Dylan on 60 Minutes

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: number 6
Date: 08 Dec 04 - 06:26 PM

Funny ..... after all these years Bob seems to get people ranting. It's all just Bob. Take him as he is or leave him as he is. Personally I thank him for all the profound music that he has given.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Dec 04 - 05:07 PM

They miss their own youth, Sue. Either that or they're just jealous. That's how I figure it.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST,SueB
Date: 08 Dec 04 - 01:04 AM

Bradley is an ass. You can see why Dylan doesn't like to give interviews if it means answering inane questions from inanely grinning dillweeds like Bradley. I don't get the weirdly bitter criticisms of Dylan - what the hell do you want from the man? Does he owe you something? Would you have liked the interview better if he was wearing Dockers and a crewneck sweater from Old Navy? Sheesh.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 02:56 PM

Actually, he stole them all from me, Guest. :-) The deal was, he would have to put up with the fame, the fans, and the press, and the critics, and I would get off scot free. I have never regretted it.














(joke, obviously...)

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 02:12 PM

I understand what you are saying Peter. The reason why I never have more than a passing bemusement about all the Dylan hype is because he doesn't seem to have changed much over time, masked or not.

Someone mentioned Joni--she has changed a lot down through the years as a person, and as an artist. But Dylan just seems to be going through the same motions now as was 10 years ago, 20 years ago, all the way back to when he had his creative burst of songwriting.

Which when taken with the multiple masks and multiple personas and multiple personal histories he was generating in those days actually make me wonder if it was him that wrote the songs, or if he didn't steal them from some genius on the Iron Range or Dinkytown, and dump the body in a nearby river.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Peter T.
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 01:01 PM

The question of personae (when does the mask begin to stick permanently to the face?) is a big one for considering Dylan (and Yeats too, for that matter, who wrote better about it than anyone). I think I am baffled in an uninteresting way by Dylan now -- I compare him with someone like Yeats, or even the Reverend Gary Davis (now there was a complex guy in later years) -- maybe it is the opaqueness in the passivity that is hard to fathom. Think of someone like Son House in his eighties -- like some kind of demented hurricane.

Well, maybe it is an interesting puzzle after all. I sure pity the women in his life, though.   

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 12:58 PM

We didn't get the TV programme in the UK, but a couple of points for posters to mull over:

1. When Dylan was young he led a very uncomplicated life. Get up, eat, play, write, go to bed, that sort of thing. As the years, and wives, kids, houses, etc, have passed, his personal life must have been (still is?) pretty complicated. That takes time and involvement and surely must have impacted his concentration on his work. (Hey, and remember, most of us get to forget about work at 5.30pm).

2. He has written just about every song I started to write!! He may feel the same way. Maybe did about 20 years ago...

My twopenny worth. Oh, and by the way, anybody who isn't too impressed by his poetry should read "Last Thoughts On Woody Guthrie" (IMHO).

Pete

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 12:57 PM

That's an interesting question, PoppaGator. I tend to think that honesty about his name, roots, etc. is not essential, brecause they're not (or should not be) the main point of who he is and what he has to offer. He came up with a new name and some interesting fictions about his origins when he first got started, probably because he recognized that it would be hard to get a foot in the door as a middle-class Jewish kid from Hibbing. People would ask themselves why they should bother listening to him, in the belief that he should be defined by his resume, ethnicity, or social class. He could have argued that point at the outset, but first he needed people to pay attention. So he invented a name and persona that might help him be heard without the filter of his true-life origins.

As for the name, there's nothing new about that in show business. It used to be a pretty standard practice, especially if you were Jewish; just ask Ramblin' Jack, Jerry Lewis, or a host of others who did the same thing. It is also customary to take a new name at threshold moments in one's life: marriage (most women, at least until recently), religious conversion (Simon Peter, Muhammed Ali), etc. I think there's value in it, at least for some.

As for the biographical fictions, I think they served a purpose, and probably did allow him to communicate his artistic vision more directly, and therefore more honestly, than he otherwise might have done. Primarily because the various fictions (which he never bothered to keep straight) made him interesting, so people listened to him, and discovered the substance in his work. They might never have crossed that threshold if they thought he was just some suburban Minnesota kid who liked rock and roll. Also, it may have had some psychological impact on him as well; it's amazing what we can make ourselves believe, at least on some level, if it serves our purposes.

