Comparisons between Charlie Brown / Charles Shulz & Bob Zimmerman / Bob Dylan are really interesting.
CB/CS used a rather unusual forum / medium to get our attention so he could tell us stuff about ourselves - stuff he needed to say and therefore needed for us to listen; I mean really listen.
BZ/BD did exactly the same thing except, of course, the forum and delivery medium were of his choosing.
I'm referring, of course, or the early years of CB. The last few years were, well actually quite alot like Bob's last few years (more pop / less intense) of course the times and issues changed too.
College level physcology texts of the early sixties had scads of material describing the personalities of Lucy, Linus, Charlie and that lunatic hound. A kid's strip on one level, perched atop deeper stuff just beneath, stuff you had to dig down throughy to appreciate.
Dylanish, or what?
Captivate, by whatever method is necessary - hold your listener's attention - then communicate as a prosecutor would to a jury so each thinks the wordflow is directed at them personally. Would describe either - take your pick.
Shulz didn't worry about being a great artist; he just figured out how to get people to listen - pure Dylan.
Shulz work went from paper to TV - a watered down message for a larger audience. Bob similarly went from acoustic to electric - absolutely identical.
Using Shulz to explain Zimmerman . . . just brilliant.