David Leaf to reissue California Myth

[Galaxy Liz]

I thoroughly pissed off about EH (there's an oxymoron if ever there was one)!  I was in an on topic discussion defending the book against some silly criticisms when one of the moderators took my posts down and emailed me to say I wasn't to post on that thread any more.  I told him posting on EH was a total waste of time.  I spent time and effort checking the content of my post for errors and accuracy, made sure it related to the book and pffft - it's gone.  I only started posting there to defend some absolutely silly criticism such as 'teachers shouldn't have enough time to write if they are doing their job properly' and 'young fans shouldn't approach artists after a show when they are tired and it's is a bad example to set to his current students'.

Sorry that my first post after a long time should be a moan!

I'm still reading the book (again after a long time) but it seems to me that it is exceptionally fair.  Obviously David's status has changed so now he has to limit himself in what he says but nevertheless it gives us insight into his work with Brian and concludes the SMiLE story with a happy ending.  I'm so glad to have it and read it again.  Covid was sucking the soul out of me and this has got me fired up again about the music.

That thread was a train wreck.

Obviously, I haven’t read the new edition yet, but I have both the 1978 and 1985 editions and I always thought it was a fair assessment of Brian’s story especially as it relates to the BB.  Is David biased? OK, sure. But he is still fair, I think, to the other members (much more fair than his critics are willing to admit).

Yes, it was a train wreck and they were probably right to shut it down but they cut a post which was on topic and took me time to write.  Shut it down and don't accept new posts then people don't waste their time and it doesn't look like censorship.

I'm probably a bit biased in favour of David but though I wouldn't have minded much if he was more biased toward Brian, I was surprised how fair he was to everyone else.  Reading it now after so many more inflamatory works it seems very mild.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

When I first read the 85 version I was shocked at how balanced it was. I kinda was expecting something like the Gaines book to be honest

[Robbie Mac]

When I first read the 85 version I was shocked at how balanced it was. I kinda was expecting something like the Gaines book to be honest

Exactly.  Gaines was WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY harder on Mike than Leaf was.

[guitarfool2002]

Like I said earlier in this thread or in the other thread about the Leaf book, it's great to have it once again available and people can make up their own minds about what they read with their own eyes. This book, and eventually Leaf himself, got put in the firing line and attempts were made for years to discredit it, and therefore the author too. But when you compare what was said about the book by those trying to dismiss it to what was actually in the book, you'll see the disparity between the talk about the book and the actual book.

In Beach Boys Land it's sadly a common tactic to try to dismiss things that may not boost certain narratives. Then there's the tactic of picking out one element of a book or article to hammer and hammer more to discredit the book or article. Then there's the outright personal attacks and attempts to discredit the author too. And maybe call him or her "toxic" or "anti-" something or another, with the suggestion readers should just throw away anything they or their books/articles may say. Someone tried that with Jules Seigel's "Smile" article from '67, picking out one sentence to try discrediting Jules and the thousands of other lines in his article. And it was absolutely laughable.

It's been happening recently.

Again it's good people can read this book with their own eyes and make their own judgements on what is "toxic" rather than being told for years about an out-of-print, hard to find book.

[guitarfool2002]

When I first read the 85 version I was shocked at how balanced it was. I kinda was expecting something like the Gaines book to be honest

Exactly.  Gaines was WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY harder on Mike than Leaf was.

Gaines had good sources.

[Angela Jones]

When I first read the 85 version I was shocked at how balanced it was. I kinda was expecting something like the Gaines book to be honest

Exactly.  Gaines was WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY harder on Mike than Leaf was.

Gaines had good sources.

So why DID David come in for such hostility? Because he was the first to state Brian's side or could it be simply because of what David wrote in favour of Brian, rather than any criticism of Mike? It seems to me that Mike has always been jealous of Brian, and not getting enough attention  would be enough to annoy him.