Once the initial threshold was passed, and significant numbers of people had started paying attention, he largely dispensed with the false autobiographical stuff (except in a humourous way; he never worked very hard at sustainging these fictions). I would argue that this predated his "artistic decline," to the extent that there was one, by a number of years. I think most of his audience knew he was Bobby Zimmerman from Hibbing, Minnesota before his most widely recognized masterpieces were produced.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: PoppaGator
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 12:01 PM

I had hoped a few others would have picked up on the question of Dylan's paradoxical "honesty." I alluded to it yesterday, and at least one person responded briefly. I've thought more about it, and would like to see what others have to say.

At the very time that Bob was most effectively hiding his true background and personal past, and living as a fictional character of his own creation, he was probably at his best in conveying some kind of "truth" in his songs.

That is, he was giving voice to a whole gestalt's worth of ideas than huge numbers of young people were sensing with varying degress of coherence, but that no one was yet able to express effectively. Is there some kind of cause-and-effect here, where a certain kind of dishonesty in one aspect of a life actually enables an artist to achieve a another kind of unique truth-telling in his creative work?

One thing Bob said in his interview was that he considered it important to be truthful to oneself and to God, but not necessarily to anyone else -- pointedly, NOT to the press and therefore, by extension, to the public at large. Personally, I believe truthfulness is much more important than that, but Bob's approach seems to have worked for him, on some level -- certainly artistically. Maybe on another level, for his personal happiness, it didn't work all that well.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 11:30 AM

I'd fairly much agree with that, although I think Dylan paints with a bit broader brush, so to speak.

Joni Mitchell is a fabulous songwriter and musician.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 11:07 AM

Joni Mitchell is on a par with Dylan on songwriting.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 10:55 AM

Very perceptive comments, Peter. I still stand by my original point, but I also agree with what you are saying. There are definitely some creative people who mature into the fullness of their craft as you so eloquently put it...

"you need to develop a taste for the bittersweet, like scotch; life and love..."

"The great artists get past the muddles of middledom, and burn with a late simple fire"

Oh yeah! You are so right, Peter. It happens with a few great artists and writers. It is the product of wisdom, and of a great deal of love. And with those come humility and compassion.

Dylan has managed it now and then, sporadically, it comes creeping through with songs like "Blind Willie McTell", "Jokerman", "Sweetheart Like You", "Every Grain of Sand"...with the whole album "Blood On The Tracks"...but he seems to then fall back into that odd passivity you speak of, and for long periods. Perhaps it is wisdom that he's lacking. Perhaps he lacks the energy to focus. Maybe his mind is getting clouded by alcohol or something. I don't know.

I do know that his recent book "Chronicles" has some utterly marvelous passages in it.

Leonard Cohen, by the way, is a songwriter whom I would say just kept getting better and better as he got older. And he was darned good when he started. Ian Tyson is another who has done wonderful writing later in life, with those cowboy songs he wrote (in the 80's or 90's?). They sit realer on him than most of the folk-pop stuff he wrote when he was young.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Peter T.
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 10:10 AM

Oh, I am glad he is out there working away.

I think that the crucial point is about changing gears in creativity as you get older. Dylan is famous for the "let it all pour out" method, which works really well for the gushing days of youth; but that does not work for the older writer. The older writer needs to be more, what is the word I want, crafty (craft-y). The creative spring works differently as you get older (turns into a river?). Dylan was always half-careful, half careless, in his perverse way -- it worked much better with the fusions of youth. I am sure he could craft some great songs if he would change gears and work really hard on them. You can see in some recent ones that he gets started on something good, and then loses it -- he always did that, God knows, but the younger kind of creativity can hold the process till the end because there is so much energy in the raw material. It carries you along over the lazy bits. You can't get away with that when you are older. It is a tipoff that Dylan still needs to parasitize other people's structures (he admits this), and the most interesting lyrics of the last few years were shamelessly borrowed from someone else's book).

