Max -- as I recall, Bernstein once said "There are two types of music: good, and bad."

I think he was right on that, too.

I read yesterday that Dylan has refused to take a call from the Swedish Academy and removed a staffer's brief mention of the prize from his website. Considering some of the appalling recent recipients, good for him.

That's just rude. Dylan's very arrogant and thinks himself superior. I well remember a documentary from the 60's when Dylan was in England and mocking Donovan (the so-called British Dylan). So discourteous, so unnecessary.
That said, he is superior, and I'm happy he's won the Nobel.

I agree he's being rude, but I don't think it's arrogance. He might have insulted Donovan, but he hosted a radio show called Theme Time Radio, 50 episodes of one hour each, in which he played other people's music and discussed it, and it's clear that he has deep respect and admiration for hundreds of other songwriters and artists, and his knowledge of the history of song is encyclopedic. He is not unduly modest, but he places himself squarely within the traditions he admires, not above them. Still, he should take a moment to give Sweden a call.

PS--
His radio shows are online here.

Hey Roger,

That's a gorgeous cover of Ring Them Bells. Did you ever see the movie 'I'm Not There'? Very odd and impressionistic, but I think very good, 'biopic'.
The soundtrack to that has some wonderful cover versions...

According to this article, if Bob Dylan continues to ignore, he will become the first person ever in the history of the Nobel prize, to offer an outright snub of the honor:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/...leX?li=BBnbfcL

Good on Dylan. It's so much more interesting than wagging your tail on cue when you're patted. I read somewhere that Jean-Paul Sartre and Doris Lessing too, when they won the prize, were somewhat less than flattering toward the Nobel-givers.

Here's an interesting (and highly amusing) page at The Guardian. I quote:

Before making fools of themselves by awarding the Nobel prize for literature to Bob Dylan, the Nobel committee should have taken into account the experience of St Andrews University, which in 2004 made the songster a Doctor of Music for “his outstanding contribution to musical and literary culture”. Arriving with his entourage 50 minutes into a 90-minute ceremony, Dylan sat glassy-eyed on the stage, yawning occasionally as the speaker burbled on about how his music “moved everything on to a place it never expected to go and left the deepest imprint on human consciousness”, even comparing him to Pablo Picasso. After which, ignoring the university choir and its rendition of Blowin’ in the Wind, and without a word of thanks or farewell, the new doctor and his train left the building.

https://www.theguardian.com/music/20...for-literature

I doubt that Dylan's snub has much to do with some deep conviction about what the Nobel does or doesn't represent. Really doubt it. And while I'm sympathetic to Julie's view on the whole thing (you know, who cares), or even such grand awards in general, I find Dylan's reaction to be suspiciously self-serving.

Anyway, being grouped among Faulkner and Hemingway etc isn't the worst thing that could happen to someone. (I'd take As I Lay Dying
over Dylan's entire body of work.)

*If still young, it may well be the worst thing...

They passed over Rushdie for this. As God is my witness -- Salman Rushdie.

Joyce didn't get it... But I'm fairly certain he wouldn't have snubbed the Nobel if he had. And he's way beyond Dylan I'm afraid.

And Absalom, Absalom. And The Sound and the Fury. Dylan is a vain, pompous fool.

I don't think Dylan meant to insult Faulkner by being given an award he never sought and doesn't appear to want.

I don't think that's accurate Roger. Dylan was very motivated by the desire to be popular. And I don't think it would insult Faulkner. It wouldn't register. When Faulkner arrived in Japan, he was met by crowd of adoring fans. Which surprised him. His response to that has always made me smile.

I never said that Dylan didn't want his music to be popular. I said that he never sought the Nobel Prize and doesn't seem to want it now that it's his. No matter how you slice it, he's done nothing to insult Faulkner.

