Songs that would have been on SMiLE in '67...

[Jim V.]

I know this has been done before, many many times, but I'd like to see what this group of people think about this.

So as we know, there was a tracklisting printed out on the record sleeve for SMiLE in 1967.

So we can assume the following tracks would be included:

• "Do You Like Worms?"
• "Wind Chimes"
• "Heroes and Villains"
• "Surf's Up"
• "Cabin Essence"
• "Wonderful"
• "Vega-Tables"

However what does everybody think would have happened with the other tracks, such as:

• "I'm In Great Shape": Would it have been more than just the fragment? Or would "I Wanna Be Around" be included? "Workshop"? I doubt it.
• "Child Is Father of The Man": Would it still have lead into "Surf's Up". It sure makes sense, but do we have any proof this was thought of before '03?
• "The Elements": Probably would have had "I Love To Say Da Da" and "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" but what else. Lets not even bother starting this
• "The Old Master Painter": Was this always paired with "You Are My Sunshine"? Would there have been more to it?
• "Look": My guess is this was either discarded or possibly meant to be part of "Wonderful" as one track? Most likely discarded.
• "Holidays": This was probably discarded too.
• "He Gives Speeches": Discarded.
• "Barnyard": Maybe included with "I'm In Great Shape", maybe with "Heroes And Villains"....possibly discarded.
  

Anyways, what does everybody else think? Do we have any reason to believe that "Look" or "Holidays" would have made the album?

Still to me, that back cover tracklisting gives me trouble. How do "The Old Master Painter" and "I'm In Great Shape" warrant their own tracks. Alright, lets see what you guys think.

[Roger Ryan]

Given that  Brian completed an edited backing track to "Child Is Father Of The Man" (just under 3 minutes?), chances are that one would have been it's own song.

[juggler]

Good Vibrations would undoubtedly have been on the album.  In fact, GV is the only track listed on the front side of the album cover (final version of the slick).

[Jim V.]

Given that  Brian completed an edited backing track to "Child Is Father Of The Man" (just under 3 minutes?), chances are that one would have been it's own song.

I believe that "Child" would have been its own song. But does anybody think it would have been linked with "Surf's Up" as a lead in? Now that I think about it, probably not. I don't think Brian was doing that kinda thing, the Beatles probably did do that first.

[Dunderhead]

Moreover, it seems unlikely that a 1967 version of SMiLE would have Do You Like Worms. Didn't Brian cut out the Bicycle Rider part from that to shore up Heroes?
 I don't think Look would have been on the album at all, he never returned to it later on. I wonder what the lyrics were about.

[Jim V.]

Moreover, it seems unlikely that a 1967 version of SMiLE would have Do You Like Worms. Didn't Brian cut out the Bicycle Rider part from that to shore up Heroes?
 I don't think Look would have been on the album at all, he never returned to it later on. I wonder what the lyrics were about.

The only reason I say "Worms" would make it is simply its inclusion on the tracklisting. If indeed they released the album that year, they would have used that sleeve. The only reason they didn't use it for Smiley Smile was because it had a different title and way different tracklist.

I know he ended up taking part of "Worms" for "Heroes" but I figure he still would have used it due to it being listed.

I also agree with your reasoning on "Look". It was probably something he deemed unnecessary along with "Holidays" and "He Gives Speeches". I honestly think SMiLE, if released in 1967, probably would have been in a pretty conventional format. The songs would be something new and crazy, but its presentation, probably nothing crazy.

By the way, does anybody know if the cover was going to be a gatefold? I've been reading around that it wasn't, but I was pretty sure it was. With the front cover with the shop, the back cover with the "Carl/Dennis/Mike/Al/Bruce" live lineup, and then a psychedelic photo of Brian in the opening of the gatefold, with a booklet thrown in too if I'm correct? Let me know if I'm wrong.

[Slow In Brain]

Also were the whole 400,000 printed Smile covers gatefold or not disposed in the early 1980s ?

[Alex]

Moreover, it seems unlikely that a 1967 version of SMiLE would have Do You Like Worms. Didn't Brian cut out the Bicycle Rider part from that to shore up Heroes?
 I don't think Look would have been on the album at all, he never returned to it later on. I wonder what the lyrics were about.

The only reason I say "Worms" would make it is simply its inclusion on the tracklisting. If indeed they released the album that year, they would have used that sleeve. The only reason they didn't use it for Smiley Smile was because it had a different title and way different tracklist.

