I'm a very big fan of Dylan. I admire his artistry (and his singing voice) to the up most. My peers, my outlook at that time in the 60's, and somewhat still to this day reflect that liberal image. That very image that is displayed by the media these days, giving a perception of that was what the 60's were completely about. But I have to agree with Guest. I remember vividly that we were definitely in the minority (my peers and I) in our outlook on liberalism, philosophy, art and 'rejection of the then rules and mores of society'. We were the outlaws of society. We were the outlaws that Dylan was reaching to.

Dylan certainly did speak to us, but he was not speaking for a large portion of the western world population. Don't forget, a majority of women did not work and those who did were generally relegated to the 2nd class jobs. They accepted it at that time. Let's face it, Dylan's voice couldn't match the smoothness and romance of Jonny Mathis. It wasn't until the 70's that they began to see the light, and the source of this light was certainly not the songs of Dylan.

He was not heard by the Afro Americans. Don't think all segregation was specific to the American south (another false perception of the media), there was (and still is) a large population 'caged' (thank you Randy Newman for that expression) in the ghettos of every major city in the U.S. These people in the 60's were venting their anger and frustration in violent riots in Detroit, Newark, and L.A. Let's face it, they were not and could not relate to some white middleclass kid with a hillbilly voice.

Dylan's songs did not reach the majority of the male population from the Midwest, and the industrial centres who were putting their lives on the line for their country. For a war they thought was just. Dylan was a hippy, he represented everything that was not God, country and the values of hard blue collar work

It is these people I have mentioned above whose faces are missing form that old photo of the sixties.

sIx