Mike's Book Discussion Thread (and how it relates to the SS board)

[Lee Marshall]

"What's the point of bringing this up, if you're just going to talk around the topic? Is there something stopping you from saying what you mean, directly?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well...isn't it a pretty good 'head's up' for those who plan to plow through the book...at least in terms of things to watch for?  There's more to it than Mike-Eddy teeing off on 'the expired'.  And wouldn't it be GREAT to find yourself quoted but uncredited almost as if your thoughts and posts had been airlifted directly from your keypad, to this locale and then finally into someone else's  book?  That might be cause for some kind of legal questions to be asked as said posts are pretty much dated and documented here on the pages of this site.

Will this 'auto-hymnal' to poor, disenfranchised Mike-Eddy end up being a cause for Mike to then sue 'fans' ... based on their reaction(s)?  Or perhaps might it go the other way?  Wouldn't THAT be remarkable turnabout?  (and maybe even fitting?)

[SurferDownUnder]

Is it at all plausible that statements by the aforementioned users were Mike-Love approved? I mean no offense if this isn't the case about those mentioned but if these statements are true it would make me re-evaluate some statements i've seen from this site while forming my own view on the band...

[Cam Mott]

Well, here we go.  (popcorn ready)

[SMiLE Brian]

Well Filleplage and cam only post here anymore when there is a Mike controversial statement or topic to derail the thread.

[Jim V.]

Well Filleplage and cam only post here anymore when there is a Mike controversial statement or topic to derail the thread.

Well to be fair, filledeplague has been busy building the Trump Wall and watching Fox News. She's busy. You can't expect her to be "posting" all the time on this "site" if "you" understand what I "mean."

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

Ugh, I can see that this thread will end well...

Mike is a narcissist, right? Many of us can agree about that? It wouldn't surprise me if he spent a little time lurking here, trying to get a feel for what direction the wind is blowing. Hell, he's publicly referred to our discussions here before, right? Posted that one image from the Mike Love picture thread on Facebook?

If these similarities do exist, and Smiley Smile is the source, my guess is this is stuff that Mike would have picked up over years of reading the arguments, coming across a post by Cam and saying "Damn, this is the ONE GUY who knows what's going on! I'll have to remember this apologia when it's time to write my book!" And the rest of us, meanwhile, were reading Cam and saying "Who would be crazy enough to believe THAT?"

Who indeed?  

[Juice Brohnston]

And the part in the book where Mike claims he and Brian beat up a clown with an equal amount of blows also makes one pause and wonder 

[Debbie KL]

I assume this is about Andrew Doe. If so, I think we should come out and say it. If this is indeed true, is it surprising? Andrew himself said that he has been helping out Mike with his book (as a fact checker if I recall). However, if someone's saying his book reads a lot like filledplage's or Cam's posts, well then that got a bit more interesting.

Though I don't think anybody would wanna take literary advice from the filledaplague, with the "overuse" of those "certain" quotation "marks" if you will. But hey, I'd just like an answer for how a supposed school teacher gets front row tickets to every Beach Boys show on the east coast.

Just really, really unlucky?

 

[Debbie KL]

Craig (and Billie?), I'm not clear on what is going on here. Are you accusing me of something?

I haven't read the book and don't know of the specific topics guitarfool is talking about but I don't think he is accusing you of anything. All that's being said is Mike's book has some very similar opinions as certain things that that some posters have said. Maybe Mike read some of these things and agreed with these opinions and maybe it's just a coincidence.

I wonder what Mike would do if someone used some of his words without giving credit. Can't imagine!

Me neither  

[Robbie Mac]

At the minimum, the writers seemed to have plagiarized certain posters. Or it appears that way.

[The_Beach]

It is a proven fact that BRI is on this board constantly watching our conversations very carefully! So it wouldn't surprise me if Mike Love would do it from time to time! I am sure he gets quite a few good laughs about the conversations here. If there was a message board about me i for sure would want to read about it and see what people think or have to say about me!  