I know he ended up taking part of "Worms" for "Heroes" but I figure he still would have used it due to it being listed.

I also agree with your reasoning on "Look". It was probably something he deemed unnecessary along with "Holidays" and "He Gives Speeches". I honestly think SMiLE, if released in 1967, probably would have been in a pretty conventional format. The songs would be something new and crazy, but its presentation, probably nothing crazy.

By the way, does anybody know if the cover was going to be a gatefold? I've been reading around that it wasn't, but I was pretty sure it was. With the front cover with the shop, the back cover with the "Carl/Dennis/Mike/Al/Bruce" live lineup, and then a psychedelic photo of Brian in the opening of the gatefold, with a booklet thrown in too if I'm correct? Let me know if I'm wrong.

I thought the picture of Brian was supposed to be in the centerfold of the booklet.

[Mahalo]

It wasn't uncommon for Brian to put instrumentals on his albums, so what does anyone suppose that would be? The Elements?

[Andrew G. Doe]

By the way, does anybody know if the cover was going to be a gatefold? I've been reading around that it wasn't, but I was pretty sure it was. With the front cover with the shop, the back cover with the "Carl/Dennis/Mike/Al/Bruce" live lineup, and then a psychedelic photo of Brian in the opening of the gatefold, with a booklet thrown in too if I'm correct? Let me know if I'm wrong.

The fact that the known mockups for the sleeve prepared in December 1966 were for a normal LP, and that no artwork for the inside of a gatefold has even been hinted at, would seem to fatally undermine your belief.

[Jim V.]

By the way, does anybody know if the cover was going to be a gatefold? I've been reading around that it wasn't, but I was pretty sure it was. With the front cover with the shop, the back cover with the "Carl/Dennis/Mike/Al/Bruce" live lineup, and then a psychedelic photo of Brian in the opening of the gatefold, with a booklet thrown in too if I'm correct? Let me know if I'm wrong.

The fact that the known mockups for the sleeve prepared in December 1966 were for a normal LP, and that no artwork for the inside of a gatefold has even been hinted at, would seem to fatally undermine your belief.

I believe you Andrew, but I seem to remember there being talk of a photo of Brian on on the inside or something. I guess it was just a fake or something. But anyways, who made the decision that Brian wouldn't even be shown in the "group-shot" on the back cover of one of the groups most "Brian-centric" albums. I mean I can understand Al missed the Summer Days shoot, so he wasn't on that, and I can understand that Brian wasn't on the 20/20 cover because from 68-69 there didn't seem to be many shots of Brian with the group, but why wouldn't he be in the photo for SMiLE.?

Anyways, back to the songs....any other opinions?

[OneEar/OneEye]

Gatefold would have worked if they were going to attach the booklet to the inside cover, ala The Stones Big Hits (High Tide and Green Grass), but as far as I have ever heard they weren't going to do that.  They were just gonna stick it inthe sleeve along with the disc.  The picture of Brian I believe you're talking about was/is in the middle of the booklet.  During '65, '66 there seems to have been a conscious effort to promote Brian and the Beach Boys as together but seperate.  He doesn't appear with the group in any of the photos on the back of Pet Sounds either, but only in "solo" photos.  He also is only in "solo" shots in the Smile Booklet as well.  Personally, I think a better photo to have used on the back of Smile would have been the group shot (including Brian) where they are all peering through the wooden fence.  Why?  I don't know, Mike's wearing a cowboy hat, would have gone along nicely with the western theme...

And (by the way) Happy Birthday to me!   

[Andrew G. Doe]

But anyways, who made the decision that Brian wouldn't even be shown in the "group-shot" on the back cover of one of the groups most "Brian-centric" albums. I mean I can understand Al missed the Summer Days shoot, so he wasn't on that, and I can understand that Brian wasn't on the 20/20 cover because from 68-69 there didn't seem to be many shots of Brian with the group,  but why wouldn't he be in the photo for SMiLE.?

'Cause all the photos of the others were taken while they were on tour ?  

[Jim V.]

Lame excuse. Didn't they have a bunch of band photos from recently, post-Pet Sounds? And less striped-shirty?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Lame excuse. Didn't they have a bunch of band photos from recently, post-Pet Sounds? And less striped-shirty?

The booklet shots were taken while they were on tour - in Boston, if I remember properly.

[A Million Units In Jan!]

