Why Brian Dumped Mike: Exhibit A, "California Girls"

[Michael Edward Osbourne]

I personally like the unsophisticated lyrics to California Girls. Instrumentally sophisticated pop music with simple lyrics, and that's the charm of many songs, not just by the Beach Boys. I wouldn't want the song any other way. A+

[urbanite]

I totally disagree with the premise of this thread.  Mike Love really nailed it when he wrote the words to this song, it was a masterpiece, a guy thinking about all the beautiful women out there in the world.  What guy hasn't thought about that.  The organ in the background gives the song an amusement park type of feel that works with all the other incredible aspects of the song.   I'm sure BW had his reason to expand his horizons and work with VDP, but this song was not the reason to give Mike the heave ho.  Did it have anything to do with Mike was on the road and not around?  

[pixletwin]

I totally disagree with the premise of this thread.  Mike Love really nailed it when he wrote the words to this song, it was a masterpiece, a guy thinking about all the beautiful women out there in the world.  What guy hasn't thought about that.  The organ in the background gives the song an amusement park type of feel that works with all the other incredible aspects of the song.   I'm sure BW had his reason to expand his horizons and work with VDP, but this song was not the reason to give Mike the heave ho.  Did it have anything to do with Mike was on the road and not around?  

I agree. There is a time and a place for BS rock n roll intellectualism. California Girls isn't the right time or place.

[MikestheGreatest!!]

Exhibit A for the defense: Brian didn't seem to mind having himself officially credited as the lyricist of 'California Girls' for 30 years.

Great point - in many interviews over the years . .

I recall that at some point in the '70's the lyrics suddenly offended some in the feminist movement.

Probably at the point when women started recognizing that they are humans, not consumer goods.

Probably at the point when some women in the feminist movement started recognizing that they are humans, not consumer goods.  Though funnily enough, I have never personally met a woman who considered herself a consumer good ever, at least not to my knowledge.  That would be a rather odd woman, would it not, one who considered herself a consumer good, though maybe a prostitute might?

[Emily]

Exhibit A for the defense: Brian didn't seem to mind having himself officially credited as the lyricist of 'California Girls' for 30 years.

Great point - in many interviews over the years . .

I recall that at some point in the '70's the lyrics suddenly offended some in the feminist movement.

Probably at the point when women started recognizing that they are humans, not consumer goods.

Probably at the point when some women in the feminist movement started recognizing that they are humans, not consumer goods.  Though funnily enough, I have never personally met a woman who considered herself a consumer good ever, at least not to my knowledge.  That would be a rather odd woman, would it not, one who considered herself a consumer good, though maybe a prostitute might?

Not really. It was (and still is, but less so) a pervasive idea that women are a commodity, prostitution being the most blunt expression of that, but traditional marriage, the beauty industry, songs like California Girls, Girls on the Beach and Two Girls for Every Boy, "trophy wives"... these are expressions as well. It's an idea absorbed by both women and men. I'm sure you've met women who think of themselves that way, though they haven't connected the dots.

[The Old Master Painter]

The instrumental music is an immaculate 'LSD-trip' personified into music. The lyrics are quite pedestrian, but only because they so heavily contrast the instrumental. That's just my two-cents.

[JK]

Mike Garneau and urbanite (and maybe others) nail it.

A magnificent, joyous song.

Anyway, what's ever been wrong with lyrics by young men about liking girls?

[GhostyTMRS]

Considering that Brian's original lyric was "I dig the girls" it sounds to me that Mike nailed exactly what Brian wanted. Brian has said so himself and counts it among his favorites. I guess Brian's opinion means nothing?

Really, if you're crapping all over a classic like "California Girls", not only one of the Beach Boys's greatest songs but one of the best pop songs ever written by anyone ever...chances are, you're a fan of the wrong band. 

[the captain]

Or maybe that you're capable of considering diverse or conflicting ideas, leading to simultaneous enjoyment and criticism.