[Robbie Mac]

It is a proven fact that BRI is on this board constantly watching our conversations very carefully! So it wouldn't surprise me if Mike Love would do it from time to time! I am sure he gets quite a few good laughs about the conversations here. If there was a message board about me i for sure would want to read about it and see what people think or have to say about me!  

Reading a board for shits and giggles is different from using poster's comments while writing your own life story.

[JK]

And the part in the book where Mike claims he and Brian beat up a clown with an equal amount of blows also makes one pause and wonder 

 

[guitarfool2002]

My observations were how some of the passages reminded me of things I have seen posted on this board, and in Cam's case, points and debates going back to the Smile Shop, "Sunshine Pop", and even forums prior to those.

So far I have accused no one of plagarism, or anything of the sort.

The Smile chapter was something of a letdown, because I was hoping to read some new firsthand insights from Mike regarding Smile that we've not heard before especially related to personal interactions during this period, but instead a lot of the chapter was Mike voicing what felt like his opinions and defenses of various issues or incidents. So to my eyes it read as if I had already read very similar "opinions" over a decade or more of reading Cam Mott's posts. From the drugs to the apparent degradation of having the band lie on the floor to cut vocals and make animal noises, to the notion that the Beach Boys were doing the heavy lifting on the road spreading the gospel while Brian stayed home in LA acting silly, it has all been offered previously. And in a few specific cases, it really did feel like I've read the same defenses offered by Cam Mott, and others.

No accusation of plagarism, just noting the similarity.

For the record, and not wanting to review per se, the Smile chapter felt disjointed and out of chronology. There were events and scenes described that actually happened during the making of Smiley Smile, the timeline jumped back and forth from December 66 to April 67 to Smiley Smile summer 67 and back to February and March 67. There was no flow to the timeline, and some events told out of order seemed to be done to make a point rather than present the actual timeline of events. The band was recording in an empty swimming pool at Brian's house for SS, not the Smile sessions.

Fact checking 101.

It also felt more like Mike was defending accusations and charges made against him than trying to tell the story. Again, more of the usual points from years past. And in this case, to do so, there are quite a few excerpts used as quotes from Brian that came from various depositions Brian gave in lawsuits in the 90's, alongside the familiar 70's interviews where Brian would mention hashish and other points.

If I'm reading Mike's book, I'm more interested in what Mike has to say versus reading transcripts of what Brian testified in legal depositions from the 90's, pulled out of whatever context those depositions were pulled in order to do what looked like bolster Mike's opinions and defenses against the attacks.

[guitarfool2002]

In terms of my referencing both Cam and filledeplage's posts as having a familiar ring, again...I did not accuse anyone of plagarizing anything. I did notice a similarity between the section where Mike talks about Full House and John Stamos and the benefits to the band's legacy, and posts like this which I remembered reading here several years ago from filledeplage and others who would offer these same points when other posters were being critical of having John performing with the band, or similar debates. And there were plenty of them:

Glad you're back and saw the show.  Stamos seemed initially sort of a non-conventional choice, but, he has, in his own right become part of American culture, whether people like it or not. His former series ran eight seasons and it in virtually every TV market on this planet. He has a following that the "classic" rock fans, who are "purists" might not appreciate. But, those of us have raised kids, who have become BB fans as a direct result of Full House, despite musical brainwashing can be grateful that he drew fans into the mix, with the BB cameo appearances on his series. Those millions of kids were a captive audience for The Beach Boys. Uncle Jesse made the introduction.

Stamos and The Fat Boys, made fans out if my kids.  My son's girlfriend can't wait to see the BB's but she really likes Stamos, and wants to see them because of him. I'll take it.  I find his drumming closer to Dennis' - very straight-forward without the fancy stuff.  And for each one who finds it cheesy, ten (young fans) are enamored with him and the BB's by extension.

Just my opinion: If you read that quote, and click on the quote link to read the rest of that thread from 2014, you might soon read that section where this is addressed in the book and feel as if it sounds familiar, as something you've heard before. And that is only one example so far.

Let the readers decide when they can get their own copy.

[HeyJude]

I'd like to add that I don't mind if someone who has read the book wants to do a full-blown, blow-by-blow, detailed review. I don't consider it a spoiler or anything.

