Overrated – Bob Dylan
|
This week’s inductee into the “Overrated Hall of Fame” is … Bob Dylan.
You know, “The Voice of a Generation.” Yeah, a generation hopped up on LSD. Bob Dylan might be music’s most blatant embodiment of the emperor’s new clothes. Most of his songs are just a jumbled mess of nonsensical images and non-sequiturs, but people don’t dare pretend that they don’t have clue fucking one about what he’s going on about. It’s safer to just nod your head, look off into space and say, “Man … fuckin’ Dylan … dude’s a genius.” And I agree. You have to be a genius to parlay that mediocre body of work into godlike stature and an eight-figure bank account.
If his music were truly great, people would, you know, actually listen to it now and then. I’m betting that most of the blowhards who extol the music of the Great Bob Dylan haven’t listened to one of his unlistenable albums since they were getting blown in a mud-caked car on the way back from Woodstock.
Go ahead and name 10 Dylan songs. You might be able to do that, but I doubt it. How about singing five Dylan songs. Can’t do that either, can you? Of course not. Because he was shitty songwriter, a mediocre tunesmith and one of the worst singers ever. He doesn’t rock out, he doesn’t move you to goosebumps with profundity (save for one song, which will be addressed later) and doesn’t have the good looks to lube up the ladies or move men to uncomfortable man crushes. But somehow, he’s been sold as one of the all-time greats of music.
Even the most well known Dylan songs are overrated because they don’t say anything. We can all sing the beginning of “Like a Rolling Stone.” It’s a good song in that the lyrics roll off the tongue and are easy to remember, the melody is wonderfully doleful and it’s got a catchy chorus. A song with those qualities doesn’t have to make sense. R.E.M. and U2 have made gazillions with songs that follow that same formula. I don’t know what the hell Michael Stipe and Bono are talking about half the time, but their songs and lyrics stick in your head. That’s poetry and great songwriting, and that’s “Like a Rolling Stone.”
But people like to pretend that there’s some sort of great depth in those lyrics. If you subscribe to that school of conformist non-thought, please try to explain them to me. In fact, let’s look at the first few lines.
One upon a time, you looked so fine,
Threw the bums a dime in your prime … didn’t youuuuuuuuuu?
You never understood that it ain’t no good,
You shouldn’t let other people get your kicks for youuuuuuuu
See what I mean? It’s fun to say and it sounds good, but you know it doesn’t really say anything. The same can be said for “Subterranean Homesick Blues,” “Tangled Up in Blue” and “Highway 61 Revisited.” The lyrics are cool, but they sure didn’t help end the Vietnam War or help bring about Civil Right legislation.
The phony reverence for the Great Bob Dylan’s poetic stylings remind me a lot of that Seinfeld episode in which Elaine proves that no one really understands the cartoons in the New Yorker magazine. But people fear they’ll show their literary ignorance if they claim not to get the ramblings of Dylan, so they go with the party line that the man’s one of the great voices of the 20th century.
I’m not claiming all his work is overrated. He did write one of the greatest songs ever; “The Times They Are a-Changin’.” That song’s genius lies in its timelessness. The message – that progress can’t be stopped, and those who resist it will be left behind and treated badly by history – not only still makes sense in 2008, but it would also have been an apt message in 300 B.C. and will still be right on the mark in the year 2347. “Blowin’ in the Wind” is a fine song that makes sense, too: When will humans stop fucking up in ways large and small? How can we figure out how to stop this shit we keep pulling? Good luck. The answer’s out there somewhere, but it’s sure as shit is proving elusive. Kudos on those two pieces of art, King Bob.
But the rest of his lyrics? I’ll prove my point this way. Below are three lines from Dylan songs and two that I made up in just a few seconds. I found Dylan lyrics online and just clicked on a few random songs to find these lines. Can you tell which are the original Dylan lyrics and which are the off-the-cuff creations of a martini-soaked Ned Bitters?
- A. Sister claims she sold her heart to a ruby-scalded ocean,
But I tell her it’s no use because the stars are now in motion.
B. Beat a path of retreat up them spiral staircases
Past the tree of smoke, past the angel with four faces.