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Steve Latimer
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 09:57 AM

I didn't see the interview, but I have to agree with Whistlestop.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST,Whistle Stop
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 09:23 AM

I disagree, Peter. I think Hawk has at least part of the answer, but I also think we should recognize that a lot of the greats -- in songwriting and other fields -- peak at a pretty young age. Einstein (who was mentioned in the interview) did, as did Edison. So did Elvis, Lennon/McCartney, Jagger/Richard, Townshend, and many others of Dylan's contemporaries. Maybe Buddy Holly and Hendrix did, too; we'll never know for sure. Ginsburg sure did. It's not universal by any means, but it's a pretty well established phenomenon.

Some of the people I admire most are those that persevere even when they and others recognize that their best years may be behind them. And Dylan is not just doing a Chuck Berry, playing the same old songs the same old way and collecting his paycheck at the end of the night. He is writing new songs (good ones in my opinion, whether or not they measure up to Blonde On Blonde), and he is putting them, and himself, out there for public scrutiny, and often for public ridicule. He knows, and admits (as few others do), that he has lost something. As he himself said, he could have retired at any point along the way, and his legacy would be secure. But he keeps trying, keeps creating, and keeps finding new gems, even if they don't shine as brightly as some of those he has found in the past. I respect him for it.

As for his manner of speaking? Sure, he sounds tired; I'm not surprised. This is a tough game he's in, and he's been playing it for over 40 years. So some people want him to be more animated; big deal. One thing he has always insisted on is being who he is, whether or not it's what some other people want him to be. I admire him for that, too.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 09:05 AM

Thanks PeterT, you summed it up well for me too.

Lack of humility, lack of self-awareness (especially at his age!), arrogance, stupidity, all sum up Dylan the man for me.

I don't buy the argument that all great artists achieve their height at an early age at all, and thanks for the examples.

The saddest part of all of it is Dylan just doesn't seem to care. I'm beginning to think Paul Simon may beat him out as the songwriter of the generation, in terms of great songs over time. Though I can't think of anything I loved of Simon's lately, he certainly had a great burst of activity mid-life that passed The Bob right on by. I expect we'll hear more great stuff from him too, before his day is done.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Peter T.
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 08:49 AM

I disagree, not completely, and not certainly about pop music, which has to be dopy and simple and about first love and cars. Frank Loesser, who wrote Guys and Dolls, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, and a host of others, wrote fabulous, worldrending songs, much better songs, when they were older. Stephen Sondheim is writing at the peak of his talents right now, in spite of Gypsy and West Side Story. It depends on the tone -- the cliche is right: you need to develop a taste for the bittersweet, like scotch; life and love are not all candy bars.

The great artists get past the muddles of middledom, and burn with a late simple fire: Yeats, Titian, Rembrandt. What I find interesting/depressing about Dylan is that he is going about it in the right way -- the return to the folk song tradition (read Greil Marcus again!), etc., the eclectic styles. But he has this odd passivity which comes over him, exemplified by the way he can stall for years. This is a way of going forward, but one does lose patience -- particularly with someone who can misread himself so completely. You would think that he might be getting some self-knowledge at his age (his book, which I have now read, is astonishingly well written and full of insights marred by these blank walls of pig-self-ignorance; and as someone said, lack of humility). Oh, well.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 03:00 AM

Excellent Hawk. The early work being so good really makes your point even stronger. Really good post man.......Almost makes up for the chump chimp crap.................almost............

Spaw

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 04 - 01:02 AM

I can tell you why Bob can't write anymore like he did in the early days...

He's not young and fresh and open anymore like he was at the start. There is a sense of newness in the young that fuels tremendous idealization and there's an innocence along with it that carries that idealized energy to the heights. People tend to lose that as they get older. They start second-guessing themselves instead of just expressing spontaneously from pure feeling without pre-judgement. Bob wrote that early stuff instinctively. Can you imagine how he idealized his early heroes (like Guthrie or Hank Williams or Ramblin' Jack)? Can you imagine the excitement with which he mastered the craft and ate up the material he was listening to, the thrill of absorbing work like Ramblin' Jack Elliot's (which Spaw alluded to, and it was the biggest influence on Dylan, for sure)? He was absolutely consumed with love of the musical traditions and techniques he was learning...