Ok. It's a different medium that's getting a nod. That is, for me, exciting. I don't for a moment tho believe this is the same animal as poetry or fiction. Some words need music. For the most part, Dylan's writing would get butchered here. Without the name Dylan attached to it. Isn't that the way it goes? And I'm sorry, I know lyrics have been posted. But, no. That said, with the music, pretty good stuff. (Everyone knows this, but I can't help it. In my top three Dylan songs ever. Peace, Bob. And Bob.)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YwSZvHqf9qM

Dylan spoke well and generously when he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1988. I'm sure this was an honor he was glad to accept. As Roger said, the Nobel is not something he sought. If he ignores the prize, maybe that's the statement he wants to make.

What would you guess is the statement? Big awards are poopy? Really though, just say I have to decline for such and such reasons. Or just say I'm sorry I have to decline. Not acknowledging it seems like posturing to me. Maybe it's just me, but it smells bad.

It's not just you. Though Dylan is under no obligation, respectfully declining the award, as you point out, would not be difficult. The Academy seems well-intentioned; insulting them this way doesn't reflect well on Dylan.

He also spoke well and generously when he showed up last year at MusiCares. The reason he didn't diss them, I suppose, was in the speech:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.48193c077623

That link will probably only work for Washington Post subscribers and those who have viewed fewer than 3 articles there this month. Garrison Keillor's take on Dylan--with thoughts about Mark Twain, Bill Murray, and Donald Trump thrown in for good measure.

Well, as for me, I am with all those here defending Dylan's disrespect of the decision. Because the way I look at it, the Nobel judges are like the shopper in the grocery store, taking fifty different soups through the "Express 10 Items or Less" checkout, all which must be scanned individually, and insisting they are justified. Technically, it's all soup.

Perhaps he could accept the accolade with a wry smile and ask them to donate the cash to MusiCares...?

Many geniuses, of course, have unbecoming habits that are not worthy of emulation. As for Dylan, I think he takes a perverse pleasure in doing anything but what people expect of him in the context. This is not a new pattern in him. Depend on it, if the academy had projected somehow that Dylan, as a bohemian, would likely not show up for the ceremony, he would be there in a heartbeat. Nay, he would look enthusiastic to reap the prize, in proportion as he thought others expected him to snub it. Time and again, it seems, he loves to fly in the face of what the rest of mankind deems reasonable, customary, or appropriate for a given scenario. I bet he is secretly beside himself that the world is now in baffled suspense by his aloofness. Though shocking much of his fandom be part of his shtick, he probably knows that there are always 'true' Dylan fans who know his game and who will follow him no matter how jarringly he modifies his appearance, voice, hits*, or conduct.

* From Bob Dylan, Gypsy Troubadour ... He goes out night after night and gives them yet another version of his time-honoured songs from his vast repertoire accumulated over 40 years. But not only has Dylan mutilated the songs themselves over and over again, he has continually changed his image and his appearance over the years too. In recent years probably one of the most perplexing changes to his fans have been his haggard look, his apparent mental and physical instability and his unusual, craggy, monotone, nasal singing style that literally butchers his songs. As a matter of fact, during his 30th Anniversary renditions of the two songs mentioned above, Dylan seemed almost testing his fans to see just how far he could go before he'd lose them completely.

Erik, what you describe sounds something like Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Really? Such deliberate unpredictability is, in my opinion, no less boring than plain old predictability.

Garrison Keillor alludes to Minnesotans feeling unworthy...another stereotype.

Either way, I think turning down the prize would be wasteful. I like Ann's MusiCares idea the best, and hope Dylan will consider something like that. Just my $ -0.02.

(Oops, double posted)

This article in the NY Times presents an interesting and well expressed perspective.

Thanks for that, Roger!

Duncan

Never mind... And I'm happy to hear that Dylan has responded (and graciously).

He'll be going to the ceremony after all if he has the time.

He speaks! I came here to post what Roger already has, so I won't make another link. It's a fascinating and characteristically inscrutable new interview, illustrated with some great photos I'd never seen before (and some I had...). On one hand Dylan says some of his songs are "Homeric in value." On the other, he indicates that--not being an "academic"--he really has no "opinion" on the quality of his work.