C. Her eyes were two slits that would make a snake proud
With a face that any painter would paint as he walked through a crowd
D. Well I woke up this mornin’ there’s frogs inside my socks
Your mama she’s a hidin’ inside the icebox
E. On the flooded turquoise highway I saw the devil playing cards
He just waved as I drove by, my numb stomach full of shards
Okay, let’s see how you did. The actual Dylan lyrics are B, C, and D. The just as full of shit Bitters rhymes were A and E. Even if you somehow made the right choices, and I doubt you did, at least admit that the inane couplets I conceived make no less sense than the whacked out babble of Sir Robert, Lyricist Emeritus.
I have nothing against Bob Dylan. He seems a like a humble, wry guy with a good sense of humor. He doesn’t walk around like he’s some sort of rock royalty. (That’s Bono’s job.) He just keeps making albums and touring. He doesn’t act in shit movies. He doesn’t trumpet some trendy cause-du-jour. He doesn’t adopt brown kids and hold press conferences about it. And even he knows that his “Voice of a Generation” status is a bunch of crap, because when he finally signed on to endorse a product, thereby sending the aging hippies into apoplectic rants about selling out, he went all the way and peddled for Victoria’s Secret.
Then again, maybe I’m the dipshit who just doesn’t get it. I wonder how Dylan himself would respond to my assertion of his overratedness. I guess he’d just quote one of his own songs. No, not some screwball lyric about striped horses and glass lilacs and rivers of green tea. He’d just hit me upside the brain with a line from “The Times They Are a-Changin’.”
“Don’t criticize what you don’t understand.”
Ned Bitters is, in fact, overrated. You can contact him at teacherslounge@hobotrashcan.com.
Related Posts:
Well said, and makes some excellent points. Hopefully people will realise that Bob Dylan was a very poor songwriter when compared to the many truly great songwriters out there.
I also have yet to see a convincing argument on why he’s called the “voice of a generation” when he comes from the generation that produced The Beatles, who were vastly more musically talented, influential and important in quite literally every single regard.
[Reply]
Diblets- re:
“I also have yet to see a convincing argument on why he’s called the “voice of a generation” when he comes from the generation that produced The Beatles, ”
I guess you had to be there-
ask the beatles- via Google- what they thought and said about Dylan- according to them he was a great influence- Google lots of other songwriters and see what they say- who they credit- who influences them- still-
yep.
Dylan.
so- maybe you just had to be there to realize why people call him- (though he does not and hates being called that)- the voice of a generation.
Loved the Beatles- still do- but sorry- they do not come up to Dylan’s literary sensibility and contribution- without Dylan there would not have been the Beatles- U2- John Prine- and so many others.
There just aren’t the layers of meaning in Beatles tunes that there are in Dylan songs.
Good literature whether it be poetry, scripture from any world religion, great novels stand up over time because they have layers of meaning that continually reveal something new, some new insight to the reader/listener about themselvesand the world over the years.
And for his part- Dylan is incredibly well read in all genre- particularly classics and history- and completely immersed in American music- he credits all those who came before and influenced him- which is why he does “theme time-” I would guess- to put that great old music out there and tell stories about his heros- the poets, writers and musicians who came before him.
[Reply]
The thing about Bob is that his music stand up over time. His lyrics are living in the sense that over time they reveal new layers- or rather- you find new layers of meaning in them.
This does not mean he intends what you interpret- of course not- It does mean however that his references, writing, lyrics are so rich and complex- and simple too- that you can find meaning and comfort in them- he has always spoken to the human condition- he still does.
He’s 68- he doesn’t write the same kind of music he did- which people still are criticizing him for.
he writes music that is appropriate to this time, this place, his age.
If you listen carefully you can find all kinds of references that speak to where we are now as a culture- and where you may be personally.
and not just in the music he wrote 40 years ago- in the new music as well.
I can listen to a Dylan song and find a whole new “aha” moment in a piece I’ve heard a thousand times-
Sorry Diblets- I just don’t get that with the Beatles or anyone else- and I love a lot of different music. I listen to all kinds of artists and genres.
But- if you don’t get it, you don’t get it.
you don’t have to- its a Dylan thing.