After awhile you start to come down to ground level. You get experienced. You start taking things for granted. You become more conscious of where you think you fit in and where you think you don't. If you're not very, very lucky you begin to get a bit jaded. You get the "been there, done that" feeling and it sucks the life out of you bit by bit. This is even more true for the very famous. Their fame destroys their innocence.

It happens with most people. It even happens with animals. Compare the behaviour of an old cat or dog to that of a young one. The young are excited about everything. The old are usually bored and world-weary. Does that sound like Bob Dylan now?

Bob wrote sheer magic at first, but it started slipping away as he began getting turned into a witness of his own position in the scheme of things. He started getting separated from the process instead of just surrendering to it and letting the wave carry him where it would.

You can only write stuff like that when you're completely lost in the process and swept away by it. When you step back and start evaluating it, it slips away.

The same thing happens in regard to romance, as the years go by. People get jaded and they start limiting their losses. They withdraw.

This is true at least for most people...

When he wrote the early protest material he was totally with it, but later he tried to detach from it, and still later he couldn't really do it any more. That's how it tends to go.

He's just like 99% of the rest of the human population in that respect.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Cluin
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 11:05 PM

Found it Jeremiah. It was on an old floppy kicking around in a drawer. These were just some of the contributions (plus the intro challenge):


Being aware of the great amount of creative talent on this list, I thought it might be fun to try some communal songwriting. I started this one but got distracted, so if anyone wants to add a verse or two, please feel free. Admittedly, it might not mean too much to our American friends who aren't subjected to the Bank of Montreal:


Come gather round Mbanx wherever you roam
And admit your campaign like a virus has grown
Your brochures and flyers have been flooding my home
I don't like the moves you're employing
So do me a favour and leave me alone
For your ads they are annoying

---Jim Stewart


I turned on the TV, imagine my shock
To hear children spewing your fake double-talk
You say that you care, but c'mon, it's a crock
With the profits you've been enjoying
You talk revolution as you turn back the clock
And your ads, they are annoying

---Chris McConnell               


You've got us real angry, cause your ads we despise
We don't understand why you tell us these lies
So please pay attention, or risk your demise
Bank allegiance ain't constantly changing
So back to the drawing board, give it one final try
Cause your ads, they need re-arranging.

---Chris Conway


If you want to do something to show that you care
Prove you think more of people than high market share
Interest paid for our savings just doesn't prepare
For our future with which you've been toying
As the rate for a mortgage grows too high to bear
Well, your ads, they are annoying

---Rick Deevey


Come, savers and spenders, throughout the land
And don't bother trying, you can't understand
Your cheques and your earnings are beyond your command
Your debt-load is what they're enjoying
It's a free-wheeling ship with its tillers unmanned
And the ads, they are annoying.

---Chris Sullivan


So remember, all of us average Joes
Won't follow your wolf dressed in Bob Dylan clothes
Your conscience cares nothin' for our jobs and our woes
Unless your fees you be changing
Reduce some of your profit that obscenely grows
Your adds need re-arranging!

---Bo Vandenberg


You use Natives and children and encourage trust,
But with mbanx service cha-rges, we'll soon go bust,
If you want our business, you'd best change your thrust,
For hypocritical words are just cloying,
To toy with our values is grossly unjust,
Oh, your ads, they are annoying.

---Beverlie

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 08:43 PM

Well, gol danged...

I ain't gonna get into no spittin' contest but just say what I feel. First of all, had it not been for Bob Dylan, I probably wouldn't have ever picked up a guitar...

Second, I enjoyed the interview very much.

Third, the P-Vine, who is no fan of Dylan's of folk music for that matter, sat and watched the entire interview and at the end of it made an interesting observation about it in saying some thing along the lines of: "I guess this would have been the way Einstien would have handled an interview." Hmmmmmm? That is telling...