If anyone has read the book and wants to do as detailed of a review as possible, please go for it. Maybe start a new thread and mark that it's a detailed review in case someone considers it somehow "spoilers."

I wouldn't mind hearing more details about what Mike goes into as far as the 1997-1998 era and Al relationship, C50, and so on.

[Juice Brohnston]

So there is an opportunity here for Cam to pull a 'Kramer' and start the Real Mike Love Reality Tour!!

[Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll]

So there is an opportunity here for Cam to pull a 'Kramer' and start the Real Mike Love Reality Tour!!

 

[guitarfool2002]

And this one:

Not hyperbole, just not getting the recognition as yet.  The C50 intro for Do It Again supports that.  I liken his position to Carl's many interviews where Brian "made him sing." Except my take is that Cowsill took to the drums like a duck to water.  Brian had his own guys on drums for his whole solo career.  Cowsill was the choice.  And, not unlike Carl, he grew in the job with his family's band.  The Cowsill work became a part of American culture as well. Everyone from the late 60's knows The Rain, the Park, etc.  and even if they forget who sings it, they know the melody.  As well as Hair.

At the end of the day, my son's 27 year old girlfriend likes The Beach Boys because of John Stamos. How they "get there" (as a fan) doesn't matter.  Only that they do.   

Let me be clear that out of all the available drummers, I would pick John Cowsill as well. That being said, I would think part of his appearance on C50 was due to negotiation/politics, for Mike to at least get a couple of his guys in the band. I’m sure Brian dug playing with Cowsill too, but I doubt Brian started off by demanding Cowsill. How many times had Brian met Cowsill or heard him play with Mike’s “Beach Boys” prior to C50? Again, I think Cowsill was an excellent choice, and he’d be my first pick for another reunion tour, and I would think Brian approved highly of his playing. But let’s be honest with ourselves about what goes into picking any of these musicians, especially when we’re talking about the political minefield that was/is C50.

As for his drumming, I could pick about a hundred points in the show that demonstrate his drumming expertise without pointing out the opening to “Do It Again”, which is a pretty basic intro that every drummer in BB history has been able to do perfectly well. Not sure how that demonstrates drumming prowess.

Back to Stamos, I will absolutely grant he won the band some new fans in the 1988-1994 timeframe or so. That has pretty much nothing to do with whether he needs to be prominently featured at a show in 2014. I’d say the same thing if the Fat Boys got on stage and rapped through the entire show. Again, even Stamos has said he *understands* why people are annoyed by him being there.

Having been a Pre-K teacher during that Kokomo era, what I can speak to are the demographics of those kids, who are the same ages as my own kids. No one was more shocked that The Beach Boys were on a sitcom than I.  My kids were calling from another room that "Uncle Jesse had The Beach Boys on!" 

It would be foolish to suggest that "some new fans" were won.  That does no one justice and just check out the global syndication and viewership.  I would bet that John Stamos has a facial recognition factor that outguns many political leaders.  Shows like Seinfeld, Cosby, and Full House make these "reruns" prime viewing for young people. 

What I do know is that there are millions of new fans, who are and have been watching these shows in many countries and languages and The Beach Boys became stars all over again for new generations.  That is Stamos.  And he is a star, like it or not. 

But, I got the sheet music (easy version) and the kids would learn to skip to it.  And I got PAID for it. It is a great country.  Uncle Jesse!  And in 2014, those fans who were four in the late 80's and some have kids of their own. Guess what they watch? Full House, complete with the mullet hairdos and The Beach Boys.  And, yes, Stamos is appropriate for these shows.  He had the one lead (Forever) that he helped popularize and resurrect for two new generations of fans.

Stamos introduced Dennis Wilson to this generation.  Sorry.  I respectfully disagree.   

[Autotune]

My observations were how some of the passages reminded me of things I have seen posted on this board, and in Cam's case, points and debates going back to the Smile Shop, "Sunshine Pop", and even forums prior to those.

So far I have accused no one of plagarism, or anything of the sort.