[Galaxy Liz]

So why DID David come in for such hostility? Because he was the first to state Brian's side or could it be simply because of what David wrote in favour of Brian, rather than any criticism of Mike? It seems to me that Mike has always been jealous of Brian, and not getting enough attention  would be enough to annoy him.
[/quote]

Could be though I expect that David letting the cat out of the bag over the real situation didn't help.

[atp]

So why DID David come in for such hostility? Because he was the first to state Brian's side or could it be simply because of what David wrote in favour of Brian, rather than any criticism of Mike? It seems to me that Mike has always been jealous of Brian, and not getting enough attention  would be enough to annoy him.

Could be though I expect that David letting the cat out of the bag over the real situation didn't help.
[/quote]

There is a rather marvelous quote in the 1985 edition, "I guess when you have a lot of skeletons in your closet, it makes you nervous if somebody starts rummaging around in there, even if they're only looking for a broom." I think that reflects the situation quite accurately, as far as I can tell.

[Angela Jones]

So why DID David come in for such hostility? Because he was the first to state Brian's side or could it be simply because of what David wrote in favour of Brian, rather than any criticism of Mike? It seems to me that Mike has always been jealous of Brian, and not getting enough attention  would be enough to annoy him.

Could be though I expect that David letting the cat out of the bag over the real situation didn't help.

'There is a rather marvelous quote in the 1985 edition, "I guess when you have a lot of skeletons in your closet, it makes you nervous if somebody starts rummaging around in there, even if they're only looking for a broom." I think that reflects the situation quite accurately, as far as I can tell.



[/quote]

Very astute!

[Zenobi]

Let's always remember that "Brianista" is meant as an insult by almost everybody using that word. As I said elsewhere, is it even conceivable a "Paulista" directed at fans of Sir Paul? David Leaf is a "Brianista", albeit a particularly fair and balanced one, and that's enough to attract hate. Sad and even uncanny, but true.

[Angela Jones]

Let's always remember that "Brianista" is meant as an insult by almost everybody using that word. As I said elsewhere, is it even conceivable a "Paulista" directed at fans of Sir Paul? David Leaf is a "Brianista", albeit a particularly fair and balanced one, and that's enough to attract hate. Sad and even uncanny, but true.

I got a 'Brianista' T shirt made especially lol! I debated having 'poisonous little madam' (as one of the EX posters on smileysmile once called me) written on the back!

I think it's OK to have your favourites, in fact, quite understandable. As long as you try to give an honest appraisal what's the problem?

[rab2591]

I thoroughly pissed off about EH (there's an oxymoron if ever there was one)!  I was in an on topic discussion defending the book against some silly criticisms when one of the moderators took my posts down and emailed me to say I wasn't to post on that thread any more.  I told him posting on EH was a total waste of time.  I spent time and effort checking the content of my post for errors and accuracy, made sure it related to the book and pffft - it's gone.  

I see your current review thread there is being met with that patented Endless Harmony kindness. Kinda odd they've had a lot of locked threads lately - I guess their harmony isn't so endless after all. 

I didn't get as far as I wanted to in the Leaf book this past weekend - not the fault of the book, just a hectic schedule. But what I did read was absolutely wonderful. All the intro material has me excited for both the early 60s stuff and the post 85 era...mostly the latter as I've always wanted to learn more about Brian's activities during the 90s. Hopefully that section does not disappoint.

[Galaxy Liz]

I thoroughly pissed off about EH (there's an oxymoron if ever there was one)!  I was in an on topic discussion defending the book against some silly criticisms when one of the moderators took my posts down and emailed me to say I wasn't to post on that thread any more.  I told him posting on EH was a total waste of time.  I spent time and effort checking the content of my post for errors and accuracy, made sure it related to the book and pffft - it's gone.  

I see your current review thread there is being met with that patented Endless Harmony kindness. Kinda odd they've had a lot of locked threads lately - I guess their harmony isn't so endless after all. 