Yeah, I thought he did very well but I'm a Dylan *nut*. I liked his frank honesty about writing songs. I understood it. I think any song writer would. It was a brutally honest answer... Maybe that's what folks don't like about Dylan. Underneath it all, he is masterfully but brutally honest...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 08:37 PM

I am an avid Dylan fan and spend a significant amount of time listening to his music. I looked forward to the interview and enjoyed it. However, I did not expect anything from it. I merely appreciated the opportunity see him and hear his voice. I wasn't disappointed. Dylan is Dylan. He is not going to change and the draw for me is not his personality it is really the music. For those of you that don't get his new stuff, he didn't write it for you. He wrote it for those of us who were not fortunate to experience him the first go-round. He is still good live, and his recent shows are better than those I saw 10 years ago. He is just a musician. Enjoy him while we still have him.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 08:07 PM

I have to address Ron here. One word--well, two. Eric Bogle. An accountant who is still writing wonderful and important---and more important--memorable--material.

His spoof on Dylan (very old) is a classic.

Yes---the teeth were bad. Though I never did notice Bradley's

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:48 PM

Ron,

Very perceptive of you.

Billy Bob Teeth are very cool. I thought it amazing that both Bob and Ed chose to wear theirs for this TV interview. I prized mine highly until a friend insisted I sell them my last pair. Instantly, I popped them out of my mouth, washed 'em off, and gave them to the lady.

Really, put B.B.T. into a search engine------and marvel.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:36 PM

Or poetry like Bob Kaufman. Or Anne Carson. Or so many other truly gifted poets who are poets (not songwriters) and contemporaries of Dylan.

Dylan was at one time a great songwriter. By his own admission, he ain't anymore. He was never a gifted poet. Only people who never read poetry believe that hype.

And here is what I can't figure out. Why can't Dylan still write great songs like he used to? I mean, many of the best songwriters down through the ages just got better with age, not worse.

So was I surprised to hear Dylan admit the obvious last night about his former songwriting glory years? No. But I found it very odd that he didn't seem to give a shit about the fact either. Like I said, not much to indicate that he is a very reflective person at all.

Which made me think that maybe selling out is the key. After you sell out, there isn't the same impetus to write as there was before he cynically sold himself out.

And his comments like "I can do other things now" (really Bob, like what?), and that he was still touring because it was his destiny/soul's purpose, just sounded empty, hollow, and sad--not at all genuine. Did anyone else notice that?

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:33 PM

PT used "counterstory." I think myth works in a number of cases as well. Bob is still trying to sell us a crafted story along the lines he wants us to believe. It's been working for him for years and I think he'll make it work awhile longer. When he dies the myth will grow to outrageous proportion.

Has he lost it? Hell, I'm amazed he ever had it.....or that anyone would, at least to write such powerful songs for an extended period. Take any three decent songs of Bob's and they're a career to many others. He can still wrtie but he's just another songwriter. I think that even he is amazed to some degree at the number and quality of his first 10 years.

Most of the mystique/myth/total bullshit stuff is still flowing along.......like the whole Woody thing. Listen to his playing, his voice, and his phrasing on those early albums. Bob wasn't trying to be Woody. He was trying to be Ramblin' Jack (who was trying to be Woody) but with ambition....and he pretty well succeeded. Ferchrissakes, Bob hardly ever saw Woody, let alone worship at his feet! The best flip side to that is that no one (IMNSHO) does early Dylan stuff better than Jack, including Bob!!!

It was Bob.....It was "60 Minutes."......And you expected what????

Spaw

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:14 PM

Better yet, let's see Dylan write poetry like Ginsburg. Not even close!

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:13 PM

Ron,
Let's see a folkie embrace an instrumentalist.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Peter T.
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:09 PM

I think Dylan is delusional -- he asks people to look at the songs more carefully and they will see that he wasn't a prophet -- like sure Bob, like Times They Are a Changing, Hard Rain, Gates of Eden, When the Ship Comes In.   I think he rejected the prophet pose after it started to really work -- I think he wisely worried about the nature of his gathering power -- but to believe that that wasn't what he was doing is nuts -- he may have told the counterstory so long that he now believes it, but he is still delusional.   Calling his Wailing Wall visit a "stunt" -- who does he think is going to believe that?

I think that the later music is deeply boring, including the stuff from the last five years or so. One or two flashes (the best parts plagiarized).

Still, a genius. Shave the mustache, Bob, if you want to get out of the Edgar Allan Poe movie!

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 07:06 PM

let's see an accountant write poetry like Dylan.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 06:59 PM

Perfect note there, PoppaGator!

