An Open Letter To Bob Dylan

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Wesley S
Date: 24 Aug 05 - 11:53 AM

I don't know of ANY audience that gets forwarned ahead of time about the content of a performance. You pay your money and you take your chances. Sure - if you go see "Phantom of the Opera" and they perform "Our Town" instead you have a right to be upset. But any audience that boos because an artist doesn't perform the songs they wanted to hear is just plain rude.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 24 Aug 05 - 12:40 PM

We can agree to disagree on that, Peter. Yeah, the Stones put out a new album every few years, but the material on those albums is just an attempted rehash of the sound of earlier stuff, without any attempt to really make new music that stands on its own merits. And yes, they play a few of the new ones each time, but the bulk of their set list is from the 60s and 70s, done the same way they were done way back when. And their schtick is exactly the same, year in and year out.

It's a nostalgia show -- a good one, I'll grant you, but that's all it is. Kind of like when Henny Youngman would trot out his old "Take my wife -- please!" line in his later years, and people would applaud; not because it was funny, or creative, or interesting, but just because they remembered how it made them laugh the first few hundred times they heard it.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: *daylia*
Date: 24 Aug 05 - 12:59 PM

Maybe news travels slowly in Canada   

Well, it's got an awful looooong way to travel around here   :-) but my own companions, for instance, knew very well what his latest album was all about. And even though it wasn't their cup of tea they wanted to hear him anyway. It's always quite the occasion when someone of Dylan's stature plays in Toronto! They just weren't prepared for an evening of nothing but "Slow Train".

I bet I was there on the first night he performed, and you were there later LH. By that time, word would have gotten out and people knew better what to expect.

As I've stated before, if he'd have obliged his fans even just ONCE with a request at some point that evening, I doubt the reaction would have been as negative. And I'm glad to hear other people had different experiences during that tour! As it was, for someone like me who didn't have much concert-going experience at all (yet) - the unpleasantness and negativity was just a turn-off - not only re Dylan himself but about BIG concerts/audiences in general. I got over the concert thing - but I've judged Dylan way too harshly over it all these years, I see now.

Shame on me    :-)

But any audience that boos because an artist doesn't perform the songs they wanted to hear is just plain rude.

Agreed!

Dylan is different: I don't believe he thinks of the audience as an audience. I think he thinks of them as a kind of ambience. You can watch this evolve over time, but it is there from almost the beginning.

"AMBIENCE: a feeling or mood associated witha particular place, person, or thing: ATMOSPHERE"

(had to look that one up) Hmmm .. thanks Peter. Interesting! Oh and that reminds me -

I am sure that Bob is many things, but "beloved" is not one of them! (This may be the best thing about him!!)

LOL!! At the risk of sounding just as un-spiritual as I really am, I wanted to thank you for that one before!   :-)

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: *daylia*
Date: 24 Aug 05 - 01:28 PM

I've been an admirer of both Dylan and Beethoven since I was a kid (in the mid-60s, when I was a musician in training in both popular and classical realms). I think there are some real similarities there, in their relationship with their audience. Both were (and in Bob's case, continue to be) castigated for years for not being what they were before, and hence for not living up to their audience's expectations, and both were/are accused of being rude performers.

Just wanted to include some of Beethoven's own words here, to highlight these similarities between himself and Dylan. Never quite thought of them this way before, but ....

I have never thought of writing for reputation and honor. What I have in my heart must come out; that is the reason why I compose.

and

No friend have I. I must live by myself alone; but I know well that God is nearer to me than others in my art, so I will walk fearlessly with Him.

and finally,

Applaud, my friends. The comedy is over. (said as he was dying)

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 12:59 PM

one thing i have always thought, and i don't think anyone mentioned it above, is that perhaps dylan is shy. that's odd for a performer, but possibly true. in other words, he might like writing and singing songs, but doing it in front of people might be daunting. and could explain why the studio albums are good, and live performances are sometimes lackluster.

also... someone said: "We criticized him when he went electric. We got on his back when he went and did the spiritual songs.   And here he is again, doing the things he wants to do..."

And leave us not forget the Victoria's Secret commercial that featured not only a song, but also featured Bob himself. Explain that. Sellout? Self effacing? Lost a bet?

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 01:03 PM

"And leave us not forget the Victoria's Secret commercial that featured not only a song, but also featured Bob himself. Explain that. Sellout? Self effacing? Lost a bet?"

An opportunity to hang out with supermodels. I tried writing songs as soon as I saw that opportunity.

People need to give it a rest, get their own house in order before they start complaing about Dylan.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Steve Latimer
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 02:44 PM

Amen Ron.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 03:18 PM

"lost a bet" LOL! Good one, Guest.

Yeah, hanging out with supermodels sounds okay for an afternoon, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Frankham
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 04:55 PM

It would have been different if Dylan hadn't been lionized and touted as a "folk artist" who epitomizes the "topical song.". Then I could accept him as I do Elvis for just doing his thing.

