Bob Dylan - Nobel Prize for Literature

Bob24

leakyboots wrote: »

He's removed all mention of it from his website now apparently

He's probably smart enough to know that giving him the price was more of a political statement to make more people feel like they appreciate literature than a real recognition that his writing is superior to other potential contenders, and still unsure about how to handle it.

He's a very good artist, but if his lyrics are what is considered world leading literature nowadays, it is a massive redefinition of what literature means (presented in isolation from the music, there is no way a literature expert and enthusiasts would honestly choose his lyrics as their top pick ahead most leading contemporary poets and novelists).

To be fair to him the Nobel committee has put him in front of a difficult decision. Whatever he does about the prize will attract criticism.

Tombo2001

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Can somebody post some genius. Genuine question. Some thing that stands as a poem.

This is a trite for instance.

How many roads must a man walk down
Before you call him a man?
How many seas must a white dove sail
Before she sleeps in the sand?
Yes, and how many times must the cannon balls fly
Before they're forever banned?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind
The answer is blowin' in the wind.

.

The question is: if you never heard the song and found it in a book of children's poetry (10-12) you'd have to be a harsh critic. The song is good though but forget the song. This wasn't a music award.

Its a very powerful political statement that has to be set in context of the civil rights movement of the early 1960s in the US.

As it happens, it also inspired Sam Cooke to write 'A Change is Gonna Come'...

From the New Yorker:

In a story that has come to symbolize the ways in which American popular music intersected with and helped sustain the civil-rights movement, Cooke was motivated to write “A Change Is Gonna Come” by another sixties anthem, Bob Dylan’s “Blowin’ in the Wind.” When he first heard that song, Peter Guralnick writes in 2005’s “Dream Boogie: The Triumph of Sam Cooke,” he “was so carried away with the message, and the fact that a white boy had written it, that . . . he was almost ashamed not to have written something like that himself.”

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-unlikely-story-of-a-change-is-gonna-come

The lyrics are simple and forceful, and need to be seen for what they are. Its not a nursery rhyme.

Tombo2001

Bob24 wrote: »

He's probably smart enough to know that giving him the price was more of a political statement to make more people feel like they appreciate literature than a real recognition that his writing is superior to other potential contenders, and still unsure about how to handle it.

He's a very good artist, but if his lyrics are what is considered world leading literature nowadays, it is a massive redefinition of what literature means (presented in isolation from the music, there is no way a literature expert and enthusiasts would honestly choose his lyrics as their top pick ahead most leading contemporary poets and novelists).

To be fair to him the Nobel committee has put him in front of a difficult decision. Whatever he does about the prize will attract criticism.

I think if you are going to compare his lyrics to poems written on paper; of course it wont stand up.

In the same way that if you put a Paul Muldoon into a folk song; that wont come out well either.

As a writer of folksongs, he is clearly of lasting artistic merit.

So the thing is; do you see folk music as being part of the literary canon or not.

You don't. The Nobel Prize committee does.

Bob24

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I think if you are going to compare his lyrics to poems written on paper; of course it wont stand up.

In the same way that if you put a Paul Muldoon into a folk song; that wont come out well either.

As a writer of folksongs, he is clearly of lasting artistic merit.

So the thing is; do you see folk music as being part of the literary canon or not.

You don't. The Nobel Prize committee does.

Yes and if you read my post this is exactly what I said:

Bob24 wrote: »

He's a very good artist, but if his lyrics are what is considered world leading literature nowadays, it is a massive redefinition of what literature means

Basically they are trying to make literature less elitist and more approachable by extending the definition of what literature is. I am not sure lowering the standard for what is asked from the public (a very good song is easier to listen to than a very good piece of writing is to read) is serving the literary cause.

Having said that the lyrics themselves can of course be called literature if they stack-up purely based on the writing, but the music and the singing isn't part of how to compare them to other contenders for a literature prize.

GerB40

Personally I'm a Bob Dylan fanatic and I can see why his music, or more precisely, his lyrics, are seen as literature. While I'm delighted to see him being recognised for his almost superhuman use of the English language, having a musican win a Nobel prize opens the floodgates for any musician that has made a lyrical impact on music. For example, Paul McCartney and Seamus Heaney spoke highly of Eminem. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/jul/01/highereducation.news There's no doubt that Eminem has made huge waves with his lyrics but could rap be considered Nobel worthy?