The Smile chapter was something of a letdown, because I was hoping to read some new firsthand insights from Mike regarding Smile that we've not heard before especially related to personal interactions during this period, but instead a lot of the chapter was Mike voicing what felt like his opinions and defenses of various issues or incidents. So to my eyes it read as if I had already read very similar "opinions" over a decade or more of reading Cam Mott's posts. From the drugs to the apparent degradation of having the band lie on the floor to cut vocals and make animal noises, to the notion that the Beach Boys were doing the heavy lifting on the road spreading the gospel while Brian stayed home in LA acting silly, it has all been offered previously. And in a few specific cases, it really did feel like I've read the same defenses offered by Cam Mott, and others.

No accusation of plagarism, just noting the similarity.

For the record, and not wanting to review per se, the Smile chapter felt disjointed and out of chronology. There were events and scenes described that actually happened during the making of Smiley Smile, the timeline jumped back and forth from December 66 to April 67 to Smiley Smile summer 67 and back to February and March 67. There was no flow to the timeline, and some events told out of order seemed to be done to make a point rather than present the actual timeline of events. The band was recording in an empty swimming pool at Brian's house for SS, not the Smile sessions.

Fact checking 101.

It also felt more like Mike was defending accusations and charges made against him than trying to tell the story. Again, more of the usual points from years past. And in this case, to do so, there are quite a few excerpts used as quotes from Brian that came from various depositions Brian gave in lawsuits in the 90's, alongside the familiar 70's interviews where Brian would mention hashish and other points.

If I'm reading Mike's book, I'm more interested in what Mike has to say versus reading transcripts of what Brian testified in legal depositions from the 90's, pulled out of whatever context those depositions were pulled in order to do what looked like bolster Mike's opinions and defenses against the attacks.

Anything positive to say about the book so far?

[HeyJude]

I may have this all backwards, but assuming the publisher submitted the edited extracts to the Daily Mail to publish (which I would assume would be the case), it's funny that Mike and his publisher went to the Daily Mail for publicity for his book; was it not the Daily Mail that was part of the mid-2000s lawsuit from Mike regarding the free CD promotion?

[filledeplage]

In terms of my referencing both Cam and filledeplage's posts as having a familiar ring, again...I did not accuse anyone of plagarizing anything. I did notice a similarity between the section where Mike talks about Full House and John Stamos and the benefits to the band's legacy, and posts like this which I remembered reading here several years ago from filledeplage and others who would offer these same points when other posters were being critical of having John performing with the band, or similar debates. And there were plenty of them:

Glad you're back and saw the show.  Stamos seemed initially sort of a non-conventional choice, but, he has, in his own right become part of American culture, whether people like it or not. His former series ran eight seasons and it in virtually every TV market on this planet. He has a following that the "classic" rock fans, who are "purists" might not appreciate. But, those of us have raised kids, who have become BB fans as a direct result of Full House, despite musical brainwashing can be grateful that he drew fans into the mix, with the BB cameo appearances on his series. Those millions of kids were a captive audience for The Beach Boys. Uncle Jesse made the introduction.

Stamos and The Fat Boys, made fans out if my kids.  My son's girlfriend can't wait to see the BB's but she really likes Stamos, and wants to see them because of him. I'll take it.  I find his drumming closer to Dennis' - very straight-forward without the fancy stuff.  And for each one who finds it cheesy, ten (young fans) are enamored with him and the BB's by extension.

Just my opinion: If you read that quote, and click on the quote link to read the rest of that thread from 2014, you might soon read that section where this is addressed in the book and feel as if it sounds familiar, as something you've heard before. And that is only one example so far.

Let the readers decide when they can get their own copy.

GF - there is little or anything in that/those posts that is/are not common knowledge or within the common background of experience seeing Full House in the 80's-90's or on Nick at Night.  I articulated it, but I didn't make it up nor was I urged, paid, or whatever to post here.

And, it is also common knowledge that Stamos did popularize "Forever" on his program for millions to be exposed to the music of The Beach Boys and in particular Dennis' song which was given air play that otherwise would likely never have happened.

