2. music
  3. 123214-2454

The Beach Boys

I'm a huge fan of classic rock, and music in general, listening to almost all genres from classical to jazz to rock to contemporary pop (very selectively). Don't care much for country and reggae. I've been reading in the latest issue of Stereophile about Acoustic Sounds reissuing The Beach Boys catalog, and the article compelled me to express my opinion on this forum. I'm simply completely, utterly, and overwhelmingly at a loss to understand the acclaim for this band. The fact that "Pet Sounds" is considered one of the greatest albums of all time leaves me speechless. I always considered their music a bit of a joke, good for background when you're in a beach bar in Southern California, in the same vein reggae or mariachi music are tolerable in Jamaica or Mexico, respectively, when one's on vacation. I then heard about them being compared to The Beatles and have been confused ever since. Perhaps a comparison to The Beatles early songs as they were evolving as musicians and songwriters would make sense, but comparing the genius of The Beatles to the "genius" of Brian Wilson is just preposterous, in my opinion.

I would like to hear from those who like or love The Beach Boys what it is about their music that they think warrants the acclaim and their presence in the upper echelon of music. I realize my post may generate quite a bit of controversy and angry responses, but I don't mean to offend or put down anyone's musical tastes. I'm posting as a music lover who is truly perplexed. 

    
actusreus
martykl
3,578 posts
 
213

Unless you are arguing that we must bear the responsibility for the moral consequences for all of our consumption decisions and their ethical implicarions, you are mistaken.   Accepting the fruit of the abuse isn't endorsing the abuse.

BTW, It IS possible to endorse the abuse - see Timothy Leary and "Turn on, Tune in, and Drop out".  I am NOT suggesting that.

 As Minkwelder notes, the history of musicians and drug abuse is long and varied.  A ton of highly regarded jazz musicians of the '50s used booze, pot and/or heroin.  Add LSD and try to find a significant rock musician who didn't abuse one or more of those drugs during the '60s.  Toss in cocaine and quaaludes and you've covered most of the seventies.  Mix in some ecstasy and....

....you our get the picture.

So, if you ARE insisting that we must examine those ethical implications, then I trust that you consume none of that music.  And none of the following:

I trust that you buy no Chinese made goods, lest you implicitly endorse the Chinese government's abuse of intellectual property rights, etc.  I assume that you don't enjoy any running water in your home, because that was developed by the Romans, and I'm sure that you do not champion feeding Christians to Lions.  You surely don't listen to the blues, so that there's no possible implicit endorsement of slavery.  I'm certain that you've never owned a Volkswagen product, purchased  Bayer aspirin, etc.  This list gets long in a hurry.

If you do none of the above, you're an admirable man indeed.  More principled than I am.  However, if you have done any of the above......
213runnin
914 posts
 
You've used some interesting strawman arguments, but they do not apply to what I've clearly said.  
martykl
3,578 posts
 
Your most recent post just popped up.  It's different in tone than some of previous posts.  Please ignore my previous post as you've already addressed it.  I think I get your point, now, but maybe we just hear this particular music differently.  

"Good Vibrations" came out of the Pet Sound sessions and it's a pretty bizarre piece of music - the expected guitar solo is played on electro-theremin.  I've always seen the subsequent direction of Brian Wilson's music as a continuation of that artistic arc.  "Vibrations" was a hit, but it was also a move towards a much less commercially reliable way of producing music.  If you hear Smile as a symptom of drug abuse and believe that it's celebrated for that reason, than I understand your reaction.  I just don't hear the music that way.


minkwelder
256 posts
 
213runnin,

"Yes, you embrace abuse when you accept the fruit of the abuse".

How do you explain this, then?:

"Personally, I listen to music I enjoy, and don’t research artists for drug use".

How is it that you're not accepting the "fruit of the abuse", but "some" of us are?
 

"The line that I draw is to not revere the resulting chaos that LSD caused Brian Wilson and his music, as some of you seem to do".
 
I would like to request that you share with us how you concluded that some of us are merely listening to music we enjoy, but some of us "revere the resulting chaos" to musicians that drugs have caused.

 
fjn04
1,561 posts
 

bdp24- indeed Sunflower is great IMHO. I might go so far as to say, and underappreciated gem. I must ad Good Vibrations at one point. I'd likely grab The Smile Sessions LP from 2011, or Smiley Smile. If the latter, maybe the QRP, as it's not the easy to find a nice copy used. Of course either of those would also give me Heroes and Villains.

More to discover