😉
[Reply]
Dylan’s multiple transformations make him stand out from others who reside in the cultural pantheon of the last 60 years or so. Most who could be considered his peers made one big jump : Frank Sinatra from teen idol to respected vocalist (and film star); Elvis from rockabilly performer to Vegas star; the Beatles from pop/r&b to experimental music and lyrics; Michael Jackson from child star to pop trendsetter. Listen to the following Dylan albums: “Bob Dylan” (his first); “The Times They Are A-Changin”; “Highway 61 Revisited”; “Blonde on Blonde”; “Blood on the Tracks”; “The Basement Tapes”; “Time Out of Mind”; and now, “Together Through Life.” The transformations from Woody Guthrie folky, protester/social commentator, innovative rocker, surrealistic lyracist, self-confesssional torch-bearer, fabulist, commentator on mortality, to road-house bluesman demonstrate a unifying resiliency unique in American artistry – and the guy is just damned cool!
[Reply]
Interesting debate. I tend to agree with the premise of this article, although some of the counterpoints here are interesting.
I WANT to get Dylan, but I simply don’t FEEL his
music. It perhaps is generational (I’m 33). But I DO get the Beatles. To me the Beatles are so self-evidently more important and better.
I think an argument could be made in a narrow artistic sense that Dylan is better/more impressive than Bob Dylan. But in terms of impact on the broader pop culture/society, there is no contest.
Now granted, having read defenses of Dylan as a songwriter, I’m willing to give his due here, if my first impression on listening to his lyrics is that they are kind of nonsense, as I don’t really understand the illusions (culturally/socially) he is making, as he is describing a world that I never lived in and no longer exists (some kind of mid20th century heartland America myth). I think some of the older listeners would feel the same way about great hip hop lyricists today like the WuTang Clan and Kanye West, whose stream of consciousness kind of requires you inhabit the cultural space they inhabit.
But musically, there really is no comparison between Dylan and the Beatles. Dylan has a fairly limited musical repertoire, IMO. He doesn’t really deviate from folk/blues.
To the above poster: to dismiss the Beatles transformation as being simply from an R and B band to an experimental band is kind of a joke. Listen to the the Red and Blue Album compilations in one sitting. The progression is amazing in such a short time, and I don’t think has ever been matched.
[Reply]
Interesting debate. I tend to agree with the premise of this article, although some of the counterpoints here are interesting.
I WANT to get Dylan, but I simply don’t FEEL his
music. It perhaps is generational (I’m 33). But I DO get the Beatles. To me the Beatles are so self-evidently more important and better.
I think an argument could be made in a narrow artistic sense that Dylan is better/more impressive than Bob Dylan. But in terms of impact on the broader pop culture/society, there is no contest.
Now granted, having read defenses of Dylan as a songwriter, I’m willing to give his due here, if my first impression on listening to his lyrics is that they are kind of nonsense, as I don’t really understand the illusions (culturally/socially) he is making, as he is describing a world that I never lived in and no longer exists (some kind of mid20th century heartland America myth). I think some of the older listeners would feel the same way about great hip hop lyricists today like the WuTang Clan and Kanye West, whose stream of consciousness kind of requires you inhabit the cultural space they inhabit.
But musically, there really is no comparison between Dylan and the Beatles. Dylan has a fairly limited musical repertoire, IMO. He doesn’t really deviate from folk/blues.
To the above poster: to dismiss the Beatles transformation as being simply from an R and B band to an experimental band is kind of a joke. Listen to the the Red and Blue Album compilations in one sitting. The progression is amazing in such a short time, and I don’t think has ever been matched.
[Reply]
Seems to me he was great more because of WHEN he was writing than WHAT he was writing. Were he to emerge as a new artist today with the same stylings and the same (sometimes profound, often trite and middling) lyrics, and were he to set up a myspace page, not many people would browse in IMO. “Yah, another guy with an acoustic guitar.” Too many past musical icons are revered as sacred cows due to the eras they lived and recorded in, and due to the fact that there was a scarcity of industry and means of production. Now that anyone can make any music and release it to any audience, there can be no more sacred “roots” music, and people like me who see through the matrix of “music history worship” will take Dylan and others at face value, and judge them based on the true metric and acid test…could they release today and be as popular? Stevie Wonder could release his big 4 today, and they would still smash, with the increased competition and the decreased attention spans. Dylan? Not so much IMO.