You know, I always wondered what exactly Brian's deal was with not having his own picture on the album. SMiLE was gonna be as much 'his' album as PS was, and he's on the cover of that. Weird that he would not have his picture on there, but still put his name on the back as producer. That is, if he even had anything to do with the back cover. For all we know, someone at Capitol could have chosen what the back cover looks like.

[juggler]

You know, I always wondered what exactly Brian's deal was with not having his own picture on the album. SMiLE was gonna be as much 'his' album as PS was, and he's on the cover of that. Weird that he would not have his picture on there, but still put his name on the back as producer. That is, if he even had anything to do with the back cover. For all we know, someone at Capitol could have chosen what the back cover looks like.

What about the zodiac symbols on the back cover?   That's a pretty strong clue that Brian had at least some influence on the design of the back cover.  Multiple sources indicate that he was heavily into astrology at the time.  I can't believe that someone in Capitol's art department would, on his or her own initiative, just put zodiac symbols on the back of a Beach Boys album.

[XY]

Isn't it amazing that this December 1966-dated SMiLE back-cover contains "Vega-Tables", a song that wasn't recorded until April 1967?

[metal flake paint]

Isn't it amazing that this December 1966-dated SMiLE back-cover contains "Vega-Tables", a song that wasn't recorded until April 1967?

Although the concept of "Vega-Tables" was first worked on in the form of chants and argument sessions in November 1966, according to this excellent website http://www.esquarterly.com/bellagio/gigs66.html

[Phoenix]

Although I usually just lurk here, I've spent way too much study/obsession/theorizing/etc. on Smile (nonstop, before and since BWPS) to not throw my two cents in.  First, I'm convinced the songs on the handwritten list and back of the album are indeed the intended 1967 tracklisting and with only a couple exceptions, they aren't too far from the album Brian released 37 years later.  Further, apart from some vocals and the possible exception of "The Elements", I think the album was pretty much done.  I also think most or all of the few changes made between 1967 and 2004 were done to allow Van Dyke and Darian (back) into the creative process, as Darian was the one helping Brian through it and once moving along, he probably felt it would be nice to bring it full circle with Van Dyke.

However, my thoughts totaled seven paragraphs and I didn't want to risk being raked over the coals for such a large post so I saved them in word in case anyone feels like reading them.  It reads like an essay but at least it's well written (IMO) so let me know if you want me to post it.  Otherwise, I'll just go back to my lurking post

[metal flake paint]

Please, do share.

[Phoenix]

Of the songs, we know what several of them would have sounded like by listening to the tracks on box set and (in most cases) comparing them to their respective versions on BWPS.  These include "Wonderful", "DYLW", "Good Vibrations", "Cabin Essence", and (for the most part) "Vega-Tables".  We also have a good idea for both "Heroes And Villains" and "Surf's Up" but I'll get back to them in a bit.  As for the remaining songs (excluding "The Elements"), only one is missing the lead vocal (and possibly 60's era lyrics) and the other two are medleys.

As stated above, Brian prepared a completed backing track for "CIFOTM" and after hearing it coupled with "Wonderful" on BWPS, I finally had the answer to the reasoning behind the latter's abrupt ending (as I'm sure many of you did).  I'd bet my life the two of them were always meant to go together and I wouldn't doubt if Brian had at least some idea of the lyrics, even back in the 60's.  The recorded (backing) vocals aren't just nonsense words like "Oohm, bop didit" or "Wah wah who ha".  They're actual lyrics, repeating the "proposed" title and as eccentric as Brian (and the entire project) was, I doubt he or Van Dyke wrote lyrics for the backing vocals before having at least an idea of what the lead vocal would include.

Onto the other two, I'm thoroughly convinced they're both "shorthand".  Just as it is on BWPS, "I'm In Great Shape" is the self-titled piece, "I Wanna Be Around", and "Workshop".  Regardless of the tracklisting on BWPS, do we really think "Workshop" should be considered its own song?  Clearly, as with "IIGS" it's just a piece of a larger song.  And the same goes for Brian's arrangement of "The Old Master Painter".  It appears on BWPS (nearly) as the medley he always envisioned it to be: "Barnyard"/"TOMP"/"YAMS".  All those references to "the Barnyard medley"?  Hello!  "TOMP" IS "the barnyard medley."  The only thing missing is "Barnshine" following "YAMS" (as many people have said it did) but whether that changed before or after Darian's involvement, I wouldn't stake my life (tho my guess would be after; probably after Darian got used to it not being there, thanks to the box set, etc.)

