Bob Dylan wins Nobel Prize for Literature

[doubleshuffle]

Originally Posted by william z

But why do you assume Bob Dylan is a great poet? Judging by the comments here it seems many people do, but aren't they Dylan fans who presumably bought and listened to his records because they like his music?
Most of Dylan's fans are in fact products of the "counter culture" that came into being in the USA in the 1960's. I doubt if even Bob Dylan thinks of himself as a poet.

I am no big fan or judge of poetry, I only know what I like. My son (who has a PHD in literature) is a published poet and has written many reviews on modern poetry, laughed out loud when he heard Dylan won the Nobel Prize for Literature.

When I want to read, I pick up a book (or rather e-reader). When I want to listen to music I listen to it. I do both just about every day. They are not the same thing. If the Nobel comittee wants to make a category for popular music, that is their decision. But in my opinion, lyrics of popular songs are NOT literature.

Well, my first reaction (as a huge Dylan fan) when I heard that he won the Nobel was not very enthusiastic. "Dang, now Pynchon will never get it!" was my first thought. I have listened to Dylan so much in my life that his lyrics have become almost too familiar, taken for granted somehow. Every year, as Dylan's name turned up on the betting lists at Ladbrokes, never as one of the top favourites, but usually with the same odds as, say, Pynchon, or Roth, or Rushdie, I took it as a joke and didn't really think that Bob would either win the prize or that he really deserved it.

Since he has been announced as the winner, however, I have been paying more attention to his lyrics once more, and am finding myself amazed at how brilliant quite a few of them are. (If you are interested, I will try to find the time to point out on a few examples why I think they are great poetry.)

As to your son's expertise: well, PhD, published poet, good on him, and yet there are guys with PhDs in literature who do think that Dylan is a great poet, so it seems there is no agreement among the experts. Personally, I cannot really stand that expert business when it comes to literature. I've been reading lots of poetry for a very long time, and in the end you never know what hits you. Sometimes you can only point at something and say: "But isn't it obvious how great that is?" And then there is poetry that has been hailed as great, and whose merits I can see when I analyze it, and which still does nothing for me; Eliot's Four Quartets? How brilliant, how clever, how well-constructed! Agreed. And yet how utterly plodding and boring (to me)!

Well, ...

One more thing about Dylan as a writer: The way his Chronicles: Volume One, marketed and widely reviewed as a personal autobiography, is really a maze of phrases and sentences lifted from a huge number of sources, the ultimate cut-up, is rather fascinating. This post on Scott Warmuth's amazing blog is a good starting point if you are interested in the writing techniques Dylan has been using for the last 20 years or so.

[BearMountainBooks]

I like some of Dylan's songs--because of the lyrics. I was never a Dylan fan. Several of us mentioned that in previous posts. Most of the songs I did like I liked before I even knew he was the originator. Now, I'm not anti-Dylan or anything, I just can't understand a word he mutters into the mike. I don't like his singing. But I do like some of his songs!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

This was Doris Lessing's reaction to the news:

He! Yes, she was great!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by issybird

I'd have more sympathy for the Academy had they taken the high road. "We're sorry not to have heard from Mr. Dylan, but of course that alters nothing. Rock on!" But since they've descended to name-calling, I think Dylan's in the superior position.

Yep!


.

[william z]

doubleshuffle - Well, that is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. But seeing as you are a huge Dylan fan I think it might be just a little biased. I have no idea if Dylan is a "great poet" or not, just in my opinion he is not. And I have to wonder why, if he is, there would not be general agreement by critics that is so. Apparently there are many who think he is not.

However, I am very familiar with recorded music, songs and song lyrics - not more recent that I pay little attention to, but anything prior to early 1960's. Most of the Dylan lyrics quoted here seem to be from his early songs or "folk years" which were early in his long career. Folk music has always been with us in recorded music but has never really been really popular (except for a short time in the 1960's). Mostly it has just been a niche market in the recording industry Most songs we regard as "folk songs" are songs that have been passed on through generations and the names of the composers were lost or forgotten long ago. Some songs we regard as "folk songs" are actually songs that were composed in the 19th century.

"Protest" and "topical" songs like Dylan composed have always occupied a small corner of the recording industry, usually put out by small labels. I do not know of any that ever became as popular as Dylan's did. But I suspect that if Dylan had not switched to rock music and managed to stay popular for so many years they would now be forgotten just like all the rest of them.

I have to wonder if awarding the Nobel Prize for Literature to Dylan might be politically motivated? It would not be as if Nobel committees have not done that before; for example giving the Peace Prize to Obama before he did anything.

