Here's one: Was Dennis Wilson really a racist who hated black people?

Frank Stallone thought so.

j/k

But seriously? Was he really a racist?

I've read that was one of the reasons, why he bonded with Manson, who didn't like blacks either. He once said that Aretha Franklin looked like bad, even though he acknowledged, that she was a good singer. Funny because I think she's quite beautiful

In that same interview he said that Brian also doesn't look good. It was all about how people who don't look very good can make music, that is very beautiful

Yeah that's the one, something about Aretha Franklin being someone you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley and Nat King Cole looking like a piece of sh*t.

Søren

Here's one: Was Dennis Wilson really a racist who hated black people?

Frank Stallone thought so.

j/k

But seriously? Was he really a racist?

I've read that was one of the reasons, why he bonded with Manson, who didn't like blacks either. He once said that Aretha Franklin looked like bad, even though he acknowledged, that she was a good singer. Funny because I think she's quite beautiful

Yeah, but John told Van Dyke that Paul also thought Mike was a jerk.  My point was, maybe John was just speaking for himself, not Paul.  Van Dyke was also hanging out with John when he was in the lost weekend period (Van was at the table the night of the infamous nightclub incident), and John didn't have the happiest view of anything at that time in his life.  In any case, I don't think Mike Love loomed as large in his psyche as Van Dyke's, so it's more of a dismissive thing than a condemnation.  John never had to deal with Mike other than meeting him in India.  Van, on the other hand, had extensive experience.

Why is it such a problem if Lennon thought Mike was a jerk, a lot of other people have said so too. Is it because it's a sign that Beatles didn't totally adore Beach Boys?

Søren

[BWPS]

Small problem - on all the 1966 tapes, and also on BWPS, Brian quite clearly sings "wahala", not "mahalo"

Small problem #2 - no matter how you put together the translation below, it's still nonsense. For example:

"Thanks, quiver/thanks, boring/Many protuding branch"

or:

"Respectfully, grass/Respectfully, calm/King flash particle"

It sounds like wahala to me, but Van Dyke wrote "mahalo." Some people think "over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" is nonsense.

Well couldn't that be their excuse? If they could write "nonsense" english lyrics, they could also write nonsense hawaiian lyrics, it didn't have to have a concrete meaning, but just sound like great poetry. Maybe it was dummy words and they were meaning to look up some real hawaiian sentences later. One could imagine that it was something about what the hawaiians said to the first white men, that came to Hawaii and they would look it up later.

Søren

 Anyone else thing a cool ending for Heroes would be Sunny Down Snuff, then "by the heroes and...", concluding with Bridge to Indians? 

I've actuallly done that, I made a version of the BWPS version, where I inserted Great Shape instead of Bicycle Rider and out of necessity I had to end it that way.

Søren

One of you will have to marry into her family and then have a poke around whilst you're visiting.

Yeah, or maybe elect her as "Woman Of The Year" of the Smiley Smile site. Find out where she lives, buy her some flowers and try not to look like a scruffy, desperate Smile geek and then take it from there. That would take some work, I know.

Søren

Why not try one of those dating sites, as a means of getting close to Durrie. "Looking for a woman with Smile acetates". Well if you're that desperate and you never know, you might get lucky   .

Søren

If Brian was writing stuff with Van Dyke on intuition then why did Brian take David Anderle's portrait of Brian as a piece of art full of deep meaning?  Why wasn't the portrait of Brian simply a painting of Brian?

It seems to me much more likely that Brian & Van Dyke were making music that was full of meaning--but to avoid explaining that meaning they present it as a tossed off piece of work.

Van Dyke's contention that the lyrics are his has truth to it, but the idea that they were all his doing belies the way that Brian Wilson worked with his collaborators.

Van Dyke currently handles SMiLE questions because Van Dyke can handle SMiLE questions.

I don't see why it should be such a contradiction, just because you work intuitively, the music can still have a lot meaning. Peter Reum described Brian as one of the most intuitive people he had met. Brian was probably very influenced by his acid trips religious experiences and so forth, but he also said he wasn't able to explain them. Instead he tried to communicate what he sensed through music and he must also have been inspired by the imagery of Van Dykes lyrics. Brian also seemed very much into sensing things, running around on the beach and in the mountains, building the sandbox seems to be an attempt to bring nature into his own living room. I'd imagine it was probably a tentative process based on the newly awakening of Brian's senses and Van Dykes lyrical input and as they got more into it, the big picture started to unfold, but it was probably not very predetermined.

