Smiley Smile

[the captain]

In re E=MC2

That's not the point: I'm not saying success or acceptance is based solely on catering to the whims of the public; but that if one stays true to his/her/their artistic interest(s), the public disapproval is an absolute possibility, whereas it is more of an assurance of success to pander to the public (although certainly no guarantee).

(And, by the way, yes. Magical Mystery Tour.)

[Chris D.]

The Beach Boys were once the 2nd most popular group in the world. The fans had nothing to do with it from that point. It was all up to the Boys whether they would stay in that spot or fall off the face of the earth. Did the same fate happen to the Beatles? The Stones?

I would suggest that the artist is the one holding the cards.

If that were true then every artist would be number one.

Did the Beatles ever cater to the whims of the buying public, or in their case was it: they could merda a brick and sell it like it was gold?

They admitted to wearing the matching suits to cater to the public.  You rarely become popular because a lot of people love everything about you.

[Jason]

That's not the point: I'm not saying success or acceptance is based solely on catering to the whims of the public; but that if one stays true to his/her/their artistic interest(s), the public disapproval is an absolute possibility, whereas it is more of an assurance of success to pander to the public (although certainly no guarantee).

I guess Talking Heads were just lucky when they added all the worldbeat influences.

[the captain]

If you love something a lot, why wouldn't you involuntarily think about it to the point of thorough analysis? 

I was thinking the opposite way--if I dislike something, should I be forced to consider and analyze it thoroughly? After all, I didn't like it. I want to put it behind me. That isn't to say that I may not be missing something by a quick dismissal, but I'd have every right to do so.

Although as I consider it, there is music (and art of other media) that I enjoy and don't want to analyze more deeply. I tend to analyze music, but certainly don't think it's a requirement. And I more rarely analyze any other art form. I don't think that cheapens my opinion in the least. If pushed, I could explain my like or dislike, but don't believe I have to explain it ahead of time just to "validate" my opinion.

[I. Spaceman]

Chris, you are the world's foremost authority on SMiLEY, I proclaimed it, so mote it be.
And keep it up.
SMiLEY is an ancient falling-down house, beckoning us in to see it's beautiful ugliness.

[HighOnLife]

I don't see Smiley Smile as out of character at all. I think for Brian's state of mind in early 1967, it was quite in-character. True, you cannot remove Smiley from their catalogue as if it never existed, just as you cannot remove Stars & Stripes from their catalogue.

Are you suggesting that fans must love the whole catalogue?

[Jason]

I don't see Smiley Smile as out of character at all. I think for Brian's state of mind in early 1967, it was quite in-character. True, you cannot remove Smiley from their catalogue as if it never existed, just as you cannot remove Stars & Stripes from their catalogue.

Are you suggesting that fans must love the whole catalogue?

That would mean we would have to love Keepin' the Summer Alive. That would suck because that album sucks, even more than Summer in Paradise.

[the captain]

SMiLEY is an ancient falling-down house, beckoning us in to see it's beautiful ugliness.

I'd be an a$shole to note a typo, eh? So I guess I won't.

[I. Spaceman]

SMiLEY is a typo, beckoning us to correct it's beautiful wrongness.

[Chris D.]

If you love something a lot, why wouldn't you involuntarily think about it to the point of thorough analysis? 

I was thinking the opposite way--if I dislike something, should I be forced to consider and analyze it thoroughly? After all, I didn't like it. I want to put it behind me. That isn't to say that I may not be missing something by a quick dismissal, but I'd have every right to do so.

Although as I consider it, there is music (and art of other media) that I enjoy and don't want to analyze more deeply. I tend to analyze music, but certainly don't think it's a requirement. And I more rarely analyze any other art form. I don't think that cheapens my opinion in the least. If pushed, I could explain my like or dislike, but don't believe I have to explain it ahead of time just to "validate" my opinion.

I might buy that if you never complain about music you don't like.  And maybe you don't, I don't know.  You do have a right to not analyze music, but the artist has a right to keep it to themselves -- like the original Smile tapes.  I know I wouldn't put a lot of effort into releasing my work if I knew the responses were just going to be along the lines of "It sucks" or "It rules."  Even Brian analyzed all the stuff he liked, practising to Four Freshmen records on his piano to understand how they were done so he could replicate that since he liked the records so much.  You're able to enjoy Brian's music because of his analysis and study.  I'm willing to pay him back in kind.

