Wow! three blind mice... I love it!! As for dylan & poetic ability.. He did some great songs, blatantly stole some other stuff.. (for example check out the trad song "Leavin' of Liverpool" & see if it ain't familiar), & had a lot of influence.. that means something - I'm not always sure what, tho, or how positive.. I always thought a white city boy who never picked cotton - did he ever really get his hands dirty? - more than a bit incongruous, singing some of his songs, given their topics.. though gotta hand it to him for having guts.

As for poetry, power & beauty of expression, eloquence w/the english language (which I fer shur ain't got), & a sensitive - perhaps sensuous - ear for tunes, tonalities, etc.. IMHO he just wasn't even there most of the time. I think there are/have been many vastly more eloquent, intellectually more honest & more impressive folkish singer-song-writer types. Folks, get out your old albums & listen CAREFULLY to Gordon Lightfoot, esp lots of his early stuff - THERE is a poet! Speaking strictly for me, Dylan didn't hold a candle to GL & many others.

For grit, emotional power & content how about Eric Bogle - who makes no pretense of being an elegant vocalist - or Stan Rogers, who inspired me to get through some damn tough times ("Mary Ellen Carter"). And for a guy who has it all - a rich, sonorous voice, powerful, thoughtful & elegant use of language, artistry in his instrumental mastery - how about Stan's "little" brother Garnet Rogers - wow, that's class, folks... No matter who is the most famous - or might at least still be mentioned in books a hundred years from now - Dylan isn't even in their league - not even in their universe, as far as I'm concerned.

Talent has almost nothing to do with "success."

My $0.02; Cheers, BK