The Beach Boys and TV shows from their inception, such as Lassie,  Leave it to Beaver, Happy Days and Full House are a part of American culture.  It is not news. And I just finished reading the Mike book freebie on amazon, looking for whatever these wild accusations might be.  It was not a full version of the book.  

"Similarity?" Stamos toured with The Beach Boys and I saw them in the 80's when Carl was running the show and Brian was on Full House.   Stamos gave much needed publicity to the band when they were in their late 40's or early 50's and were considered a has-been oldies band by many.  

And, when you are looking at what I have written, you might check out that other disparaged (on this board) BBB where I posted 2 reviews after seeing Brian on this recent tour. I think of those band members as "Beach Boys" which defies logic for some here.  Maybe it is generational.  It is not an original position and is one held by millions of fans.  They are still The Beach Boys - just playing in different venues.  And that is my opinion.  

Fans who post here, should not be put continuously on the defensive if they see all of the Beach Boys where ever they play. It is what has led many posters to leave this forum, which is pretty sad.  JMHO        

[HeyJude]

Wait, how did ANOTHER puff piece on Stamos come out of this particular discussion?   

[Rocker]

Wait so the book sucks?

 



It's no secret that this board is watched by more than one "side" of the Beach Boys. And I don't think it would be news to anybody. Remember that Mike only started to talk about autotune in an interview when asked if he had heard Brian and Al's "The right time" after that song and it's use of autotune was discussed right at the same time as said interview on this board very intensely. It was much too obvious to be a coincidence.
I hate to say this, mainly because people will probably get this in a wrong way, but Mike is what one would call a populist. On one side he jumps on any bandwagon (and usually keeps hanging on there for much longer than anyone would consider appropriate). On the other side he's stuck in a view that everyone is against him (which could be a result of decades of pure hate thrown towards him) and therefor lets people know that he is the one who is fighting for truth and righteousness. His "message" is reduced to simple and striking statements (many of them not even very reasonable) that he's repeating over and over until he has his own view built around that and can't escape that swirl.
He smells a conspiracy when something doesn't fit in with his view of himself. Unfortunately it is quite obvious that Mike's idea of himself is very different to what comes into notice.
He wants everything to be outlined very clearly so that in his mind it makes "sense" (a word he uses quite often, I guess, especially during the Beach Boys reunion and the interviews*) and then that's the way it is. There's no interfering; only one way/reason. You can even kinda see that in the way he compiles the setlists of the shows.

*The interviews show another side as well: the way certain things get changed or adapted until they fit with his view or just what he'd like to have happened. In the earlier interviews he quotes Brian with after re-recording "Do it again" with - paraphrasing - "Not bad for a 70 year old". As the interviews went along, it suddenly was "How can a 70 year old sound so great?!". IIRC there were three "phases" of this quote, each one getting more complimentary towards Mike. I think this is an interesting point. It doesn't mean btw that Mike didn't indeed do a great job with his singing. The view is just on the evolution of said quote.


So, that is a populist. And that's ok. Some people are populists or lean towards that side, others don't. It doesn't automatically mean you are a bad person. Plus this is only the way we can see Mike in his public behavior. It could be very different in private.
Mike is an entertainer and his personality and actions won't do any serious harm to many people. It's another thing if populists who are millions of times more dangerous than Mike could ever be get, the chance to become president. That said, I wouldn't be surprised though if Mike felt at least a little sympathy for Dumb Donald, not necessarily for his racist, homophobic and stupid comments but because he feels somewhat like he can identify with that "me against the rest" mentality.

Ok, I guess I will get some digital punches from a couple of members. So, go ahead.

[HeyJude]

Fans who post here, should not be put continuously on the defensive if they see all of the Beach Boys where ever they play.   

I'm not seeing anyone being criticized for which touring bands they see in concert.

If someone sees, say, a dozen or more Mike shows per year and maybe sees Brian once or not at all, then perhaps I'll weigh their "opinion" on Mike-related topics accordingly.

But nobody is being attacked for the act of seeing any or all touring bands.