I didn't get as far as I wanted to in the Leaf book this past weekend - not the fault of the book, just a hectic schedule. But what I did read was absolutely wonderful. All the intro material has me excited for both the early 60s stuff and the post 85 era...mostly the latter as I've always wanted to learn more about Brian's activities during the 90s. Hopefully that section does not disappoint.

TBH I don't really care what they write.  I promised I won't respond just in case they use it as an excuse to lock it and I felt guilty on David's behalf in case it was my fault so I'm just trying to make up for it.  So I'm not even going to read it in case I'm tempted.

I'm enjoying the book again.  Dreading the 80s which is slowing me down but chomping at the bit to get to the last section.

[jonathan anderle]

A handy audio/visual reference guide that David just shared on Facebook.

https://omnibuspress.com/pages/the-viewing-listening-and-reading-list-for-god-only-knows

[Angela Jones]

A handy audio/visual reference guide that David just shared on Facebook.

https://omnibuspress.com/pages/the-viewing-listening-and-reading-list-for-god-only-knows

Thank you so much for this wonderful information! Much appreciated.

[guitarfool2002]

A handy audio/visual reference guide that David just shared on Facebook.

https://omnibuspress.com/pages/the-viewing-listening-and-reading-list-for-god-only-knows

Thank you so much for this wonderful information! Much appreciated.

That is a fantastic reference, thank you!

[Lonely Summer]

Let's always remember that "Brianista" is meant as an insult by almost everybody using that word. As I said elsewhere, is it even conceivable a "Paulista" directed at fans of Sir Paul? David Leaf is a "Brianista", albeit a particularly fair and balanced one, and that's enough to attract hate. Sad and even uncanny, but true.

I have come across the occasional Paulista, those who think Macca can do no wrong.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Yup…and the converse as well

[Angela Jones]

Let's always remember that "Brianista" is meant as an insult by almost everybody using that word. As I said elsewhere, is it even conceivable a "Paulista" directed at fans of Sir Paul? David Leaf is a "Brianista", albeit a particularly fair and balanced one, and that's enough to attract hate. Sad and even uncanny, but true.

I have come across the occasional Paulista, those who think Macca can do no wrong.

I'm happy to call myself a Brianista but I don't believe for a second Brian can do no wrong - my definition of the word (regardless of anyone else's) is someone who is on Brian's side in those arguments amongst certain band members. As someone (probably Brian) says in the chattering bit in Smiley Smile's Wonderful 'Don't think you're God. Just be a cool guy.'

[Joel Goldenberg]

Just finished the book. Superb. Never saw so many intros and codas in a book, but as David writes, he kind of didn't want the book to end.

[Zenobi]

Fact is, nobody has ever been called a Paulista (excepting citizens of São Paulo), nor a Rogerista (Pink Floyd), or a Peteista (Who), or a Ianista (Jethro Tull), or a Johnista (Creedence Clearwater Revival), etc.
That extremely dubious blessing has been bestowed only on poor Brian.
Elsewhere, it's usually accepted that a rabid fan of a group may be also a rabid fan of the writer of most of its music. Not so, it seems, in a sizeable part of the Wondrous World of BB Fandom.

[Ian]

I noted elsewhere that I read the new portions of the book (have not yet reread the original portions from 78 and 85) and thoroughly enjoyed it. As I said it is a book about Brian rather than a BBs book so the updates are mainly filling in what had happened to Brian was up to. Even then it is more about David’s personal experiences as an insider in Brian’s life and is not a biography of everything that BW has gone through since 1985. Indeed at times when David became busy with his own life he checked out of Brian’s life so there is nothing about the years 2008 or so up to 2018. If I was to be at all critical I would say that, as he is an insider, David refrains from any criticism so he has nothing bad to say about any albums or the 25th anniversary show or Joe Thomas or Scott Bennett, etc. Again, that is fine, though I am sure he has lots more he could say about all of the ins and outs. David revealed that Debbie from the board was an anonymous source on the original book and gives her ample space to share her experiences from the 1977-1981 period that was not in the original book-which is fascinating. We also learn all about how the Radio City show was organized.