Søren

They wrote in the same room didn't they?  So there must have been a lot of talking back and forth, with Brian coming up with some chords and Van Dyke supplying some words and Brian adjusting to that and so forth. You get the impression that it was a colaboration pretty much based on intuition, not much planning. Brian said something like:  "We just do things."

Søren

I know the Byrds wanted to be the "American Beatles" and borrowed a lot of their sound from the Beatles. The Byrds are one of my top favorite bands. But I feel Rubber Soul is so Byrds influenced, with songs like "Nowhere Man", that's it really the Beatles trying to do a folk rock album and using the Byrds as their model. And I don't think its as good as Mr. Tambourine Man. I don't think the songs or the production are as strong. Even the Rubber Soul album cover is a rip off of the Mr. Tambourine Man album cover.

Which version are we talking about because the most folky version was the US version, which wasn't Beatles' invention. The UK version was just as soul influenced, hence the title I guess.

Søren

Produced by Jan, not Brian, and Brian's vocal was recorded back in 1970. No chart action whatsoever. The old Huey 'Piano' Smith song.

Who also wrote "Sea Cruise" I wonder if Brian was into New Orleans piano music at one point. Some years ago I saw a TV show about the story of rock'n'rol,l where Brian participated and he said that he liked Fats Dominos playing, becáuse he played some nice picturesqe chords. Brian's own piano playing can be a little fat and heavy like some of those guys.

Søren

A question regarding Brian's involvement with the Beach Boys circa 1969-71:

If the Boys were desperate for Brian to be involved with them during that time--or at least to create the APPEARANCE that he was involved with them--is it possible that they added his name to the credits of songs that he didn't really write or co-write on albums like SUNFLOWER, SURF'S UP, SO TOUGH, and HOLLAND?

Well, Elvis got his name added to stuff he didn't write, and so did Spector.

I'm now feeling very disillusioned.

I don't know if it's a big problem, he was probably sometimes cocredited for songs like "At My Window" or "Deirdre" even if he contributed very little. The big songs like "'Til' I Die" must have been Brian, there's just a marked difference in quality.

Søren

Brian gave one extremely negative interview when GIOMH was released.  He claimed the songs were chosen for him, and he wasn't happy with the results.  He gave different views in different interviews.  It's hard to say what Brian feels about things at times.

He did the same in a dutch newspaper in connection with the european Smile tour, where he said he wasn't able to make any decisions and other people had to do it for him. Melinda had to tell the bewildered fans that it was one of Brian's bad days and there was bad vibes between him and the interviewer.

Søren

And why is that hard to believe?  I say things I don't mean when I am in a snit. 

You can believe anything you want. The point is that you get a lot of contradictory stories about Brian's situtation, also from himself. He was probably exaggerating somewhat, but I think there's also some truth to it. I don't think he's a vegetable, but he's probably not up to his full capacity. I think you can also hear it in the music, his lead vocals sound somewhat stilted and unsure, like he's had to relearn singing and considers every word he's singing, it doesn't just flow from him. Doesn't mean that he still hasn't got  something to offer, I think there was still good things on GIOMH and his christmas album, but I just think he still has to fight a debilitating insecurity and some heavy mood changes, he's probably not just lazy. It's great that he's still trying, and some good things can still come out of that, even if he's probably just able to work at half speed.

Søren

Brian gave one extremely negative interview when GIOMH was released.  He claimed the songs were chosen for him, and he wasn't happy with the results.  He gave different views in different interviews.  It's hard to say what Brian feels about things at times.

He did the same in a dutch newspaper in connection with the european Smile tour, where he said he wasn't able to make any decisions and other people had to do it for him. Melinda had to tell the bewildered fans that it was one of Brian's bad days and there was bad vibes between him and the interviewer.

Søren

I also think that much material of SMiLE doesn´t really work as stand-alone pieces. "Barnyard" or "I'm In Great Shape" are nice, but they REALLY start to work as parts of a larger whole, for example movements...

