Let's play a little game of "Guess Who?" I'll write down some song lyrics, and you can guess what really horrible song writer wrote them.
The first lyrics are:
If I ever lose her I will go insane.
I go half crazy when she calls my name.
When she says babababababy I-I-I love you
There ain't nothing in the world I wouldn't do.
The same writer wrote this following little ditty:
If not for you
Babe, I couldn't find the door,
Couldn't even see the floor,
I'd be sad and blue
If not for you.
I know what you're thinking. Lindsay Lohan lyrics are as painful to read as they are to listen to. Except these lyrics aren't Lindsay Lohan song lyrics. Or Britney Spears. Or any modern pop singer. Nope.
They're Bob Dylan lyrics.
Maybe the reason Bob Dylan mumbles all the time is so people will always think he's a genius at writing. The mumble method can really be beneficial. Once, when I took a computer class, we were allowed to work in groups for a project. Each student had to fill out an individual worksheet, but you were all allowed to write an identical answer as the rest of your group mates. One kid in my group had chicken scratch for handwriting (the written version of mumbling) and received a 100 for a grade. My handwriting was entirely legible, and I received a 90. We wrote the exact same thing.
This is pretty much how Bob Dylan gets by in life. I don't know a single "expert" in the field of music who doesn't call Dylan a master at writing. Maybe the problem is that these are music experts and not writing experts? Take away the melody, the harmony, the music and he becomes a mumbling man who you'd cross the street to avoid if you saw him walking in Boston. Maybe packaging is all that matters. The scruffy look, the frazzled hair, the sheer inability to smile--it all makes Bob look like some starving artist, so he earns "cred, baby."
In a way, packaging is no different than what the Pussycat Dolls get by on. They can't sing, just like Bobby can't sing. They can't write lyrics, just like Bobby can't write lyrics. They're pre-packaged to make people enjoy them, like a Lean Cuisine frozen dinner. And because people enjoy the packaging of Bob, we're told he's good. (Maybe not quite Lean Cuisine for him. Bob seems more like a Hungry Jack frozen dinner.)
Here's one last gem from Bob:
I don't think I want this anymore
As she drops the ring to the floor.
She says to herself: 'You've left before.'
This time you will stay gone, that's for sure.
Awww, sorry. That's a Pussycat Dolls' lyric. I get them confused a lot with Bob Dylan these days.
Hello, Quin here, FSC alum from the Mental Health Counseling Masters Program and HUGE Bob Dylan fan. Therefore, while I will admit a bias towards Bob Dylan, I also know how to keep an even keel in regards to most things as I need to in my chosen field. I will concede that both of the lyrics you quoted are of Dylan's lesser songs and lesser albums. "New Morning" is a serviceable country album with sweet and simple songs that serve their purpose, hence "If Not For You". However, it is certainly not among his top 10 albums and it might only barely break his top 20 albums. "Ugliest Girl in the World" comes from his album "Down in the Groove" which is widely regarded as Bob Dylan's WORST album, and it was released in what is without question his WORST decade as a musician/writer. And yet, even in his worst decade, he churned out such brilliant pieces of music like "Jokerman", "Most of the Time" and "Blind Willie McTell". When someone has a career as long and prolific as Bob Dylan, there are bound to be clunkers in his canon, but to equate his lyrical abilities to the Pussycat Dolls completely invalidates any point against Dylan you make because your initial premise is so outlandish and foolhardy! First of all, the Pussycat Dolls don't even write their material so the comparison is inherently flawed. Second of all, Bob Dylan's public persona is not crafted and marketed to appeal to a demographic like the Pussycat Dolls are; Dylan's persona is ever-shifting and seemingly impenetrable partially because HE presents it that way, but mostly because his fans choose to project whatever image they want him to have and Dylan pretty much just lets that happen. I know there are many Dylan detractors, but even those that find him overrated would cite his voice or guitar-playing as his shortcomings, BUT NOT HIS WRITING!!!!! This article reeks of deliberate contrarianism where your sole purpose isn't to state a well-thought out opinion or position, but to go against the duly held notion that Dylan is a great writer simply because it would make your position unique and different from most other rational people. If that was your purpose, then congratulations because I think you are alone in your position that Dylan is no better than the Pussycat Dolls. I will therefore close this comment with lyrics from one of the greatest rock songs ever written: "How does it feel?! How does it feel?! To be on your own..."
