ones? Kind of the way Carol played bass on certain versions of certain songs, but not always the versions that the public is familiar with? I have a hard time believing Mike was featured on Caroline No though, unless that is him barking at the train. 

[KDS]

To be 100% honest, I find the lack of fact checking more offensive than anything Mike says in this article (we've heard it before). 

For one, it sounds like Al, Brian, and Bruce joined Mike for the reunion.  No mention of David Marks or the fact that Bruce was already in Mike's group.  And Brian left the tour in June?  Jeez.  Take five minutes to do some basic research. 

[HeyJude]

To be 100% honest, I find the lack of fact checking more offensive than anything Mike says in this article (we've heard it before). 

For one, it sounds like Al, Brian, and Bruce joined Mike for the reunion.  No mention of David Marks or the fact that Bruce was already in Mike's group.  And Brian left the tour in June?  Jeez.  Take five minutes to do some basic research. 

I think the little "factoid" about the 2012 reunion goes beyond even simple lack of fact-checking; there are plenty of articles that get a year wrong or a song title wrong, and usually it's a nitpicky issue that doesn't really mean anything. But not in this case. Saying Brian "left" the tour is HUGELY misleading and *conveniently* shunts responsibility (and any resulting criticism) regarding the end of the reunion away from Mike and towards Brian. That the reunion ended, and that it was *Mike* that chose to quit the band and desert a willing Brian and Al, is a *huge* hot-button, divisive topic for the band's history for this particular decade.

That the writer not only literally puts the wrong person's name in there, but also concocts a wildly incorrect date (June) for the end of the reunion makes me wonder where this incorrect info came from. Ultimately, of course, it's the writer who should fact-check *any* source. But I'm curious if he got the date or implication towards Brian from Mike himself. I believe June is around the time of Brian's alleged "no more shows" e-mail, so while I have no way of knowing if any of that info about the end of C50 came from Mike, I could totally envision Mike telling this writer that by allegedly sending that e-mail, Brian "left" the tour in "June."

[HeyJude]

If Brian's "handlers" are interested in Brian's well being AND they are keeping Brian away from Mike, doesn't that say something about the Brian/Mike relationship being bad for Brian? This never gets addressed.

There may very well be some truth to Mike being Brian's favorite collaborator. But I have many leather jackets and I choose one that is the right one for me at any given point. I rarely wear my favorite one. It is broken in and comfortable but does not fit with today's styles and does not make the statement I want it to make. Favorite does not equal best.

In the many iterations of the Pet Sounds music, is it possible that Mike did sing on (almost) all of the songs in some manner, but just not all of the released ones? Kind of the way Carol played bass on certain versions of certain songs, but not always the versions that the public is familiar with? I have a hard time believing Mike was featured on Caroline No though, unless that is him barking at the train.  

The stuff with Mike trying to characterize his place in the "Pet Sounds" story is just Mike's awkward way of not EVER being able to just credit Brian with something without pumping himself up too. He knows he'll sound like a total tool if he tries to claim the other members were as important as Brian concerning specifically PS, so we get these awkward blurbs where Mike has to amend the story and point out the already-obvious, which is that of course the other BBs did contribute to the album and in very important ways.

As for Brian's feelings about his collaborations with Mike, everything indicates that Brian treasures and fondly remembers and *fully* celebrates Mike's contributions to the songs he co-wrote. Brian does indeed say nice things about Mike to this day.

I'm not even sure what Mike's deal is with Brian and Brian's attitude towards him (Mike). What is he even trying to say? Is Brian controlled? But then Brian does say nice things about Mike. What is the contention? The times Brian says something nice about Mike, he must have escaped the clutches of his "handlers?"

And what of Brian being medicated? Mike (who, last I checked, isn't Brian's doctor) doesn't even get into whether Brian might need medication. Hasn't Brian already commented in recent years about his current medication, probably in more detail than he needed to? The implication, in my opinion, from Mike's "medicated" comments are much more serious and carry a strong implication of something nefarious about Brian's being medicated.