[Reply]
Solo Reply:
June 25th, 2014 at 2:02 am
Totally agree, the same for the most of bands / musicians, it depends of the moment, for example, if the Rolling Stones ( or any other band / musician on that time early 60′) would starting their careers nowdays… probably you would get an oportunity to see them in any noisy bar or so, surrounded by a few friends of them and relatives, the main value at that moment was that they were pioneers, they were almost alone on the road by that time..
[Reply]
Brian Reply:
September 21st, 2022 at 3:58 am
If that’s so, he’s only a product of his time, etc, then why do people still pay to see him tour and buy his albums, more than 60 years on from his beginning?
You might not like his stuff but you can’t tell his fans what they do and don’t like. Whilst I am not going to go out of my way to win a highly subjective argument, the very fact that literally thousands of musicians have recorded his songs as covers over a span of more than 60 years shows that his songs have merit – so much for the guy saying that he was just into blues. You will find rock, rap, reggae, ska, hip hop, jazz, folk, gospel and blues versions of his songs, reflecting his influence across the whole spectrum of music.
And it’s facetious for the guy writing this article to claim that Dylan’s fans don’t know Dylan’s lyrics. Who is he to judge what people whom he has never met knows about anything? Maybe it reflects his values and his circle of friends values but it’s arrogance to assume that they apply to everyone else.
[Reply]
Lot of angry people here, and I don’t understand why. All these famous people they look up to are not God…& when they’re criticized, it plays on their OWN insecurity. Most celebrated people (even those hailed as geniuses) only have so much they can offer – usually parts of their repertoire are good, but the rest is just drivel.
IMHO – (I am a songwriter myself, and really hate mediocrity in every form) couple of Bob Dylan’s songs are OK, can’t listen to him long-term, however – annoying voice, lyrics too much of a mouthful, same old song construction, tunes mostly difficult to remember, same old harmonica (does my head in). Same goes for Neil Young. Both probably pretty unpleasant people behind closed doors. Who cares? They’ll blow away to dust just like all the rest of us one day.
[Reply]
he is, by far, the most overrated, pretentious, ignomenious boob in all pop music…the Bangles were better!!!
[Reply]
BWAHAHAHAHA!
How dare you challenge the non-sensical rhymes of Bob Dylan? Notice how Bob Dylan fans reply to your critical article by calling you a ‘wanker’, and ‘dipshit’, as well as saying you have ‘your head in shit’… demonstrating the deep mental maturity that Bob Dylan fans have? Then they say, ‘you just don’t get it, man!’ Like they have some Hippy-ninja mind power which transcends the frontal lobe power of mortal man. Then they quote lyrics from a BD song, typically something like this:
The purple leprechaun
ate all my cheerios
and then I flew a Dorito chip
to the town of Kandahar
But where are my pants?
The point is, Bob Dylan’s lyrics are a jumble of artsy fartsy drug induced drivel. He is an amazing figure though, as all you hippies took his bait hook, line, and sinker, and he is a multi-millionaire because of his saavy.
He’s got a few songs I’ll listen to, and I admire the man. But don’t keep trying to make him something he isn’t.
[Reply]
Petty Officer Owens : You selected a few of the inane comments “supporting” Dylan and ignored the coherent, thought-out ones; I like to think my own are among the latter. Some of his vast repertoire does border on doggeral drivel, but his finest work – e.g., “Desolation Row,” “Chimes of Freedom,” and more recently, “Not Dark Yet,” are lyrically transcendent, not at all like your parody. I find your comment that you “admire the man” a paradox, coming after the blistering indictment you inveigh against the man and his fans. What could you possibly admire about a person whose work and influence you find so baleful -other than those “few songs” you’ll listen to?
[Reply]
Petty Officer Owens: Copied below is a recent blog post on the “Best American Poetry” blog maintained by Lawrence J. Epstein. Here is the address if you would like to share your view of Dylan’s work: http://thebestamericanpoetry.typepad.com/the_best_american_poetry/
Bob Dylan structures his songs through rhymes. Given his skills, the results can be comforting, jarring, or rousing. But why do Dylan’s rhymes work so well? Why are rhymes in any song often so enchanting?
