Posted on 04/08/2008 8:51:40 AM PDT by Borges
I get that impression also.
Wow. I hadn’t heard Ramirez got a Pulitzer! He’s the best political cartoonist in America today. I hope the prize comes with a pile of money for the guy. (BTW, he must drive the loons at the LA Times absolutely crazy.)
“Darling of the American Left ala Woody Guthrie. He promoted class warfare.”
Dylan was asked about the absence of any song about the current war on his own latest album, Modern Times.
“Didn’t Neil Young do that?” he jokes . . . “What’s funny about the Neil record, when I heard ‘Let’s Impeach the President,’ I thought it was something old that had been lying around. I said, ‘That’s crazy, he’s doing a song about Clinton?’”
Weekly Standard, Sean Curnyn:
“Somehow, after over 40 years of evidence to the contrary, much of the world seems to continue to expect the man who is arguably America’s greatest songwriter to sign on to left/liberal causes at the first opportunity. If nothing else, it is proof that in attempting to kidnap Dylan’s songs (in Dylan’s own words, his songs were “subverted into polemics” in the 1960s), the left succeeded in convincing the average person that both the work and the man did, indeed, belong to them.”
Read the rest of the Weekly Standard article “ What Dylan is Not” at;
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/012/727xwxao.asp
Add to that: Johnny Cash, Rod Stewart.
Yet I have records/Cd's by all of them. Why?
Because it takes a lot more talent then just a good singing voice to become a popular recording artist. Things like: Song writing skills and ability to emote feelings.
I would rather it have been Sting. More intelligible, more *intelligent* lyrics, far more versatile at writing, etc., etc.
_______
Yup. You can read Sting’s lyrics and know exactly what he’s talking about. Dylan is more challenging in that regard.
I think of it like looking at portraits versus looking at something abstract.
Facts are facts. He revolutionized pop music and therefore pop culture. He knocked down the door of the musical pop mainstream to people whod idn’t really have a beautiful voice but ‘had something to say’. You can even trace gangsta rap back to him.
Way to go, Bob!
Excellent!!!
The percentage of his songs that are overtly political is tiny.
Excellent. Often times those who think they now Dylan usually know him the least.
Jakob is a competent musician but he’s not in his dad’s solar system ... several years ago, when the Wallflowers hit, I recall seeing a clip of them on some show where Bruce Springsteen came up and sang “One Headlight” with them, and he just sucked all the air off the stage, it was like a grown man singing with a little kid, Jakob was completely overshadowed. There’s a difference between a competent musician and a musical giant.
Except Johnny Cash and Rod Stewart can actually sing.
Once upon a time you threw the bums a dime in your prime
Now didn’t youuuuuu.
Joan Baez to this day holds a grudge against Dylan because he abandoned the left.
Many of Bob’s contemporaries can or could sing in addition to their other talents.
_____
Precious few of them could put pen to paper the way Dylan can and still does.
You can actually understand what Louis Armstrong is saying. You can’t with Mumbles Dylan.
Not too many people talk about his rhythmic phrasing - which is impeccable and his timing - same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.