I think it's almost the other way around, most of the major songs on Smile work as stand alone pieces and most have been released as such. Tying them together in movements makes it sound more like medleys. There really isn't much of an organic musical flow in the Smile movements, except in the second movement and they overutilize that idea by coupling "Song For Children" with "Child". If you look at the descriptions of how the movements were created it was really more about grouping songs together that seemed to fit together musically and thematically, there was no big concept. That's why I, listening to the music, have a hard time buying, that Brian originally wanted to do a three movement piece. Doesn't mean that it probably wasn't supposed to be some kind of concept album, but more in the way that Pet Sounds or Song Cycle were concept albums.  Fragments  like "Barnyard" and "I'm In Great Shape" sounds more like they were thrown in because they were to good to just leave on the cutting floor, IMO they don't really work on the record and arent really used to their full potential. They should have put Great Shape in H&V, where it belongs and cut out the Bicycle Rider theme, whose appearance in H&V seems to originate from the Smiley period. Also I don't understand why it seems so important hang onto the idea that  Smile is a three movement opera or cantata when it doesn't work better than it does. It's like trying pin some kind of high art validity to Smile even though it probably would have worked better as a straight concept album, with some link tracks here and there.

Søren

Don't know the story of The Gunslinger, but it also seems that King had an original version from which he worked.

If only that were true -- it would have been better.  But King had no idea where the story was going until he wrote the last three books.  That's why he had to partially re-write the Gunslinger.  I can fault him for his decisions (and do) but it was his decisions and his ability to say, "It's done."

It's a completely different scanario, apparently King was in the process of writing those books and then decides to rewrite the beginning, that's not the case with Smile.

Søren

How do you know?  Were you there?  Do you have notes?  How do any of us know what happened beyond a few comments on session tapes and testimony from interviews (which you are discounting as you see fit)?  The point is, none of us know exactly what happened, and to dismiss a masterpiece composition (which does production-wise pale with the original production) based upon such ill-founded opinions is annoying as heck.  Brian wrote the songs, he can finish them however he wants.  Then the BB versions should be kept separate as productions.

Well from what you tell, it seems like two different scenarios. I don't see I'm discounting anything, there's just so many contradicting and vague accounts about what happened, that you have to look at it from all angles. I'm not trying to dismiss anything and if it's a masterpiece it will stand on it's own and it won't matter what I or anybody else says about how it came to be. I don't personally think it's a masterpiece composition and that may be something I don't get. I still think it sounds pretty fragmented and unfinished, and this whole going into how it was made, is really just an attempt of trying to explain or make sense of that fact. I never disputed Brian's right to do whatever he wants to and he doesn't owe me or anybody else any masterpieces, he's still one of the greatest, but of course I have an opinion about the music and what happened.

Søren

Don't know the story of The Gunslinger, but it also seems that King had an original version from which he worked.

If only that were true -- it would have been better.  But King had no idea where the story was going until he wrote the last three books.  That's why he had to partially re-write the Gunslinger.  I can fault him for his decisions (and do) but it was his decisions and his ability to say, "It's done."

It's a completely different scanario, apparently King was in the process of writing those books and then decides to rewrite the beginning, that's not the case with Smile.

Søren

But as you said, Brian has every right to do that. Because he's the creator. If he says this is it and it's finished, that's it, even though we know it could have been more or better. I do think it's comparable to authors finishing their work years later. It's also comparable to classical composers, the old masters, finishing their work years later, many of them having gone through all kinds of turmoil in the meantime. Their final product might have been different had they completed the work much earlier, too. But it is what it is. We know what Smile might have been, but it's not our place to second-guess the artist. The artist gets the final say.

It's still a different thing. Brian wasn't following his muse, he was told by his wife and manager that it was time to finish Smile and you can also question to what degree it was actually his work or the work of Darian.

If you started to write a book, got sidetracked, came back to you notes years later, and finished the book, you would say you finished the book. 

Yes, in a very formal sense, but if you also told that you didn't really remember, what you wanted to do originally, then I think you could question how finished it really were.

Søren

Didn't seem to bother Stephen King when he re-wrote parts of The Gunslinger because the original novel no longer fit what he decided 30 years later was the actual ending of the Dark Tower.

Don't know the story of The Gunslinger, but it also seems that King had an original version from which he worked. Brian doesn't really seem to remember what his original ideas were and there also seems to be some missing pieces, like the Air element which he apparently didn't finish. That's why you get the impression, also from hearing the music,  that Smile 04 is really the music, that was recorded  before Brian left the project, strung together for a live performance, not really a finishing of his original ideas. Of course Brian has every right to do that, but when you know the story, questions like these are bound to arise.