Rhymes are pleasing to the ear. They are also pleasing to the brain because in a rhyme the second word becomes more familiar to us than if there had been no first word to rhyme with. Our brains like what’s easy to think about and don’t like what’s difficult to think about. (Psychologists call this “cognitive fluency.” Songwriters don’t.) Beyond the attractions of repetitive sounds, a rhyme offers the mystery of an unexpected affinity between two or more words that are seemingly different.
The coincidence of two or more words that rhyme suggests a linguistic order missing from the chaos of ordinary life. Rhymes hint at an alluring land of English, a place of beauty and design. But there’s a danger to rhymes as well. Rhymes are mysterious and inexplicable. We have to confront mirror images and doubles, worlds that complicate the simplicity that the rhyme seemed to bring.
For songwriters, rhymes make it easier for audiences to memorize the material. It’s no accident that nearly every popular song is written using rhymes. But rhymes can be traps, forcing songwriters to write words they don’t want to all for the sake of having to rhyme.
Rhymes are often associated with simple, childlike feelings. Yet they can be a form of attack, a battering ram of words pounding away at the listener. That’s why the rhymes in Dylan’s protest songs work so well. They keep hitting us with their power, and the repetition forces us to confront what is being protested. The rhymes all through “The Ballad of Hollis Brown” reinforce Brown’s growing despair and retrospectively explain his final, desperate action. Consider the concluding verse of the song:
There’s seven people dead
On a South Dakota farm.
There’s seven people dead
On a South Dakota farm.
Somewhere in the distance
There’s seven new people born.
Anyone can hear obvious rhymes. It’s the great lyricist who can hear what the rest of us can’t. Dylan can hear that “farm” sounds like “born,” and “born is the the perfect word, not only standing in contrast to the people Hollis Brown has killed but also in providing hope (for new people have replaced the dead) and a warning (don’t let what happened to the Brown family happen to these newborns).
Similarly, rhyme as a form of attack works well in angry love songs. In “Idiot Wind,” Dylan writes:
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth.
You’re an idiot, babe.
It’s a wonder that you still know how to breathe.
Or take another pair of lines from the song:
Idiot wind, blowing like a circle around my skull,
From the Grand Coulee Dam to the Capitol.
The rhyme is more exact but is still unexpected. Additionally, it magnifies the subject of the song from beyond the angry subject to the singer himself and then to Washington. It’s a neat shift of ascribing idiocy from an external partner to the internal self to the political.
The battering ram effect can also be seen in poignant love songs such as “Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands” and attack songs about so-called friends, such as “Positively 4th Street” with lines like:
I know the reason
That you talk behind my back.
I used to be among the crowd
You’re in with.
Do you take me for such a fool
To think I’d make contact
With the one who tries to hide
What he don’t know to begin with?
Here Dylan uses what is technically known as “feminine rhyme” in which the rhyme comes from the penultimate words (or syllables), in this case “in with” and “begin with.” That is, Dylan’s rhymes are far from simple. He doesn’t just use traditional end rhymes. Additionally, he uses alliteration (repeating consonant sounds) and assonance (repeating vowel sounds creating internal rhymes in a line.) Here are some beautiful lines from “Mr. Tambourine Man”:
Yes, to dance beneath the diamond sky with one hand waving free,
Silhouetted by the sea, circled by the circus sands,
With all memory and fate driven deep beneath the waves,
Let me forget about today until tomorrow.
The assonance of “fate” and “waves” and “deep” and “beneath” and the many examples of alliteration add to the rhymes and startling images to create the attractive world the tambourine man offers.
And that’s why nobody rhymes with Bob Dylan.
[Reply]
Thanks for the unvarnished truth. You are spot-on. No longer do I feel like the only one who sees the painfully obvious.
[Reply]
A couple other thoughts: Even Dylan’s songs that DO make sense are, for the most part, unimpressive. I was reading the lyrics to “If Not for You” and was struck with just how trite the words are. And how cheap and easy the rhymes are (“you,” “blue” and “true,” e.g.). Honestly, this evokes images of a 15-year-old plunking on his guitar, coming up with an understandably juvenile tribute to his girlfriend. It’s that sophisticated.