ReplyDeleteHello there,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment. While I respect where you're coming from (and appreciate to see your knowledge of Dylan is superior to most I've known; very impressive), I still believe Bob Dylan is immensely overrated as a songwriter. My belief isn't thrown out there arbitrarily to provoke a response. It's simply a personal belief, though my belief isn't without merit or quite as outlandish as one might suspect. And while I'm delightfully irrational often in life, this argument of mine was created during a lucid and quite logical moment.
My belief partly stems from the fact that Bob Dylan has routinely plagiarized. In 2006, Rolling Stone magazine pointed out six different situations (that they've caught so far) in which Dylan lifted a lyric from another source. (And we're not talking about some obvious sampling like P.Diddy.) If an English major plagiarized that much they'd be kicked out of college, not praised for their writing skill. As a curious side note, Dylan sued Hootie & the Blowfish for vaguely lifting a line from one of his songs (so he said). Now, I love double standards as much as the next guy, but Bobby needs to learn to stop calling kettles black when his pot is blacker than most.
Secondly, one of the members of the Pussycat Dolls actually does contribute songwriting to many songs for the group. (Whether she should admit to that is another question.) Thus, the argument to compare their lyrics with Dylan's is valid...writer vs. writer. His writing just came during a time of upheaval throughout American society. Take his most noteworthy works away from the time it was penned and take away the name associated with the work, and simply see it as a piece of writing on its own merits. Many analysts of writing would argue whoever wrote the work was rather limited in scope and depth. But because we associate the words with someone often told to be a master we instantly glorify the work without truly standing back to observe the work on its own.
But the idea that Dylan hasn't created a persona to be marketed to a demographic is somewhat being disingenuous. Dylan has always marketed himself as a visionary in touch with the plight of the common folk, like Bruce Springsteen minus the gym membership. That very act is in itself a marketing gimmick no different than the Pussycat Dolls uber-pop that is so sugary it gives us all cavities. Just because Dylan's appeal is more nuanced and "artistic" in its approach doesn't negate the act. People promote themselves every day in every public moment they have, whether or not they're aware of their self-promotion.
Bob isn't perfect at writing. Not even close, despite his renown. As he wrote in 1981 on "Ain't No Man Righteous":
"Talk about perfection, I ain't never seen none."
Thanks for your take though. It's always appreciated!
Oh my, where to begin. First of all, let me just say that you are a very good writer and your arguments are posed well enough to please Dylan detractors and possibly even convince casual fans that Dylan is overrated as a writer. However, I am no casual fan and I'm afraid I must now counter each and every one of your arguments!
ReplyDeleteLet me first address your assertion that Dylan has plagiarized. First of all, I would like to know which six songs Dylan has been accused of plagiarizing. If these songs were written in the early sixties during his "folk-singer" phase, then the accusation of plagiarizing doesn't really stick. You see, it is part of the folk tradition that artists within the genre take pre-existing tunes and put their own spin on these tunes. Dylan did indeed use some of these tunes as the musical conduit for his own lyrics, such as using the classic folk song "Scarborough Fair" as the template for three of his finest songs in that era: "Girl From North Country", "Boots of Spanish Leather", and "It Ain't Me, Babe". The only one of these songs that has even a slight LYRICAL resemblance to "Scarborough Fair" is "Girl From North Country", but that song's lyrics are still largely original. And even if Dylan lifted more lyrics from these classic folk songs, it would technically not be plagiarizing because the bulk of these songs were never copywrited!
