Bob Dylan, My Friend, Is Blowin' In The Wind (and it follows the money)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-times-they-are-a-censored-bob-dylan-makes-first-appearance-in-china/2011/04/06/AFHNv8qC_story.html
I think this article is a nice way to introduce my views on Mr. Zimmerman. I consider myself a moderate fan, hardly as hard-core as many, and certainly not as obsessed as some have become. I own a couple dozen albums, listen to them from time, have a tremendous love for his earlier work, regret not seeing him perform in those days, and feel no real need to see him now. And I feel with Dylan, as I do with most artists, that there's a separation between their art and themselves. I don't need to admire/love/agree with them personally to enjoy what they create. Hell, I don't even have to like them or give a thought to their personal life. Oh, occasionally, someone becomes so villainous that I begin to get creeped out by even such a mild association as listening to their records, (Michael Jackson and Gary Glitter approach this level). But otherwise, I'm just not that involved, (even my boy Springsteen, I try not to get too worked up over, in terms of his personal life). What this means, when it comes to Dylan, is that I just don't get all twisted up when he does something,, but the reason for my passivity might in turn insult him. I think he's a performer. Pure and simple. There was an interview many years ago in Britain, (I think) where he was asked by some clueless reporter to define himself as a folk or protest singer, and he (jokingly) replied that he was just a "song & dance man". I don't think it was a joke. I do think he's a brilliant poet, perhaps the finest of the Boomer generation. And I think he is (or was) able to almost effortlessly take what was happening with and to people around him and beautifully capture it in song. Where I differ from his disciples is that I think he's almost an idiot savant of our culture - he wanted to be successful, and he had this extraordinary ability, and that was it - no real commitment to anything other than his own success. In other words, he's just like most other and lesser performers - he's just a hundred times better than them. One in a billion, tallent-wise. But he has no more commitment to a given style or movement than those lesser mortals do. When it we commerically convenient, he was a rebellious folkie. When the Beatles put a crimp on that, he became a rocker, and then was into country rock, and then lounge-y disco (listen to the Budokan album), and then born-again right winger, etc. etc. It goes on - his tawdry using of Joan Baez, his pathological lying about his background in the early Greenwich Village days, his (electric) glove on the ground performance at Newport, the playing at casinos, religious conversions back and forth, even a Christmas album. Each time leaving the fanatics wondering and frequently crying sell-out, other times they might say he's "expanding" or "exploring". Yea, whatever. I know what he's really doing - he's trying to market himself and gain a new and/or bigger audience. He's trying to make money. That's what song & dance men do. That's what they're really committed to. Sinatra and dozens of other old Vegas hacks covered Beatles songs - a group they despised. Dino even added psychedelia to his hit, Houston. The list goes on and on. And old rockers have frequently done the same thing "selling out" their original sound in (frequently desperate) efforts to remain "relevant", (I'm looking at you, Neil Young, thanks for "Trans").
So, what does all this mean? I'll tell you. Just enjoy the music that you want to. It's separate from the people that created it, (usually). I can't get worked up personally about Dylan, pro or con. But there are tunes of his that are part of my DNA. That's what's important - not Bobby. I will say I think it's a pity that he feels the need to make so many extra millions of dollars that he's willing to kowtow to a bunch of people I consider fascist thugs. But so be it. And one sentence in this article really brings that home:
"For many of the Chinese fans in the audience, the concert was the chance to see an American icon in person — even if they didn’t understand the songs or even know much about his legacy." Ha! Neither does Bob....
I think this article is a nice way to introduce my views on Mr. Zimmerman. I consider myself a moderate fan, hardly as hard-core as many, and certainly not as obsessed as some have become. I own a couple dozen albums, listen to them from time, have a tremendous love for his earlier work, regret not seeing him perform in those days, and feel no real need to see him now. And I feel with Dylan, as I do with most artists, that there's a separation between their art and themselves. I don't need to admire/love/agree with them personally to enjoy what they create. Hell, I don't even have to like them or give a thought to their personal life. Oh, occasionally, someone becomes so villainous that I begin to get creeped out by even such a mild association as listening to their records, (Michael Jackson and Gary Glitter approach this level). But otherwise, I'm just not that involved, (even my boy Springsteen, I try not to get too worked up over, in terms of his personal life). What this means, when it comes to Dylan, is that I just don't get all twisted up when he does something,, but the reason for my passivity might in turn insult him. I think he's a performer. Pure and simple. There was an interview many years ago in Britain, (I think) where he was asked by some clueless reporter to define himself as a folk or protest singer, and he (jokingly) replied that he was just a "song & dance man". I don't think it was a joke. I do think he's a brilliant poet, perhaps the finest of the Boomer generation. And I think he is (or was) able to almost effortlessly take what was happening with and to people around him and beautifully capture it in song. Where I differ from his disciples is that I think he's almost an idiot savant of our culture - he wanted to be successful, and he had this extraordinary ability, and that was it - no real commitment to anything other than his own success. In other words, he's just like most other and lesser performers - he's just a hundred times better than them. One in a billion, tallent-wise. But he has no more commitment to a given style or movement than those lesser mortals do. When it we commerically convenient, he was a rebellious folkie. When the Beatles put a crimp on that, he became a rocker, and then was into country rock, and then lounge-y disco (listen to the Budokan album), and then born-again right winger, etc. etc. It goes on - his tawdry using of Joan Baez, his pathological lying about his background in the early Greenwich Village days, his (electric) glove on the ground performance at Newport, the playing at casinos, religious conversions back and forth, even a Christmas album. Each time leaving the fanatics wondering and frequently crying sell-out, other times they might say he's "expanding" or "exploring". Yea, whatever. I know what he's really doing - he's trying to market himself and gain a new and/or bigger audience. He's trying to make money. That's what song & dance men do. That's what they're really committed to. Sinatra and dozens of other old Vegas hacks covered Beatles songs - a group they despised. Dino even added psychedelia to his hit, Houston. The list goes on and on. And old rockers have frequently done the same thing "selling out" their original sound in (frequently desperate) efforts to remain "relevant", (I'm looking at you, Neil Young, thanks for "Trans").
So, what does all this mean? I'll tell you. Just enjoy the music that you want to. It's separate from the people that created it, (usually). I can't get worked up personally about Dylan, pro or con. But there are tunes of his that are part of my DNA. That's what's important - not Bobby. I will say I think it's a pity that he feels the need to make so many extra millions of dollars that he's willing to kowtow to a bunch of people I consider fascist thugs. But so be it. And one sentence in this article really brings that home:
"For many of the Chinese fans in the audience, the concert was the chance to see an American icon in person — even if they didn’t understand the songs or even know much about his legacy." Ha! Neither does Bob....
posted by mendip at
3:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home