Søren

If you started to write a book, got sidetracked, came back to you notes years later, and finished the book, you would say you finished the book. 

Yes, in a very formal sense, but if you also told that you didn't really remember, what you wanted to do originally, then I think you could question how finished it really was.

Søren

Smile is two things -- a composition that is published with a publishing company and a production done by a specific band at a specific time. Both were left unfinished in 1967.  He most definitely finished to his satisfaction the composition in 2004, but there is no way to finish the 1967 recordings.  Clearly when Brian says "Smile is finished" he means the former.  Why is this so hard to understand?

I think that Smile was whatever hazy musical vision Brian had in his head around 66/67 and that was what people was also obsessed with before Smile 04 came out,  the completed version sounds more like some of the Smile music strung together with the purpose of a live performance, so I don't know if Brian finished Smile, meaning his original ideas for that music, it's more like he got it out of the way.

Søren

Another thought I just had about Brian's involvement:

Why should Darian film/record these writting sessions with the famous "Darian-cam" if he did it all the work alone??!!?!? Why should he tape himself? Using the camera only makes sense if he was recording the idea-exchange between Brian and Van Dyke (and Darian), so that he could do his job as "musical secretary".

Really hope you get what I try to express.

I don't think anybody said that Darian did it all alone, no doubt Brian was involved, it's more about the degree of his involvement and how much he was up to it.

Søren

What happened to all that footage I wonder?  That would make a great DVD, all the out-takes of the BWPS collaboration and Inside Pop.

You would probably just see some feet or an elbow most of the time, when it came to the stuff being filmed with the "Darian-cam".

Søren

What I don't understand is why that MATTERS to people. Is it good? Is it listenable? Your milage varies, but I'd say absolutely, yes, it is. It is a listenable, coherent, cogent rendition of a composition partially written in 1966 and partially written in 2004 in the style of 1966. It is a recorded performance of "SMILE: THE COMPOSITION."

I don't particularly like it. It sounds like three medleys of Smile music strung superficially together without any big idea behind it, and if you read Darian's description of how it was put together in the tour programme, that 's more or less how it went down. I guess that's why you still partially obsess about the historical facts, even though the answers are probably lost forever.

Søren

How does being a proficient musician with capable production skills make Bruce more talented than Carl???

I think he was a better songwriter, even though his songs were mostly cheesy, he was more creative in that respect compared to Carl, who mostly relied on very basic chord patterns. He was the only one besides Brian, who actually wrote some standards. Carl may have been a more tasteful producer, but I don't rank producing as high as songwriting. In terms of musicianship they were probably equal, even though I imagine Bruce knew more chords. When it came to singing Carl had the advantage of just having a better voice, but Bruce is a good vocalist, I heard him do GOK some years ago and I was pretty amazed at how great his performance was.

I don't know about  Al as a producer, but I put him a notch above Bruce as well.  He's got way more heart and plain raw talent if you ask me. 

I think Al is boring as a producer, at least Bruce is cheesy.

Søren



Søren

John Lennons voice didn't change dramatically the day he started pot.

Maybe not the day after, no, but Lennon had screwed up his voice quite dreadfully by 1969.  The songs were so great that perhaps it never mattered, but he would never again be able to pull off a "Hard Day's Night" style delivery.  I think "And Your Bird Can Sing" was the last time he came close.  His 24 year old self would have cringed if he had heard the 1975 rendition of "Stand By Me".  It's not a bad performance - Lennon's vocal frailty makes the song even more moving - but the "brassy glare" (to use Ian MacDonald's phrase) that was one of the trademarks of the early Beatles has vanished.
 
 

Couldn't it just be that after Beatles stopped performing publically, he just lost the routine because he wasn't using his voice regularly and I bet he didn't do voice training. He could still deliver a good vocal when he wanted to, his vocals on "Rock'N'Roll" are great IMO. About Brian I don't think it's just his voice, he just sounds insecure, as if he's had to learn singing all over again, so his vocals sound a little odd or stilted, just like his physical appearance. I think he's just accepted that, because after all he want's to be out in the world performing

Søren