So that leaves just the "singles"/"masterpieces" and "The Elements".  Everyone KNOWS Capital wanted the single version of "Good Vibrations" so I'm not even going to discuss it, other than to say I'll bet it was going to kick off side two, as opposed to ending it and I believe ending it was Darrin's idea, having realized how well it would fit with a reprise of "Our Prayer", which would have been the first "hidden" track (at the start of the album), beating the Beatles' "Her Majesty" to the punch by almost three years.  

And speaking of reprises, I'm convinced (sorry to keep using that word but I can't say it's a unequivocal fact, nor that it's just my "opinion") Brian always intended to include the "child section" at the end of "Surf's Up" to serve as a reprise to "CIFOTM".  (I also believe "CIFOTM" would have closed out side one and "Surf's Up" (with the reprise) would have done the same for side two (and the album itself).  Would the second movement of "Surf's Up" included fuller instrumentation (or even the same) as the first?  My guess is probably at one point.  Brian may have even intended to "fly it in" for the second go round; possibly with a couple of edits but I think after the Inside Pop performance was called "one aspect of new things happening in pop music today" and "a symbol of the change many of these young musicians see in our future", he may have hedged his bets and decided to replicate the sound of that performance for the second movement, as not to draw (possibly) negative comparisons to the version Oppenheim expressed such admiration for.

As for "Heroes And Villains, I'll keep it short but it's my belief that "Heroes And Villains" is the cantina version, while "Heroes And Villains Part 2" is essentially the single version.  They weren't specifically two separate songs (which is why many people have stated that was a just a case of misinformation).  Instead, I think they were recorded separately (hence the "HAVPT" session listings) with a clear delineation between them.  That way, if/when "HAV" was split between the two sides of a single, the split would sound intentional, unlike what we've all since heard on stuff like "American Pie", "Standing On The Top", etc.  To recap: Cantina version up to the tape explosion, tape explosion fades out, (flip, if listening to the 45), first chorus of the released single version to the end (possibly with the addition of Mike's "the heroes, the heroes..." part).

Finally "The Elements": "Fire" we know, so I'm not going into it but just as everyone "knew" "ILTSDD" was "Water" as soon as they heard it, I actually felt the same way about the earth section, the first time I heard "Fall Breaks..." Then there's all the "revelations" surrounding "All Day": "Oh my God. It's 'Air!" "But I thought '...Da Da' was 'Water'...."  Yep.  Just like "Bicycle Rider" is both "HAV " AND "DYLW" and "Child" is both "CIFTTM" AND "Surf's Up"!  Two themes four elements, one song, clocking in at a time not too crazy for even the most avant garde yet still VERY mainstream pop artist of the mid-60's.  Again, I could get more into it but I think that's more than enough to give you some idea of my thoughts.  Thanks for asking

But then again, "Why should I speak? For I know nothing."

[Cam Mott]

My impression from Geo Osaka [the SMiLE art director] is that Brian had input, even called the shots, because he was the Producer but George did the layouts. For instance, after seeing the album and boolet photos George remembered he wasn't crazy about the SMiLE shop drawing for the cover because it wasn't an image of the group. It still made the cover. Everything on the album cover was controlled, reviewed and approved by the Procuder after being checked by the Art Director, Editorial department and Legal department.  Why Brian wanted it the way he wanted it only Brian knows I suppose.

Guy Webster remembered some of the booklet photos of the Boys as being taken at Boston Harbor, Brian's were taken at his home. Some of the Boys photos may have been taken elsewhere.

[A Million Units In Jan!]

Interesting stuff, Cam.
 I always thought  Brian had as much input as the back cover as the front (as juggler said, the astrological signs pretty much give it away), I just wondered why he would choose a picture for the back cover that excluded him-considering the fact that, as you mentioned, the front cover is not a group photo.

[XY]

Perhaps Brian saw himself as the man in the background, the songwriter + producer, studio singer, but not part of the public group. Bruce had to replace Brian for the public eye.
Or because of the group-dynamics, Brian had the producer-credit on the backcover, the other boys got the visual recognition.
But in truth I think no one cared. It was just another group pic, with a special effect, five guys, the Beach Boys, nice enough for a back cover. Al wasn't on the Summer Days's Cover, so what? Brian wasn't on the 20/20 front cover either.