[Jukka]

Dylan and Lennon ruined rock lyrics. I'll take 60's Mike over them any day.

[Jay]

That just might be the most stupid thing I've ever seen somebody post on any message board. Ever.

[pixletwin]

That just might be the most stupid thing I've ever seen somebody post on any message board. Ever.

Its just their opinion.

[the captain]

There's a good argument to be made for it if what you want from RnR is simple, teenage emotion and more raw energy. You could argue it's a sentiment in line with any number of back-to-basics movements.

[Bill Ed]

Dylan and Lennon ruined rock lyrics. I'll take 60's Mike over them any day.

So will I:

You used to ride on a chrome horse with your diplomat
Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat
Ain't it hard when you discover that
He really wasn't where it's at
After he took from you everything he could steal?

[GhostyTMRS]

Or maybe that you're capable of considering diverse or conflicting ideas, leading to simultaneous enjoyment and criticism.

Oh, they've been considered. It's like saying "That's Alright, Mama" would've been a better song if the lyrics were written by William S. Burroughs.

Or Bugs Bunny cartoons would be funnier if that damn rabbit wasn't such a wisecracker.

Or Star Trek would've resonated with people more if it had been set in a bus depot.

Sure, you can have that opinion, but it sounds to me like Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup, the classic Warner Brothers cartoons and Star Trek are maybe not for you.

[the captain]

I didn't really take a side. Just was ok with people who did.

[CenturyDeprived]

I think people would be more forgiving of Mike's less stellar lyrics (certainly not all of them are poor) if he were less cocky about proclaiming himself to be The Surf Word Man who is the McCartney to Brian's Lennon. I think Brian Wilson himself can be a perfectly rad lyricist too when he wants to (and that some of his own lyrics aren't too great), but Brian never gives off a "my sh*t don't stink" type of attitude that Mike does.  I get and empathize that Mike is damaged goods from the crediting snafu, but that doesn't give him an endless license to act in the way that he does.

I'm sure Mike's overly-pushy nature was part of why he was dumped. Not just that Brian wanted to stretch his wings. A combination of factors. Brian should have had zero "obligation" to stick with Mike, but Mike guilt-tripped Brian so friggin' hard, which I'm glad Brian called Mike out on in his autobiography.

That said, I love California Girls, and it's in my top 5 (maybe even top 2, now that I think about it) BB songs ever. It perfectly, and oddly seamlessly blends the earlier lightweight ideas (Mike) with progressive acid-drenched sounds that Brian was cooking up. It's a product of its time, but in a way it's the ultimate BB song, being that it blends two eras simultaneously to great effect. It's just remarkably joyous to my ears... but yeah, Mike's lyrics are basically an afterthought. They are just there, and they are functional. It's more about the song's vibe and less about the words themselves. Mike does deliver a great vocal performance.

It's possible that my emotional attachment to the group is allowing me to look past some of CG's lyrics (which might otherwise make me roll my eyes, if say I was a newcomer to the band and then heard the song). But regardless of why, I don't have any real issues with the song's lyrics. But I *totally* understand how Brian was ready for a change after this song. It's perfectly understandable that discerning music fans/friends at the time (even if they might be considered snobs to some) had legit issues with the less mature lyrics that - while they could work in certain instances - would prove to be a major factor in underselling the band's talents.  I don't personally think it's snobby to dislike CG's lyrics. I can understand that POV completely.

Take Salt Lake City and Wendy for example - those are probably some of the lamest Mike lyrics on top of more progressive backing tracks, and IMO those actually drag those songs down. Like a lot.

[GhostyTMRS]

I didn't really take a side. Just was ok with people who did.

I didn't mean you specifically.

[GhostyTMRS]

I think people would be more forgiving of Mike's less stellar lyrics (certainly not all of them are poor) if he were less cocky about proclaiming himself to be The Surf Word Man who is the McCartney to Brian's Lennon. I think Brian Wilson himself can be a perfectly rad lyricist too when he wants to (and that some of his own lyrics aren't too great), but Brian never gives off a "my sh*t don't stink" type of attitude that Mike does.  I get and empathize that he's damaged goods from the crediting snafu, but that doesn't give him an endless license to act in the way that he does.