And the same with his melodies. Predictable. No complexity, no interesting twists, modulations. If even you’ve never heard a given Dylan song, chances are you can still hum along with it. It never goes off in an unexpected direction.
As for you guys hurling invective at our Dylan critic, looks like he hit a nerve. Happens every time. When an irrationally held belief comes under scrutiny, it always stirs up “how dare you” outrage from the zealous devotees.
[Reply]
I get his genius…I do. As a poet and former regional recording artist, I can respect his form of poetry and his artistic uniqueness. It’s like he opens his mind and poured out thoughts or his creativity in it’s rawest of forms and a generation dug it.
The reason I think Bob Dylan is overrated is because he relied heavily on his writing skills without developing his skills as a musician and a singer. It is music after all and he is very hard to listen to at times. Some of his stuff I really disliked, it seemed as if he could have even been insulting his fanbase by putting it out. It seemed as if he wasn’t even concerned about putting out quality. Could’ve been drug use or something.. who knows.
It’s obvious that through his genius he has endeared himself to so many fans and inspired generations of singers and musicians. Perhaps to many people they feel as if they have a part of him because he seems to be able to do whatever he desires when he records.
At the end of the day I don’t if Mr. Dylan gave his best efforts whenever he created music, but he got the most out of his talent. He is a legend, but one of the greatest singers/artists/musical acts of all time? I wouldn’t say so.
[Reply]
I’m two years late to this conversation, but I’ve been googling ‘Dylan is overrated’, in hopes of finding ammunition. I live in Holland, MI, a small town with a small museum. We have, of all things, a Dylan exhibit running this fall (2010), and I’m being dragged by my musician friends to pay homage. They all get, as you’ve described, the thousand-yard-stare, and say, “Dylan, man…”. I’ve been committing social suicide and saying “I don’t get it.”
We’re meeting in a few hours to make the pilgrimage, and I want to thank you for shoring up my resolve. I’ve been forbidden by the group to make snarky remarks, in fact not allowed to introduce the topic of surf music to the conversation (my particular passion). I think I’ll quote your ruby-scalded ocean line, and see what trouble I can stir up.
Amen, brother!
[Reply]
Eddy … better late than never … if you scroll up in this blog you will know how I should react to your comments … but is your fellow Minnesotean overratted? I have decided that this is a question that will only be answered when I am gone (I being a a decade junior of Bob) … beyond that, to paraphrase a recent quote in the Wall Street Journal, ultimately, the market will determines if Dylan or any performer is under- or overrated … I hope you did make your snarky remarks, they are how you feel and you should not be disallowed from making them, and I am interested in your friends’ reaction to them …
[Reply]
Fellas,
Ned Bitters editorials are supposed to be tongue in cheek, semi-sarcastic rants..He is simply writing the persona of someone who is BITTER, hence the name. WOW! You guys ALL need to drop the pretense, and get a freakin sense of humor..Holy Crap, I have known Nuns who had a better sense of humor than some of you dimwits..
I bet some of you guys are a real party to be around. Yeesh…
Get a grip.
[Reply]
Okay. You fucked it up, really. You left put some of the best lyrics from ‘Like a Rolling Stone.’ they make a clear point. He’s asking some rich girl how it feels to suddenly be on her own and realize what life is really like.
“you never turned around to see the frowns/ on the jugglers and the clowns when they all did tricks for you/ you never understood that it ain’t no good/ you shouldn’t let other people get their kicks for you”.
Also, guess what? I pulled those lyrics off the top of my head, because I listen to Bob Dylan frequently. I understand that people might not like his style or whatever, but his lyrics do make sense.
[Reply]
I figured out what’s wrong with Dylan.
His music isn’t really music. It’s poetry read over little bits of guitar. It’s good poetry, I suppose. It might lose its power if it wasn’t sung in song form.
But the problem… the ‘music’ is oftentimes repetitive, dry, and generic. Music is melody, rhythm, harmony, etc. Dylan focuses far more on the lyrics. For someone who doesn’t care too much for poetry, his music might seem quite dull.
That’s me. I want there to be musical craft. After all, it IS music. Not a piece of paper where I can read his lyrics. It ISN’T poetry. It’s music. Anyway. I like some of it, but I have to say, it’s quite overrated. Just because I don’t personally enjoy it doesn’t mean there is something wrong with me. I’m not daft. I like music, and music is not poetry.
