Editing Pet Sounds (section)

====Perceived storyline====
''Pet Sounds'' is sometimes suggested to be a [[song cycle]]{{sfn|Schinder|2007|pp=114–115}}{{Sfn|Howard|2004|p=64}} portraying the unraveling of a romantic relationship.{{sfn|Doe|Tobler|2009|p=21}}{{sfn|Lambert|2007|p=249}} Author Scott Schinder argued that Wilson and Asher had crafted a song cycle about "the emotional challenges accompanying the transition from youth to adulthood", paired with "a series of intimate, hymn-like love songs".{{sfn|Schinder|2007|pp=114–115}} Music historian Larry Star traced a thematic progression from "youthful optimism [...] to philosophical and emotional disillusionment" across its track sequencing.{{sfn|Starr|2007|p=265}}

While ''Pet Sounds'' exhibits unified emotional themes, no deliberate narrative was planned.{{sfn|Tunbridge|2010|p=173}} Asher stated that he and Wilson never discussed a specific concept, though he acknowledged Wilson's potential to unconsciously shape one.<ref name="Tony Asher interview" />{{refn|group=nb|Responding to the songwriters' denials of a conscious lyric theme, journalist [[Nick Kent]] observed that the album's lyrics predominantly depict a male protagonist's struggles with self-identity and crises of faith in love and life, excluding "Sloop John B" and the instrumentals.{{sfn|Kent|2009|pp=23–24}} Granata writes that while these tracks disrupt the album's "thematic thread", they enhance its pacing.{{sfn|Granata|2003|p=89}}}} Musicologist [[Philip Lambert]] argued that Wilson likely intended a narrative framework, influenced by his familiarity with similar "theme albums" by [[Frank Sinatra]] and the Four Freshmen.{{sfn|Lambert|2008|pp=116–117}}{{refn|group=nb|Lambert distinguishes "theme albums"—collections of songs linked by shared lyrical content but lacking musical cohesion—from concept albums, which integrate recurring melodic, harmonic, or structural elements into a unified artistic presentation.{{sfn|Lambert|2007|p=250}} With regards to the issue of authorial intent, he felt that artists' commentaries on their work may reflect external agendas or lack objectivity, and that the artwork itself should remain the primary basis for analysis.{{sfn|Lambert|2007|p=245}} }}