I also won't argue with anyone calling The Bob a great songwriter back in the day. I might disagree on the more recent stuff though. I listened to the latest, the greatest, the Grammy winning in an Elvis outfit "Time Out of Mind" come back album, and admit to just not getting what all the brouhaha was about. I didn't find it nearly as good or interesting or musicially compelling as the Steely Dan come back album, for instance (I'm shooting for one of those apple comparisons here).

My personal interest in The Bob is no greater (and actually a lot lesser) than some other great MN musician/icon/music idol and homeys with roots here in MN--like The Artist and Judy Garland. At least the latter two could sing!

Maybe they invent all these stories about themselves because the truth about them is so bloody dull.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Justa Picker
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 06:48 PM

I've interviewed accountants with more charisma.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: PoppaGator
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 06:34 PM

Hey, I'm fascinated (perhaps unduly so) by The Bob, and I love much of his work, but I won't argue with anyone for calling him a liar.

He came to New York with a lot of made-up stories about himself, and he hid and denied the simple truth of his personal background long enough for a number of fictional "autobiographical" details to be widely published.

I suppose this can be defended as some sort of artisitic decision, not unlike renaming himself, but a certain degree of bad faith has to have been involved. Maybe that's when and how he bought himself enough bad karma to bring on the kind of fame that quickly became so uncomfortable for him to live with.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Steve-o
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 06:10 PM

...."After all his years jerking people's chains like he has, lying, misrepresenting himself, his work, and the work of others, it ain't like the dude don't have plenty to answer for..."- Who is this yo-yo GUEST?? Why don't you go find something important to do with your vitriol?!

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:46 PM

Like I said, Guest, knock yourself out... Have fun... I am. :-)

Pity that you couldn't get together with A.J. Weberman, the infamous "Dylanologist" who used to go through Bob's trash cans back in the late 60's...he was also looking for "PROOF!" of Bob's betrayal of his public. Bob got hold of Weberman one day and punched him out. Weberman probably went around for days afterward saying stuff like, "See this bruise under my eye? Bob Dylan hit me right here. See? For five bucks I'll let you touch it!"

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:37 PM

Guest, chill out! I'm speaking my own mind, just like you. You love to misinterpret what others are trying to discuss. If someone doesn't agree with you, you attack the messenger. I can't control what you say, but I can certainly hold up a mirror.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:28 PM

Ron, again your usual problem is believing you should be able to control what other people say, and how they say it. You can't.

Little Hawk, we aren't "reviling" The Bobster. We are talking about his interview on 60 Minutes, which was a snoozer. Big difference, even if not to the DDs.

Wesley S, the answer to your leather pants question is yes, and it is the same answer to that Victoria's Secret commercial!

Finally, last night Dylan said he not only dissed the media and jerked their chains, but he smugly and arrogantly admitted doing same to his fans, when his fame became an annoyance to him.

In my book, that makes the guy a user, and a jerk. Now I have proof to back up that claim!

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:22 PM

Did anyone notice that both Dylan and Bradley have really bad teeth? I hope Crest was not a sponsor of last nights show.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: PoppaGator
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:20 PM

The leather pants looked a lot smoother than the leather skin.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 05:20 PM

Hey, Guest. No sweat. Knock yourself out. Revile Bob mercilessly. I don't care. If you want a picture of Bob to throw darts at, I'll send you one... :-)

The reason we "Bob devotees" come onto these threads is amazingly simple: We're interested in the subject matter!

You might have noticed that I don't show up on threads about football...

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 04:59 PM

The really important critical question that no one has dared ask so far is :

Isn't Bob Dylan a little old to be wearing leather pants ? And what message is he trying to send to his generation ?

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 04:56 PM

Please guest, you give me too much credit for calling me a Dylan Devotee.

Yes, I saw the interview. It wasn't anything great. Bradley asked some pretty silly questions and I don't blame Dylan for his answers. Never have. He used the press, just like the press used him. It was a mutual "jerking of people's chains".

Nobody is saying you shouldn't criticize, but misguided criticism is a waste of time. If you read some of these comments, people are complaining for things he did NOT say. Dylan is what he is. Nothing more. You make claims that Dylan has lied and misrepresented himself and others.   If he was asked THOSE questions, perhaps your criticim owuld have some validity. Instead he was asked boring, mundane questions. Do we really care how long it took to write "Blowing in the Wind"? Is it necessary for him to give those kind of answers? Why do we EXPECT people to answer questions like that?