I'm sure Mike's overly-pushy nature was part of why he was dumped. Brian should have had zero "obligation" to stick with Mike, but Mike guilt-tripped Brian so friggin' hard, which I'm glad Brian called Mike out on in his autobiography.

That said, I love California Girls, and it's in my top 5 (maybe even top 2, now that I think about it) BB songs ever. It perfectly, and oddly seamlessly blends the earlier lightweight ideas (Mike) with progressive acid-drenched sounds that Brian was cooking up. It's a product of its time, but in a way it's the ultimate BB song, being that it blends two eras simultaneously to great effect. It's just remarkably joyous to my ears... but yeah, Mike's lyrics are basically an afterthought. They are just there, and they are functional. It's more about the song's vibe and less about the words themselves. Mike does deliver a great vocal performance.

It's possible that my emotional attachment to the group is allowing me to look past some of CG's lyrics (which might otherwise make me roll my eyes, if say I was a newcomer to the band and then heard the song). But regardless of why, I don't have any real issues with the song's lyrics. But I *totally* understand how Brian was ready for a change after this song. It's perfectly understandable that discerning music fans/friends at the time (even if they were snobs) had legit issues with the less mature lyrics that - while they could work in certain instances - would prove to be a major factor in underselling the band's talents.

Take Salt Lake City and Wendy for example - those are probably some of the lamest Mike lyrics on top of more progressive backing tracks, and IMO those actually drag those songs down. Like a lot.

This is a very reasoned response to this thread, but man, "Wendy" was my go-to song when my first girlfriend cheated on me. It didn't matter that her name wasn't Wendy (that would've been creepy) but those lyrics hit the spot. What a perfect marriage of music and words IMO.

[CenturyDeprived]

I think people would be more forgiving of Mike's less stellar lyrics (certainly not all of them are poor) if he were less cocky about proclaiming himself to be The Surf Word Man who is the McCartney to Brian's Lennon. I think Brian Wilson himself can be a perfectly rad lyricist too when he wants to (and that some of his own lyrics aren't too great), but Brian never gives off a "my sh*t don't stink" type of attitude that Mike does.  I get and empathize that he's damaged goods from the crediting snafu, but that doesn't give him an endless license to act in the way that he does.

I'm sure Mike's overly-pushy nature was part of why he was dumped. Brian should have had zero "obligation" to stick with Mike, but Mike guilt-tripped Brian so friggin' hard, which I'm glad Brian called Mike out on in his autobiography.

That said, I love California Girls, and it's in my top 5 (maybe even top 2, now that I think about it) BB songs ever. It perfectly, and oddly seamlessly blends the earlier lightweight ideas (Mike) with progressive acid-drenched sounds that Brian was cooking up. It's a product of its time, but in a way it's the ultimate BB song, being that it blends two eras simultaneously to great effect. It's just remarkably joyous to my ears... but yeah, Mike's lyrics are basically an afterthought. They are just there, and they are functional. It's more about the song's vibe and less about the words themselves. Mike does deliver a great vocal performance.

It's possible that my emotional attachment to the group is allowing me to look past some of CG's lyrics (which might otherwise make me roll my eyes, if say I was a newcomer to the band and then heard the song). But regardless of why, I don't have any real issues with the song's lyrics. But I *totally* understand how Brian was ready for a change after this song. It's perfectly understandable that discerning music fans/friends at the time (even if they were snobs) had legit issues with the less mature lyrics that - while they could work in certain instances - would prove to be a major factor in underselling the band's talents.

Take Salt Lake City and Wendy for example - those are probably some of the lamest Mike lyrics on top of more progressive backing tracks, and IMO those actually drag those songs down. Like a lot.