Dirty Dingus McGee

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I think if you are going to compare his lyrics to poems written on paper; of course it wont stand up.

In the same way that if you put a Paul Muldoon into a folk song; that wont come out well either.

As a writer of folksongs, he is clearly of lasting artistic merit.

So the thing is; do you see folk music as being part of the literary canon or not.

You don't. The Nobel Prize committee does.

But it is the Nobel Prize for literature then surely his lyrics should stand up to great poetry if they are being considered for the Nobel Prize for Literature.

Harvey Normal

Bob Dylan on Saint Nicholas.

Who's got a beard
That's long and white?
Santa's got a beard
That's long and white

Who comes around
On a special night?
Santa comes around
On a special night

Special night
Beard that's white

Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Santa Claus

Realt Dearg Sec

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Bob Dylan on Saint Nicholas.

Who's got a beard
That's long and white?
Santa's got a beard
That's long and white

Who comes around
On a special night?
Santa comes around
On a special night

Special night
Beard that's white

Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Santa Claus

TS Eliot (Nobel Laureate 1948) on a cat:

The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat:
If you offer him pheasant he would rather have grouse.
If you put him in a house he would much prefer a flat,
If you put him in a flat then he'd rather have a house.
If you set him on a mouse then he only wants a rat,
If you set him on a rat then he'd rather chase a mouse.
Yes the Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat--
And there isn't any call for me to shout it:
For he will do
As he do do
And there's no doing anything about it!

Elliott S

It's a shame that Dylan's voice puts so many people off. That voice, just no.

Harvey Normal

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Bob Dylan on Saint Nicholas.

Who's got a beard
That's long and white?
Santa's got a beard
That's long and white

Who comes around
On a special night?
Santa comes around
On a special night

Special night
Beard that's white

Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Santa Claus

Ted Hughes wrote awful doggerel about the Bronte sisters bare arses. He was wise enough not to show it to anybody, but it was found in his papers after he died. It doesn't mean he wasn't a worthy Poet Laureate.

On the other hand, I think Ezra Pound wrote some of the most unpeakably stupid poetry of the 20th century, whose complexity attracted academic interest, because everyone thought there was something very brilliant hiding within. As Pound is now falling out of fashion, people are waking up to the fact that he was faking most of it. Ditto his friend, James Joyce, in Finnegan's Wake. He's pulling the leg of academe.

Mr Zimmerman is the poetic son of Ezra Pound. Pound tried to be the voice of America, but was held back by his willful obscurantism and frankly, his inferior grasp of the English language. Dylan succeeded Pound, and succeeded where Pound failed: in his authenticity. Poetry must be authentic, above all else. Dylan has authenticity in spades. He sounds like his lyrics: mad and ragged, exhausted with truth.

I'm delighted with the decision to award Dylan the Nobel prize. If Ezra Pound deserved it, it would be a travesty to not give it to Bob Dylan.

GLaDOS

Mozart wrote a song called "Lick me in the arse".

That doesn't make him any less of a genius.

Bob24

GLaDOS wrote: »

Mozart wrote a song called "Lick me in the arse".

That doesn't make him any less of a genius.

What's the point though?

Mozart probably had fun doing that but hardly thought he was going to get recognition as a great contributor of literature for it. What he is recognised for is his music (and the question is not whether Dylan is or isn't a genius, more whether is work one of the very few best contributions to the field of litterature in the past 50 years).

Realt Dearg Sec

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Ted Hughes wrote awful doggerel about the Bronte sisters bare arses. He was wise enough not to show it to anybody, but it was found in his papers after he died. It doesn't mean he wasn't a worthy Poet Laureate.

On the other hand, I think Ezra Pound wrote some of the most unpeakably stupid poetry of the 20th century, whose complexity attracted academic interest, because everyone thought there was something very brilliant hiding within. As Pound is now falling out of fashion, people are waking up to the fact that he was faking most of it. Ditto his friend, James Joyce, in Finnegan's Wake. He's pulling the leg of academe.