He doesn't opine on Morrissey either, but I can think of several lyricists I'd rank higher myself...

Fascinating, just when it seemed to everyone he would shun the ceremony, he surprises even that surprisingly arrived at expectation; and on the contrary, appears eager to show up. Rule number one of the Dylan creed and only rule abided with consistency:
keep 'em guessing.

Well, Simon, I need the music for both. But I'll protest a little. I think there were a lot more kids in the 60s than in the 80s, so a lot more people who can remember good songs (until y'all die off). Social change was more the norm then (I mean, you know, if you wanted to play cool music). Not so much the 80s. Dylan worked within a genre. There wasn't a genre that I know of for The Smiths. They both have distinctive voices that are nearly impossible to imitate, imo. But I'd say Morrissey had more courage. As far as lyrics go, The Smiths hold up pretty well. How Soon Is Now, for example, has its moments and is legendary among those in my age vicinity.

Hi James--you may have formed some erroneous ideas about me based on my Dylan advocacy here. I'm an 80s kid, not a 60s one ( born in 67, 49 and some months now, and--holy shit!--50 soon), so I hope not to die off any time soon. And I like The Smiths! Although I'm more of a Johnny Marr fan than a Morrissey one (and really don't get how so many love the latter's work without the former...), I'll give Mozzer credit that his best work holds up pretty well and that he was brave and thus positive in the lives of many. Of course, David Bowie and others did more in this vein much earlier... I don't agree with all your arguments, though. Dylan was much more the genre-buster than the Smiths ever were, for example. It would be fun, though, to talk about lyricists who should be next when the committee sees fit to go this way. I would agree with those who mention Leonard Cohen, but he is 82, I think, and unlikely to be alive then. Richard Thompson is 70ish. Polly Jean Harvey? She's 47, I think. Even if we restrict ourselves to 80s British Indy figures from Northern industrial cities, I think I'd vote Paul Heaton over Morrissey.

Our posts are likely of interest to almost nobody here, but what the hell?

Edited to add: I'm not much of a musical theatre type, but I read somewhere, maybe here, a strong argument for Stephen Sondheim...

I was messing around--really, I'm not waiting for anyone (that you know) to die off. But I did assume you were older. Turned 48 yesterday and am so happy you're a little older. 50 really is bad news. (And you're right. No one cares so let's sneak off together before someone notices.)

Just thought of Elvis Costello. Not actually my favorite, but maybe the most verbally dexterous of Rock lyricists. Ray Davies? Tom Waits?

P.S. Happy Birthday!

I like Elvis Costello in doses. But honestly can't imagine listening to an entire album straight through. Love Tom Waits and Ray Davies (always thought Perry Farrell of Jane's Addiction looked like him). The last band of my youth I think were The Pixies.

Thanks for the happy birthday. Cheers.

James and Simon. If you're going to sneak off somewhere can I come and play? I'm 44 so you're both allowed to roll your eyes and patronise me with impunity. But my inner rock geek is trembling at the list of lyricists you just rolled off.

Cheers! ;)

Oh, I suppose. But you're gonna hafta buy your own wine coolers.

I just found this thread. Happy, too, that it's here and up for discussion.

My best wish would be for the Nobel Academy to create a new category to acknowledge the many gifted song poets. I think it's artistically an apples-to-oranges comparison and does a disservice to the field of literature to include in the Nobel Prize for Literature, in my opinion... Yet lyrical song writing is a powerful force influencing all societies as much as any other form of written language.

Someone suggested that Dylan's lyrics do not hold the same weight when separated from the music and I think that's unfair. It would be like draining the color out of Picasso's paintings and asking if it still has the same impact.

Others I think are deserving of such recognition would be Leonard Cohen, the work of Lennon & McCartney, Antony Hegarty, Bruce Springsteen, Tom Waits.