[Reply]
from early 60’s to early ’80’s Dylan wrote some extraordinary songs. All down hill since then!—– All you ‘bobgod’ people…name FIVE great songs of Dylan written between 1985 to present! — Dylan WAS humble back in the days when he had talent..now the brain fried old fool is an arrogent loser with GREAT PROMO from Sony. just goes to show ya the power of media over morons.
[Reply]
from early 60’s to early ’80’s Dylan wrote some extraordinary songs. All down hill since then!—– All you ‘bobgod’ people…name FIVE great songs of Dylan written between 1985 to present! — Dylan WAS humble back in the days when he had talent..now the brain fried old fool is an arrogent loser with GREAT PROMO from Sony. just goes to show ya the power of media over morons!
[Reply]
Bob Dylan’s dick is getting a thorough sucking in these comments.
Bob Dylan has some damn good songs, and by the same criteria there are a lot of others who are just as good. What we see here is a ‘Paris Hilton’ phenomenon – being famous for being famous.
He originally got big from the old school ‘hipsters’ who thought he was saying more than what he actually was – and now the torch is being carried by the young people who only like his music because they THINK it’s suppose to be good. When actually most of them have no idea what is being said.
Considering the tempermant of Dylan, he himself would probably say many people look way to hard into his lyrics.
But hey, whatever floats your boat. If you think Dylan is the greatest songwriter of all time, nothing is going to change your mind.
[Reply]
The Beatles were good singers, lyricists and as composers blow a lot of people out of the water, not just Dylan. Considering Dylan as a lyricist, I don’t think Dylan could be as concise lyrically. Dylan seemed to throw everything at the canvas in the hope that some things would stick. He was trying to be important early on. The Beatles early on wanted hits. Later they expressed themselves with Lennon catching the importance bug. I think Dylan taught Lennon that he didn’t have to always write love songs. Lennon/McCartney were more natural songwriters . No one has mentioned Paul Simon who wrote some great lyrics.
[Reply]
I love Dylan, man. I do. He is up there in my top ten. But I must agree with your text, he was great, but in no way his lyrics have all that depth and meaning RS and others have successfully propagated over the years. And as Lennon, he admitis there is nothing much to his lyrics, anyways, you wanna please hipsters? Write something no one will understand.
[Reply]
the problem with dylan is that he uses a lot of cliches and spews forth moral platitudes in lieu of profundities (“the ballad of frankie lee and judas priest” and “make you feel my love” are strings of cliches). but it’s an infrequent problem! he has some good to very good stuff (“i want you”, “all along the watchtower”, “the lonesome death of hattie carroll”, “mr. tambourine man”).
anyway.. he’s at fault (sometimes) for being transparent and polemical in the worst sense. he isn’t really non-sensical (except in some lines from his early rock period and some parodical songs — but these are jokey songs and moments,willfully sense-free).
just take the three lines you chose: d. is perfectly intelligible, even though it describes an absurd situation (it belongs to a joke song); c. is irredeemably silly but straightforward; as for b., i don’t recognize the song, but the images are biblical (the first vision from ezekiel, the tree of smoke from the exodus or the song of songs ) and are meant to mark epiphanies
[Reply]
“I don’t know what the hell Michael Stipe and Bono are talking about half the time, but their songs and lyrics stick in your head. That’s poetry and great songwriting, and that’s “Like a Rolling Stone.”” No good poetry has social meaning
[Reply]
Well of course ol’ Bob got up to his usual tricks when he wrote his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize. He included a faked-up quote from Moby Dick. Classic Bob Dylan cynicism: Cite a classic novel to assert his bona fides as a literary figure, be too lazy to actually go to the novel and dig out a relevant quote, make up the quote and then speak it in perfect confidence that nobody will call him on his deception.
If it can be shown that Bob Dylan has read Moby Dick (and who in the world has?), I will eat a copy of it. It’s just a relief he didn’t quote something from James Joyce.