Mr Zimmerman is the poetic son of Ezra Pound. Pound tried to be the voice of America, but was held back by his willful obscurantism and frankly, his inferior grasp of the English language. Dylan succeeded Pound, and succeeded where Pound failed: in his authenticity. Poetry must be authentic, above all else. Dylan has authenticity in spades. He sounds like his lyrics: mad and ragged, exhausted with truth.

I'm delighted with the decision to award Dylan the Nobel prize. If Ezra Pound deserved it, it would be a travesty to not give it to Bob Dylan.

You're absolutely wrong about Joyce. But the basic premise is right.

Overlooking Joyce for the nobel has basically discredited it forever in my eyes. Especially when you see some of the non entities they gave it to during his lifetime.

Realt Dearg Sec

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

You're absolutely wrong about Joyce

" bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk! "

I am unrepentant. Finnegan's Wake is a prank.

The rest of Joyce is mostly magnificent, except the showy-off bits of Ulysses and A Portrait.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Elliott S wrote: »

It's a shame that Dylan's voice puts so many people off. That voice, just no.

Song writing is his talent. I think the best versions of many of his songs have been covers by other artists.

Realt Dearg Sec

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

" bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk! "

I am unrepentant. Finnegan's Wake is a prank.

The rest of Joyce is mostly magnificent, except the showy-off bits of Ulysses and A Portrait.

We are off topic here unfortunately, but from literally years of studying the wake, is definitively, demonstrably, not a prank. Or at least, not just a prank. The prank element of it isn't a mark against it...

Even the example you give, it's not a trick, it's just thunder. It's no different than any onomatopoeic effect, except it's also a pun.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Elliott S

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Song writing is his talent. I think the best versions of many of his songs have been covers by other artists.

I know, my point was that some probably have never found out how talented he is because of his voice.

Choochtown

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Bob Dylan on Saint Nicholas.

Who's got a beard
That's long and white?
Santa's got a beard
That's long and white

Who comes around
On a special night?
Santa comes around
On a special night

Special night
Beard that's white

Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Must be Santa
Santa Claus

Except that that song was written by 2 gentlemen by the names of Hal Moore and Bill Fredericks back when Dylan was still a teenager.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Nobody suggested that Ezra Pound was Bob Dylan's biggest literary influence.

I'm talking about the American voice, and Dylan having captured it by doing what Pound never could manage (despite his confident denials of this): being authentic.

A lot of people think of Pound as high literature and Dylan as just a folk singer, and really, to my mind, that's quite wild. It illustrates a certain ignorance, a failure to examine the work critically and without preconceptions of what literature ought to looks and sound like.

Choochtown

Elliott S wrote: »

It's a shame that Dylan's voice puts so many people off. That voice, just no.

I must be in a minority here but I absolutely love Dylan's voice and how it has aged with him. Just to compare the Dylan voice on Freewheelin' with that on Nashville Skyline to that on Infidels to the aged voice of his more recent recordings, is like listening to different singers all of whom believe in what they're doing.

To give an example of lyrics from one of his lesser known songs ...

Got to have your own harem when you come in the door
Got to play your harp until your lips bleed.
They say that patriotism is the last refuge
To which a scoundrel clings
Steal a little and they throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they make you king
There's only one step down from here, baby
It's called the land of permanent bliss
What's a sweetheart like you doing in a dump like this?

I can't imagine anyone else who (a) could have written that and (b) could have spat those lyrics out with the vitriol mixed with humour like Dylan did.

An absolute genius in my opinion.

Star_Nupa

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Song writing is his talent. I think the best versions of many of his songs have been covers by other artists.

Just...NO.

Harvey Normal

GLaDOS wrote: »

Mozart wrote a song called "Lick me in the arse".

That doesn't make him any less of a genius.

It doesn't make him less of s genius because he did other stuff that was genius.


I asked for evidence of Dylan's genius. Not seeing it.

Holograph

Thought it was a joke, but Mozart actually wrote a piece called Lick Me In The Arse. That is one of the best things I've ever heard of.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Realt Dearg Sec

Harvey Normal wrote: »

It doesn't make him less of s genius because he did other stuff that was genius.


I asked for evidence of Dylan's genius. Not seeing it.