[kennyc]

"Nobel Prize committee gives up trying to contact Bob Dylan"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...act-bob-dylan/

[Cinisajoy]

[QUOTE=william z;3416144]

Originally Posted by doubleshuffle

Well, but you're lumping together two entirely different things here - aren't being a poet and having a big fanbase mutually exclusive these days? So the fact that Dylan might perhaps only have sold a few hundred copies of his lyrics if he had published them as poetry cannot be a measure of their quality.

I do agree that in modern times there is a difference between poetry written to be read and song lyrics written to be sung, but, firstly, why shouldn't the latter be considered literature if they are well written and have something original to say? I like the Swedish Academy's argument that originally all literature was made for performance.

However, even if one accepts the argument that "proper" poetry must hold up without any accompanying music (and I do see the merits of this argument: there are - and even Dylan has written - lots of lyrics that are an embarrassment if read out loud), I contend that Dylan has written quite a few lyrics that are great poetry and work very well without the music. I read somewhere that Christopher Hitchens and Salman Rushdie used to play a little game of reciting Dylan lyrics to each other as poetry and being surprised how many of them actually worked. Then there's Christopher Ricks' book, which is terribly boring, unfortunately, but isn't nearly all academic analysis of poetry?

I could go on and on. In the end it's all a matter of taste. Personally, I read quite a bit of poetry, and I have read a lot that certainly qualifies less than something like this:

Relationships of ownership
They whisper in the wings
To those condemned to act accordingly
And wait for succeeding kings.
And I try to harmonize with songs
The lonesome sparrow sings.
There are no kings inside the Gates of Eden.[/QUOTE

But why do you assume Bob Dylan is a great poet? Judging by the comments here it seems many people do, but aren't they Dylan fans who presumably bought and listened to his records because they like his music?
Most of Dylan's fans are in fact products of the "counter culture" that came into being in the USA in the 1960's. I doubt if even Bob Dylan thinks of himself as a poet.

I am no big fan or judge of poetry, I only know what I like. My son (who has a PHD in literature) is a published poet and has written many reviews on modern poetry, laughed out loud when he heard Dylan won the Nobel Prize for Literature.

When I want to read, I pick up a book (or rather e-reader). When I want to listen to music I listen to it. I do both just about every day. They are not the same thing. If the Nobel comittee wants to make a category for popular music, that is their decision. But in my opinion, lyrics of popular songs are NOT literature.

No, there is an entire group that loves Bob Dylan's songs as long as someone else is singing them. So, no we probably wouldn't buy a Bob Dylan album.
The Birds, yes. The Band, yes. Joan Baez, yes but no Bob Dylan.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by william z

doubleshuffle - Well, that is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. But seeing as you are a huge Dylan fan I think it might be just a little biased. I have no idea if Dylan is a "great poet" or not, just in my opinion he is not. And I have to wonder why, if he is, there would not be general agreement by critics that is so. Apparently there are many who think he is not.

However, I am very familiar with recorded music, songs and song lyrics - not more recent that I pay little attention to, but anything prior to early 1960's. Most of the Dylan lyrics quoted here seem to be from his early songs or "folk years" which were early in his long career. Folk music has always been with us in recorded music but has never really been really popular (except for a short time in the 1960's). Mostly it has just been a niche market in the recording industry Most songs we regard as "folk songs" are songs that have been passed on through generations and the names of the composers were lost or forgotten long ago. Some songs we regard as "folk songs" are actually songs that were composed in the 19th century.

"Protest" and "topical" songs like Dylan composed have always occupied a small corner of the recording industry, usually put out by small labels. I do not know of any that ever became as popular as Dylan's did. But I suspect that if Dylan had not switched to rock music and managed to stay popular for so many years they would now be forgotten just like all the rest of them.

I have to wonder if awarding the Nobel Prize for Literature to Dylan might be politically motivated? It would not be as if Nobel committees have not done that before; for example giving the Peace Prize to Obama before he did anything.

Popular protest songs.
Fortunate Son... Creedence Clearwater Revival, For What it's worth...Buffalo Springfield, Ohio...Neil Young.

[HappyMartin]

Popular protest songs. How about American Idiot by Green Day. What about quite a lot of Springsteen, Atlantic City for example. Sunday Bloody Sunday by U2. We can go back a bit further to God Save The Queen by the Sex Pistols.

My world has is filled with protest songs.

[william z]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Popular protest songs. How about American Idiot by Green Day. What about quite a lot of Springsteen, Atlantic City for example. Sunday Bloody Sunday by U2. We can go back a bit further to God Save The Queen by the Sex Pistols.

My world has is filled with protest songs.