Maybe it wasn't his fault. Maybe the "hype" in the left-wing circles about him was the problem. I think he was disingenous about his early music. He used the Left to get ahead as a rock star He said so himself on Sixty Minutes..

That said, he obviously reached a lot of people and they love his songs. That's fine.

I believe however that the artist owes the audience more than the audience owes him/her. If they artist is not gracious, I think there's something wrong with them and I question their mode of communication. It turns me off. I listen and enjoy early Miles Davis recordings but never wanted to see him live later. Why be insulted? Who do they think they are? Being an artist doesn't give anyone licence to be an a****hole.

As for Bob, he is now McDylan (a billion sold) and that's OK by me. But he's not my favorite songwriter. And I don't like his attitude.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 05:31 PM

Is it possible that our definition of "folk artist" and "topical song" lead to a narrow characterization?   Why must someone who adopts this mantle be forced into following a pre-designated role?

I also strongly disagree with the image of Dylan not being "gracious".   What is he supposed to do, and what is he doing wrong?   How is he hurting or showing disrespect to his audience? Just because he doesn't chat?   What is the attitude that everyone has a problem with?

I don't want to come across as a Dylan-worshiper. I like his songs, I admire what he has done, but he is not a prophet. I blame the press and the fans for creating an image.   Dylan is what he is, nothing more or less than that. He doesn't owe me anything.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 06:23 PM

The hype about him in left wing circles was exactly the problem.

Read any good biography of Dylan, and you will see how early he became uncomfortable with being used as the darling of the Left, and why he pretty much abandoned the more topical/protest songs after his 3rd album in 1963 ("The Times They Are A-Changin'")...well before he DID the rock music, which came in '65-66. How then, did the protest songs help him succeed as a "rock star"? They weren't rock music! They were folk music, played simply on a 6-string guitar with harmonica. How does this help one get ahead as a rock star? Dylan clearly repudiated his protest singer stance on his 4rth album ("Another Side Of...") with the song "My Back Pages", and that album was also all acoustic folk...no rock music.

By the time Dylan moved into rock music (a bit on the 5th album "Bringing It All Back Home", heavily on the 6th and 7th albums "Highway 61 Revisited" and "Blonde on Blonde")...he was not writing topical/protest material. He was writing material that could best be described as very personal and philosophical. The New Left was not too happy with that. Sing Out magazine wrote articles criticizing him bitterly for not writing more folky protest songs like Phil Ochs was doing. Phil Ochs responded by writing to Sing Out and telling them they were completely wrong, and that Dylan was pointing the way to go.

I suspect Bob was being just a tad disingenuous on 60 minutes instead, Frankham.

I mean, how do you succeed as a rock singer by recording a whole bunch of famous acoustic guitar protest songs, none of which can be classified as ROCK???? ;-) You tell me, Frankham. For Dylan, the protest songs ended with the making of the 3rd album in 1963, and that album had nothing on it but an acoustic guitar, a harmonica, and a stripped-bare voice. That's not rock music, it's folk music.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 07:27 PM

"how do you succeed as a rock singer by recording a whole bunch of famous acoustic guitar protest songs"

Dave Van Ronk had the best take on that in his book. He basically said that Dylan was taking a chance, he had no way of knowing if he would succeed. He probably could have stayed comfortable in the folk world but he took a chance and followed his muse.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Sep 05 - 07:32 PM

Yeah. He did what he really wanted to do at the time. That's what basically pisses people off. They'd rather he just did what they wanted him to do at the time.

If Dylan had done nothing but keep doing the folk routine, he'd have become a fondly remembered and not very significant musical footnote, like many others...and he'd have been bored stiff. He'd had enough of the folkie routine by '65, and was restless to try something different.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Sep 05 - 02:57 AM

I agree with GUEST above who put forward the "shy" thing. Some people are good and comfortable with off-the-cuff small talk, and others are not. I've never heard a Dylan interview where he sounded at ease, or even able to relate to his interviewer. Which I guess is why there are not many Dylan interviews.

I have a recording of an early interview he did with some old fart - on the Studs Terkels Wax Museum CD I think - and he sounded totally embarrassed about the whole thing, certainly very uncomfortable.

I don't believe that being unable to relate to people in that way is something he would do on purpose.

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: An Open Letter To Bob Dylan
From: Rusty Dobro
Date: 03 Sep 05 - 07:53 AM

I've enjoyed great gigs from Ry Cooder, Chuck Berry, Gary Moore, the Everly Brothers and (yes!) 1960's Dylan, whose total audience communication between them hardly amounted to a minute of my life, and I've also seen many lesser lights whose messages from the stage were a lot more interesting than their music. Oh, and a special mention for an octeganarian Les Paul, whose music formed an occasional interruption to a seemingly non-stop stream of hilarious jokes and anecdotes.

'All I suggest is that a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.....'