Likewise, if someone defends Dylan, you should not jump over the messenger. Just make a stronger case to defend your points - or at least have a point to make. Give us examples, not rhetoric.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 04:48 PM

To you Dylan devotees (Little Hawk, PoppaGator, Ron Olesko, et al) we aren't trying to trash your boy.

If we think the interview, which we took time out of our lives to watch, was dull, why shouldn't we say so? Why can't we have that kind of a conversation around this place, without the DD rushing in to defend the guy no matter what he does? This is SO silly!

Did you actually see the interview Ron?

Again, what exactly is the reason why the DDs of Mudcat can't let a single thread about Dylan go by without coming in like knights on white horses to save The Bob from criticism?

After all his years jerking people's chains like he has, lying, misrepresenting himself, his work, and the work of others, it ain't like the dude don't have plenty to answer for...

...and again, as entertainment, this interview was a dud. Boring. Nothing new under the sun, etc etc etc

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 04:27 PM

Wesley - "Nashville Skyline" (1968) was a departure into country music that was meant to throw a curve at his audience's expectations, but it wasn't a "bad album" as such. "Self-Portrait" (1970?) was an album deliberately concocted to demolish the "Voice of a generation" icon worship that was occurring around Bob. He figured his fans would mostly hate it, and hopefully would go away...

That said, there is still some good stuff on Self-Portrait...and there's some very poor stuff too. It's an odd hodge-podge of material.

"John Wesley Harding" (1967) was another major departure in style (after Blonde on Blonde), but it was a very good album.

So to answer your question...I think he deliberately calculated "Self-Portrait" to be received as a "bad album" and get people off his back.

Those who have the most stringent requirements and rigid expectations about their heroes (or goats) are the ones most likely to be disappointed...

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 04:13 PM

I'm just amazed that so many people are critics and are ready to pounce on Dylan because of his comments.   Who cares?   The man is 63 years old. Why hang him because of his actions when he was younger? Since the average age of many mudcatters is "older than dirt", I'm sure many of you would not care to be judged on things you said or did when you were in your early twenties. To call someone a hypocrit because of something they said 40 years ago is really smarmy.

People moan that Dylan is "mysterious" and "hidden", but then when he speaks they love to pounce on what he DOESN'T say and also complain that he is inarticulate.   Why don't you pay attention to the things he did say?   He was giving the rock version of Greta Garbo's "I want to be alone".

The man is not a messiah or a voice for a generation. He is a voice who happens to write good songs. End of story. I don't need to hear about his personal life.   Read the book, it said as much as he wants to share which is more than enough.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 03:38 PM

I remember hearing them say that - in order to help change the publics opinion about himself - that he wrote some bad albums. I wonder which ones those were ? Possibly one of my favorites ?

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Jeremiah McCaw
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 02:40 PM

Cluin - I was completely unaware of the parody; I'd be muchly interested in it.

Off on a tangent: I seem to recall a very short-lived commercial for some financial service that used a bit of Phil Ochs' "Changes". *sigh*

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 02:05 PM

I too found his comment about no longer being able to write the songs that everyone hails as "his best" to be revealing. The boring part of that statement though, is he seemed so unreflective about it.

Like I said, nothing we hadn't heard before. Dylan seemed mostly bored with the interview himself, so it is no surprise that others found him boring as well.

I guess for you Dylan devotees who hang on his every word, this was just another tasty fix. But from most peoples' perspectives, it seemed dull and not very illuminating of the man or his canon of work.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: Steve-o
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 02:01 PM

Yep, I was also surprised by all the negative reactions and whining. Can't imagine what these folks were expecting- a 15 minute interview that would reveal all the deep secrets and warm fuzzies we all long for in a music hero?? If you want to get a real sense of the man, go buy the book and read it! "I think his music is great- his persona the opposite"- there's a brilliant observation for ya.

Subject: RE: Dylan on 60 Minutes
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 06 Dec 04 - 11:36 AM

I'm in agreement with Whistle Stop

Art