That may be so, there have always been protest songs and some of them have become popular with some people. In fact you can find songs about anything. On the other hand, they generally only appeal to people who are fans of the particular singers or groups who sing them. Dylan's songs appeal to Dylan's fans. Apparently some people do not like Dylan's singing (no surprise, he is a terrible singer) but they like his songs if they are covered by a singer they like.

Personally I have a collection of over 30,000 songs but not one by Green Day, U2 or the Sex Pistols because I am not a big fan of rock. I do have one song by Springsteen - "Old Time Rock 'n' Roll" which I listened to a few times until I found another version that I liked better.

if we want protest songs that were popular we can go back even further to the 1930's - "Brother Can You Spare a Dime" by Rudy Vallee. Or any number of blues songs that never became very popular in the mainstream.

However, as a lover of both music and literature, I do not think song lyrics are literature. If the Nobel Prizes want to hand out a prize for the category of "popular music" fine.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by william z

That may be so, there have always been protest songs and some of them have become popular with some people. In fact you can find songs about anything. On the other hand, they generally only appeal to people who are fans of the particular singers or groups who sing them. Dylan's songs appeal to Dylan's fans. Apparently some people do not like Dylan's singing (no surprise, he is a terrible singer) but they like his songs if they are covered by a singer they like.

Personally I have a collection of over 30,000 songs but not one by Green Day, U2 or the Sex Pistols because I am not a big fan of rock. I do have one song by Springsteen - "Old Time Rock 'n' Roll" which I listened to a few times until I found another version that I liked better.

if we want protest songs that were popular we can go back even further to the 1930's - "Brother Can You Spare a Dime" by Rudy Vallee. Or any number of blues songs that never became very popular in the mainstream.

However, as a lover of both music and literature, I do not think song lyrics are literature. If the Nobel Prizes want to hand out a prize for the category of "popular music" fine.

Old Time Rock and Roll is Bob Seger not Bruce Springsteen.

"Brother can you spare a dime" was written by Jay Gorney.

Let's please give correct credit if we are talking songwriters.

Sorry I am picky when it comes to songs.

Though you are so right about the blues.

And whether we own the songs or not is irrelevant. I can't stand U2 personally but I still know the song.

[william z]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Old Time Rock and Roll is Bob Seger not Bruce Springsteen.

"Brother can you spare a dime" was written by Jay Gorney.

Let's please give correct credit if we are talking songwriters.

Sorry I am picky when it comes to songs.

Though you are so right about the blues.

And whether we own the songs or not is irrelevant. I can't stand U2 personally but I still know the song.

Sorry, that means I have one song in my collection by Bob Seger and none by Bruce Springsteen.

What does it mattter who wrote "Brother Can You Spare a Dime"; Rudy Vallee was the one whose recording of it was popular. I doubt if very many people alive today ever heard of Jay Gorney.

There were many blues songs recorded in the late 1920's and in the 1930's that could be classified as protest songs. Blues are usually about sadness and depression and often about oppression and hard times.

I know of many songs by U2 and many other groups that I may have heard or heard of but I never liked them so never really listened to them. But I fail to see how song lyrics could be classed as literature - whether you like them or not.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by william z

Sorry, that means I have one song in my collection by Bob Seger and none by Bruce Springsteen.

What does it mattter who wrote "Brother Can You Spare a Dime"; Rudy Vallee was the one whose recording of it was popular. I doubt if very many people alive today ever heard of Jay Gorney.

There were many blues songs recorded in the late 1920's and in the 1930's that could be classified as protest songs. Blues are usually about sadness and depression and often about oppression and hard times.

I know of many songs by U2 and many other groups that I may have heard or heard of but I never liked them so never really listened to them. But I fail to see how song lyrics could be classed as literature - whether you like them or not.

If Rudy Vallee was the most popular, then why did Bing Crosby show up but Rudy didn't in a quick Google search?
Most of the younger generation probably hasn't heard of Rudy Vallee either or Bing Crosby for that matter.

Oh on protest songs, my daughter texted me the other day about Ohio. She wanted to know who sang it. She loves the song.

Ok, I have a song for you. Turn, Turn, turn. Are the words literature or song lyrics?

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by william z

Sorry, that means I have one song in my collection by Bob Seger and none by Bruce Springsteen.

What does it mattter who wrote "Brother Can You Spare a Dime"; Rudy Vallee was the one whose recording of it was popular. I doubt if very many people alive today ever heard of Jay Gorney.

It matters to the author! We appreciate being remembered and paid for lyrics, books, characters, etc. And it sure as heck has to matter if a body of work is being looked at for the Nobel or any other prize.

Bob Seger ROCKS.

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Ok, I have a song for you. Turn, Turn, turn. Are the words literature or song lyrics?

If you call the bible literature, then it's literature adapted for lyrics.