My original issue was also more with people who said they didn't have to have reasons for liking or disliking something.  I don't see any possibility for that and no one's come close to convincing me.  The best response yet is still along the lines of, "I don't wanna" or "I don't have to."

[Jason]

SMiLEY is a typo, beckoning us to correct it's beautiful wrongness.

Resist the urge to correct grammar...

[I. Spaceman]

SMiLEY is grammar, be...oh, forget it.

Right on, Chris.

[the captain]

SMiLEY is a typo, beckoning us to correct it's beautiful wrongness.

Resist the urge to correct grammar...

It's somewhere between a struggle and an impossibility. And the drunker I become (which is already significant), the harder it becomes.

[Jason]

It's somewhere between a struggle and an impossibility. And the drunker I become (which is already significant), the harder it becomes.

sh*t happens.

[Chris D.]

I don't see Smiley Smile as out of character at all. I think for Brian's state of mind in early 1967, it was quite in-character. True, you cannot remove Smiley from their catalogue as if it never existed, just as you cannot remove Stars & Stripes from their catalogue.

Are you suggesting that fans must love the whole catalogue?

No, I'm saying you can't remove it, which you agree with.  But more than that, I'm saying even the worst Beach Boys album is as much the Beach Boys as their best one.

Chris, you are the world's foremost authority on SMiLEY, I proclaimed it, so mote it be.
And keep it up.
SMiLEY is an ancient falling-down house, beckoning us in to see it's beautiful ugliness.

And thank you.  Great comparison.

[the captain]

My original issue was also more with people who said they didn't have to have reasons for liking or disliking something.  I don't see any possibility for that and no one's come close to convincing me.

I agree with most of what you're saying, actually. But with the above sentences, if you hear something on the radio once--and you think it's poop--do you really analyze what it is you dislike? It isn't to say that you don't have some kind of reason for your initial reaction, but do you consider it, or do you go by your initial reaction? I would think that for the bulk of the trash that exists, you simply (or, not to make assumptions, I simply) dismiss it. That isn't to say I can't consider and reason my dislike. it's just to say that, if I don't want to hear something again, I certainly don't want to put forth the thought that goes into analyzing what I don't like about it.

All this is moot for something that a person is going to take the time and trouble to post about. Anything that is important enough to comment publicly about is important enough to consider.

[Jason]

I just came to this conclusion. Smiley Smile is both the first lo-fi album and the first slowcore album. Seriously.

[the captain]

You've now used three stupid catch-phrase subgenres to describe Beach Boys albums in the past few minutes.

Please quit it. They're just records. Not emoslowcorediylofiindiehardcorethisandthat. Records.

[I. Spaceman]

But just what constitutes a "record" anyway? Discuss.

[the captain]

But just what constitutes a "record" anyway? Discuss.

Shouldn't that be a thread unto itself?

[I. Spaceman]

Not really!

[Chris D.]

But with the above sentences, if you hear something on the radio once--and you think it's merda--do you really analyze what it is you dislike?

I do!

You've now used three stupid catch-phrase subgenres to describe Beach Boys albums in the past few minutes.

Please quit it. They're just records. Not emoslowcorediylofiindiehardcorethisandthat. Records.

Hahaha!  And that would also make those sub-genres seem even more pathetic in that they're so far behind.

[the captain]

But with the above sentences, if you hear something on the radio once--and you think it's merda--do you really analyze what it is you dislike?

I do!

Not that I'm not largely guilty of the same, but that depresses me, in that I think it takes away from the aesthetics of music. It is unfortunately that we over-intellectualize everything.

[I. Spaceman]

But if it's second-nature, it's not really work, it's just natural.

[Jason]

You've now used three stupid catch-phrase subgenres to describe Beach Boys albums in the past few minutes.

Please quit it. They're just records. Not emoslowcorediylofiindiehardcorethisandthat. Records.

Peter Reum uses them too, and I suppose he's just some hack who doesn't know what he's talking about, right?

You want the Beach Boys to get some long-awaited youth support from this generation? Market their albums as pioneers of emo, slowcore, or lo-fi, people will jump all over them.