Now if I may address your ludicrous assertion that Dylan is only regarded as a great writer because of how lauded he is by critics. I find this position humorous because it is actually contradicted by your first assertion that Dylan plagiarizes. The primary source you use to support the point that Dylan plagiarizes is one of the very magazines that often lauds Dylan--THEIR MAGAZINE NAME IS PARTIALLY INSPIRED BY A DYLAN SONG FOR CRYIN' OUT LOUD! So why, pretell, would this magazine claim Dylan plagiarized a few times? Also, why would this magazine condone one of its critics to begin a review of the 1970 Dylan album Self-Portrait with the line, "What is this shit?"? I thought Rolling Stone's job was to prop Dylan up as an amazing writer so that no one would actually acknowledge for themselves that Dylan was in fact a mediocre writer. I guess critics, like most thinking people, judge Bob Dylan on his work from album to album. It just so happens that Dylan released nary a bad album until the aforementioned one from 1970, thus giving the impression of group-think amongst critics that Dylan was brilliant when in fact, each album was deemed excellent on its own merits. Ahem, moving on...
Your reassertion that Dylan created a persona strictly to be marketed to a demographic is maddeningly ignorant. If you said that Dylan has cultivated a public persona that is different from his real self, then I would absolutely agree. However, if he was pandering to a demographic, he would have never "gone electric" or "gone country" or "gone born-again." Dylan has never let a demographic dictate how he conducts himself, he does as he pleases and lets others think what they want to think. His public persona is like a rorschach test in that each person sees something different: I see someone who is defiantly original and you see someone who overrated and phony. Neither opinion is wrong, per se, but it is wrong to say his persona panders to a demographic because he has no demographic--the people who love Dylan are as varied as they are numerous!
In conclusion, Bob Dylan is not perfect and he spent a good portion of his career trying to convince his folk-disciples of this fact. Dylan did this by constantly reinventing himself--not for his fans, but for himself--because "he not busy being born is busy dying." I'll let you look up the Dylan song I culled that quote from and when you do, I dare you to tell me that the man responsible for that song is merely mediocre.
QR
You wanted facts, and I'm happy to oblige your request.
ReplyDeleteA Dylan poem from his youth is a near-verbatim copy of a Canadian singer’s song from 1949 (I can’t create hyperlinks in the comments section. This is a state school. We’re a low-rent operation.):
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2009/05/21/bob-dylan-accused-of-plagiarism-over-song-little-buddy-115875-21376831/
Then there is the Rolling Stone article from 2006 I referred to previously, which I found through their website. The link:
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2006/09/15/bob-dylans-greatest-thefts/
It should also be noted that Rolling Stone's founder--an ardent Dylan supporter--is not in charge of day to day article publishing. The journalists who write for Rolling Stone are not denied the right to publish articles on favored artists even if their publisher and founder is a die-hard fan. Just as newspapers try to keep a division between the editorial and journalistic side of the operation, so do magazines. Rolling Stone is no different.
I digress. Need we be reminded of the time Dylan “borrowed” heavily from a little known Japanese book that came to light in 2003? (Story from the Wall Street Journal saved for posterity at a Cal State University site:
http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/plagiarbk010.htm)
These links cover eight instances of Dylan’s plagiarism. If we dismiss Rolling Stone’s story, there are still two instances of Dylan plagiarizing. In the world of English majors, that’s two times too many. In the world of English majors that means you’re kicked out of college, not being praised as “someone mastering their craft.” Oh, and each of these instances was a case of copyright infringement.
As for Dylan’s persona, let me put it this way: many people think I’m a smartass. (Or any other possible variation on the word.) Do I deliberately tell people I’m a smartass? No. Do I tell them to believe that? No. But do I do anything to dispel the notion I’m a smartass? No. Neither does Dylan. Passive action can still be an action, and Dylan has mastered it.
And as for Dylan not having a demographic, this is an easy matter. According to quantcast.com, Bob’s own website is visited by: White people 90% of the time, those holding college degrees or graduate degrees 61% of the time, by those making over $60,000 a year 50% of the time, and those over the age of 35 64% of the time. All of those numbers are well outside the norm for national averages of the population. The people who tend to visit a website also tend to be concert-goers by and large. So, Bob has a demographic. It’s rich, educated, white people. There's no shame in that. Just a fact.
Thanks for your feelings on the matter though. I'd just appreciate it if Bob gave a little credit to others once in awhile. If he did that, 90% of my argument would go out the window.