This is a very reasoned response to this thread, but man, "Wendy" was my go-to song when my first girlfriend cheated on me. It didn't matter that her name wasn't Wendy (that would've been creepy) but those lyrics hit the spot. What a perfect marriage of music and words IMO.

The Wendy lyrics that bug me are early in the song "I didn't know a guy could cry /till you made it with another guy"...

Call me crazy, I think it's way goofy to do "guy" / "cry" / "guy" in two lines like that. It would be like if the song had a line like "I feel dim when you're with him /the future looks awful dim". It feels super awkward and rough-drafty, not entirely unlike the idea of rhyming two words with each other. Just my opinion. The other lyrics in the song are pretty ok.

[Amy B.]

Funny, but I never realized how bad the Wendy lyrics were until you just pointed it out. "I never thought a guy could cry 'til you made it with another guy." Hmm. Even "I never thought I could cry 'til you made it with another guy" would have been better.

[CenturyDeprived]

Funny, but I never realized how bad the Wendy lyrics were until you just pointed it out. "I never thought a guy could cry 'til you made it with another guy." Hmm. Even "I never thought I could cry 'til you made it with another guy" would have been better.

Yep. That's the change I would have made too I wonder if that was Mike being a tough guy and not wanting to admit to himself (as "I" would have done) as capable of crying, instead making it about a different "guy" character who cries.

[GhostyTMRS]

Funny, but I never realized how bad the Wendy lyrics were until you just pointed it out. "I never thought a guy could cry 'til you made it with another guy." Hmm. Even "I never thought I could cry 'til you made it with another guy" would have been better.

Yep. That's the change I would have made too I wonder if that was Mike being a tough guy and not wanting to admit to himself (as "I" would have done) as capable of crying, instead making it about a different "guy" character who cries.

I think it's reflecting the times. Certainly when I was growing up a guy was NEVER supposed to cry. It was a sign of weakness. Even if you got punched in the gut, you sucked it up and held back the tears lest anyone think you were a wuss. We live I'm a different world now obviously (well, most of us do anyway). "I never thought that I could cry" is fine but it doesn't quite have the same false bravado.

I've always loved how the organ is so loud and piercing that it distorts. It actually conveys the pain of lost love very effectively.

[Kid Presentable]

I said earlier that SLC was a bigger whiff by Mike, glad someone agrees.  

The teasing out of totally reasonable opinions on all sides has been interesting in this thread.

It is weird to me, the notion that Brian "dumped" Mike.  In that he had already worked with other lyricists for years prior to 1966, and would continue using Mike's lyrics all the time, for what, the next 20 years?  Including Good Vibrations, right in the middle of the Pet Sounds sessions.  

[CenturyDeprived]

Funny, but I never realized how bad the Wendy lyrics were until you just pointed it out. "I never thought a guy could cry 'til you made it with another guy." Hmm. Even "I never thought I could cry 'til you made it with another guy" would have been better.

Yep. That's the change I would have made too I wonder if that was Mike being a tough guy and not wanting to admit to himself (as "I" would have done) as capable of crying, instead making it about a different "guy" character who cries.

I think it's reflecting the times. Certainly when I was growing up a guy was NEVER supposed to cry. It was a sign of weakness. Even if you got punched in the gut, you sucked it up and held back the tears lest anyone think you were a wuss. We live I'm a different world now obviously (well, most of us do anyway). "I never thought that I could cry" is fine but it doesn't quite have the same false bravado.

I've always loved how the organ is so loud and piercing that it distorts. It actually conveys the pain of lost love very effectively.

Yet Brian talked about personally ("I") wanting to cry on a lyric just one year later, so there ya go; the bravo/bravado-less difference between Mike's lyrics and Brian's (via Asher) in a nutshell. Mike made a trade-off of having the lyric be far more clunky to avoid the shame of letting himself seem vulnerable in the song. 

Too bad there's not a Wendy lyric about coughing that could tie in to the cough later in the song ("I never thought a guy could cough / in '95 I"ll be Baywatchin' with the Hoff")