We get it, you don't think he's great. I could post any number of his songs (Shelter From the Storm, there's one!) and you'll just say "that isn't genius". I'm not sure what that avenue of argument actually opens up. I happen to think that a lot of Harold Pinter's work is absolute trumped up sensationalist shock garbage masquerading as insightful literature. A fan of it might feel very differently and make an argument to that effect. But I'm betting there wasn't a boards after hours thread about it. The point here is not whether you or I think he's a genius (whatever that means), or at least it's not the point that makes it interesting. What's interesting is the question of whether Dylan's work constitutes literature or not in the first place. So the question is whether his work in some way changed our conception of the literary, or of the relationship between music and literature. Or whether the actual decision of the Nobel committee seeks to change our conception of the literary. I think that's what makes the decision an important one. That, and the fact that Dylan is of much wider cultural importance than virtually any other winner in the history of the prize, which is, when it comes down to it, the only actual reason this debate is taking place at all.

It seems to me whether individuals think he's great or not is less relevant in that context. Now that might seem a bit dismissive. I'm really not trying to say that the question of whether he is a great writer or not is irrelevant, although the way you frame the argument really does seem to preclude any actual meaningful discussion. You clearly don't like him. But that doesn't mean he isn't a great writer, any more than my opinion changes the importance of Harold Pinter to the history of modern drama.

I haven't heard anything as to why they gave him the prize, but my feeling is that it is about how his work blends the literary and the musical. To ask whether his songs would stand alone as poems is to miss the point. Shelter from the Storm has great lyrics but the evocation of a feeling of lost love and regret and bittersweet nostalgia has as much to do with the strummy bits between the words as it does the words itself. Obviously that implies it is a musical, not a literary effect, but the point for me is that the feeling conjured here is as much literary as musical. These effects aren't separable. That isn't unique to Dylan, but he does it more masterfully than others who might have the same kind of literary effect in mind when creating their work (Leonard Cohen, Lou Reed, whoever). In historical terms, Dylan's music harks back to other eras in which poetry and music were not separable artistic practices. Whether that be minstrelsy, or the poetry of the ancients, or whatever. But they are so vitally of their age, they didn't just reflect but also helped to shape the era in which his best work was produced, to an extent that no other writer I can think of has done. That alone is a remarkable accomplishment.

His singing is part of that. Lots of people dismissing his voice but to me his voice is so important to the moods and worlds he creates, it's a voice from before radio dictated that every voice had to meet the same standards, there is no cover of Shelter From the Storm that captures the same sense of resignation, sadness and defiance that his raspy voice conveys. His voice collapsed over the years like most people's do (not Leonard Cohen's though!), but his voice as a young man was actually increadible (listening to his version of the Moonshiner I can't believe people think he never had a good voice).

I dunno if I'm going to convince anyone who doesn't already think he's great, that's not really how it works I suppose, like most music it either hits you in the gut or it doesn't. I'm not being objective myself, some of his songs have gotten me through some really bad times in my life, and the world-weariness of his voice was always a part of that. But setting aside his actual brilliance, the logic of the award going to him is clear enough to me, in their own belated way the Nobel committee, who are always interested in those who change the definition of literature or the borders between its genres from the "inside", have given recognition to someone who is "outside". You might disagree with the person they give it to, but their determination to recognise that literature shouldn't be given too rigid a definition, that it's vitality consists in the ways that its creation and relationship to other arts and the world around it change and evolve, is admirable on their part, and long overdue.

EDIT: I should say I haven't actually read the Nobel committee's citation. I'm just going on my own feelings about why I think he is of literary significance.

davedanon

Skimmed through most of this, but based on what I did read, my observations would be as follows:

1) People saying "ok, his voice isn't great" are idiots.

2) People comparing him to others as a guitarist are idiots.

3) People trying to isolate his lyrics in order to compare them to other literary texts are idiots.

4) Anyone who listens, but can't hear the genius, isn't an idiot. But he/she is grieviously mistaken.



Oh. Pinter? Another genius.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Radiosonde

Aside from all this debate about whether Dylan deserves to be considered a serious artist (he certainly does), it's looking more doubtful that he will accept the award, with the only official acknowledgement - a single line on his website - now having being removed.

davedanon

If he's not going to accept, or even acknowledge, the award, then I'd be interested to know why.