If you have studied Bob Dylan's life with any real attention, and I have, it is clear that he was a totally sincere disciple of Woody Guthrie in the early years leading up to and then encompassing about the first 3 years of his career, and he virtually worshipped the musical ground that Guthrie had walked upon, if I may use an analogy. He wanted to BE Woody Guthrie. (just as many have wanted to BE Bob Dylan) He was a fanatical fan of Guthrie's. The hero worship that he felt for Guthrie in those early years could hardly have been more intense, and it could not have been more real. The fact that he later moved beyond the Guthrie foundations and found his own unique voice does not in any way invalidate his earlier obession with Guthrie...it just means he eventually found his own voice, that's all. This is clearly explained by Bob Dylan in his recited work "Last Thoughts on Woody Guthrie"...an affectiona farewell to his greatest musical hero, and a recognition that he now has to move on and find his own way.

It's good when someone moves on and finds their own voice. It's not betrayal...it's a maturing process. We almost all begin by emulating our heroes...and by learning whatever we can from them. This is not stealing. It's the natural learning process. To attack Bob Dylan for doing what everyone else does is stupid, and people wouldn't be doing it except for the fact that he succeeded so well. That's the only thing that sets him apart. Music is full of people who emulate their heroes, borrow from their techniques and ideas and approaches....but very few attain the very top in their profession...and Bob Dylan did. He became as big as Elvis, Sinatra or the Beatles.

Accordingly, he is hated by some, envied, attacked, and resented by a lot of people who haven't grown up enough to be happy about someone else's success being far greater than their own will ever be. In my opinion. It's a mean and crummy attitude to take toward people who achieve greatness, and it has nothing to say about Bob Dylan, but a great deal to say about the one who looks to punish another for doing what they themselves didn't do...and for doing it so well.

As for Ochs, yeah, he was utterly sincere. No question. It's unfortunate that he died so young, and so disappointed with how things had gone. I think most of his songs had a rather short shelf life, that's one of the things that bothers me about them, but their sincerity is very clear.

Dylan's songs seem to have an almost limitless shelf life (with very few exceptions). That's one of the reasons why I like them so much. They are written in archetypes and universal symbols that work in any time or place, and that is their great strength.

Ochs wrote at least one great song using universal symbols: "Changes". It's a masterpiece. Like many of Dylan's songs, it's timeless. It will always be relevant.

Phil Ochs always spoke well of Bob Dylan, even when they were not speaking to one another (for a couple of years in the mid-60s). He defended Dylan vigorously against repeated attacks from the folk press in the mid-60s even when he and Dylan were personally estranged from one another. That speaks very well for Phil Ochs. He put principle and honest artistic criticism above personal issues. Others might learn something from Ochs when it comes to that...if they had any inclination to learn something, but most of them don't.