[Reply]
The difficulty with Bob Dylan is that he is a shameless faker. He piggybacked an image as a protest singer on the civil rights movement. So google up “Bob Dylan and black people” and what you get is Bob with James Baldwin. Well fine. But you also get a picture of the young Bob Dylan playing his guitar, and in the background there is a family of poor Black sharecroppers. (Who were probably just actors, but never mind.) The man just has no conscience.
Or you’ve got the young Bob Dylan, who was a weedy little guy, strutting around in hipster shades, with a cigarette dangling from his mouth, and riding a motorcycle, and he looks ridiculous, because you just know that this is a guy who has never been in a fist fight in his life. The guy bugs me boy.
Also I would bet this month’s liquor bill that he really named himself after Marshal Matt Dillon of the TV show Gunsmoke. His first fake name was Eldred Gunn, which I’ll bet is a steal from another TV show, Peter Gunn. I’ll bet that his biggest regret when he was young was that he was physically small.
[Reply]
John Pilecki Reply:
May 4th, 2018 at 10:00 pm
The “first fake name” was Elston Gunn. Probably right the surname taken from the Peter Gunn TV program from the late 50’s early 60’s, that had a killer theme song still a staple of high school pep bands. My guess is the first name taken from Elston Howard, a catcher for the NY Yankees the same era as the Peter Gunn TV show. BTW, Robert Zimmerman’s childhood home in Hibbing MN was on Howard Street.
[Reply]
Bob Dylan is to music what Picasso is to art: tremendously overrated.
[Reply]
My own view is that Dylan’s influence on the lyrics of popular songs was more than a little malign. Let’s face it: the lyrics of the early songs of the Beatles, *and most of the songs of Buddy Holly) were moronic. Then Dylan started writing songs with “poetic” lyrics. Very soon , as if he were playing a practical joke, he began writing songs with lyrics that were not only poetic but incomprehensible. “Farewell Angelina” is a good example, although everybody who knows Dylan can draw up a list of songs with suspiciously opaque lyrics without too much trouble.
Other writers, like Paul Simon followed suit, but Simon’s lyrics actually did mean something. “Mrs. Robinson” is remarkably playful and intelligent, but not so cryptic that you can’t figure out that he was writing about a suburban housewife entering a rehab centre. Really smart stuff.
But then the Beatles became Dylan imitators. Witness “A Day in the Life,” which is Dylnaesque in the worst way: Fake-profound, preachy and deliberately opaque. The original Beatles were dumb lyricists, but they were musically pure, and then they tried to cover up lousy music with lyrics that were just bad T.S. Eliot imitations. And they wouldn’t have done this had it not been for Bob Dylan’s bad example.
[Reply]
Hilarious.
I suppose you had to be there. Lesser known albums like “Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid” are astounding.
Ya had to be there …..”All along the Watchtower” and “Like a Rolling Stone” defined a generation. They are beyond Anthemic, eternal is more like it. The Beatles never achieved that kind of gravitas, that kind of poetry that described the human condition so fully. And I havent even started talking about the Blowing in the Wind era songs. Dylan has been around so long, its really difficult to get your arms around his catalog and influence
[Reply]
Bob Dylan has like 3 well-known (mediocre) songs compared to Beatles’ 300 brilliant songs muhaha
[Reply]
I agree with most of this. I believe it’s the lyrics most people like (whether they’re great or not is up for debate) but I think his music abilities are borderline horrendous. If you had to listen to an album all the way through while driving you would go crazy. Also, I hate when people call Joni Mitchell the “female Bob Dylan”. She so much better than him in every way. Even lyrics. Her career is mind blowing…but there’s Bob…worshiped like a God because he went electric. smh
[Reply]
The strongest indication that you don’t have a good argument is the need to resort to name calling (the logical fallacy of ad hominem attacks). Art is subjective. I don’t get Picasso yet I do get Salvadore Dali. I get Patti Smith, but Dylan leaves me cold. And Mr. Bitters is not alone in his disregard for Bob Dylan. though she later denied it Joni Mitchell was quoted as saying “We are like night and day, [Dylan] and I. Bob is not authentic at all. He’s a plagiarist, and his name and voice are fake.” If my choice is to listen to Joni Mitchell or Bob Dylan, I’ll choose Joni every time. But then again, if I had the choice of listening to Bob Dylan or two Tomcats fighting, I’d choose the Tomcats.
[Reply]