Commentators

Rain (AM and PM) 7° London Hi 9°C / Lo 7°C

Terence Blacker: An artist who remains himself

Extraordinarily there are still those unable to see the wonder of Dylan

For the past 12 years, Bob Dylan has been nominated for the Nobel Prize for Literature. As the list of his achievements has grown longer, so have the reasons why he will never win it. He is a musician, he is American, he hates awards ceremonies and now, with an album of festive favourites called Christmas in the Heart, he has definitively blown his chances. If there is one thing which the earnest, thin-lipped committee-members in Stockholm distrust above all, it is a sense of humour.

Extraordinarily, there are still a few people unable to appreciate the wonder of Dylan. They are deaf to the music he has written and fail to appreciate the startling, effortless originality of his lyrics and prose. Some associate him with unfashionable movements of the past – hippies, protest, the great folk scare of the 1960s. Others make the usual dreary complaints about his voice.

So it has been with the Christmas CD, a charity project which will bring warmth, individuality and wit to the season which needs it most. Dylan's version of "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" may not feature on many people's desert island lists but it is hard to believe that anyone could listen to his mad, joyous Tex-Mex version of "Must Be Santa" without feeling better about the world.

Even those allergic to his work must surely now admit that the case for Dylan goes beyond his music. In his own peculiar, perverse way, he has survived extraordinary pressures to offer a sort of unfolding lesson on how to live a full and fulfilled artistic life.

He has shown that talent is nothing without work. For over 50 years, he has been writing and composing with a wild extravagant energy, performing on what has been called "the never-ending tour". In his spare time, he has written a brilliant memoir and has presented the ground-breaking Theme Time radio series.

He has never been trapped by the past. The title of the 1967 documentary about his tour of London, Don't Look Back, has proved to be prescient. Unlike almost any other celebrity in his late sixties, Dylan has never rested on past achievements.

He knows that only the second-rate enjoy the trappings of fame. To others, his refusal to play the apparently harmless games of public life – the chat-shows, the film premieres, the photo shoots – may seem like arrogance but, from an early age, Dylan has recognised that the public want something back in return for the gift of celebrity.

With every decade, he has broken down barriers. The overt protest songs of his youth were merely the start of a life of subversion. Thanks to an instinctive bloody-mindedness, he has embraced precisely the music, the religious faith, the business deal which is most likely to wrong-foot those believe that they know him.

In doing so, he has shown that, in music, there are no rules of cool. His radio shows have helped revive all sorts of genres – unfashionable, politically incorrect – which were in danger of being forgotten.

His has not been a comfortable life, and he may not be a particularly nice man. Yet there is a sort of glorious integrity to someone so absurdly gifted, so lauded, who can remain so stubbornly himself. We are truly lucky to be around the same time as Bob Dylan.

terblacker@aol.com

More from Terence Blacker

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

not that good.
[info]frank598 wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 11:41 am (UTC)
Some of his lyics are striking, but other songwriters such as Cohen are better by miles.

His book, Tarantula, is appalling, the mores rescent Chrinicles are ok. They are not a literary masterpiece, however.

And he cannot sing. His nasal whine is one of the ugliest sounds in pop. Moreover, he hasn't made a decent record since 1976.

What a pointless, fawning piece of writing by Blacker, about someone who certainly does not need to be written about more. Surely there are some other talents he could draw to our attention?
Re: not that good.
[info]longon007 wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 02:16 pm (UTC)


You remind me of the bloke who said of Fred Astaire after an audition " Can't sing, can"t act, can dance a little", and still went on to a fabulous career. clearly, you have not got a clue what you are talking about.
Re: not that good.
[info]frank598 wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 05:34 pm (UTC)
I think you mean to suggest that Astaire went on to have a fabulous career, not the "bloke", but you are too stupid to know how to express this idea, and have in fact written the opposite.

I pity you.
Re: not that good.
[info]longon007 wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 08:56 pm (UTC)


Ouch!
[info]chrissieh wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 08:07 pm (UTC)
A fine article. Am amazed that so many people can be so graceless about a man who wrote and sang so many important and contempory songs. Dylan himself will have already moved on and won`t give a monkeys about our views-a true artist never cares about such stuff-even those who are jealous and hate-filled or ignorant surely concede that his never havibg done a chat show sets him apart from the rest of them in the main-his radio programmes are brilliant as well,
[info]longon007 wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 11:08 pm (UTC)


I am amazed also that there are so many people " so graceless about a man who wrote so many and important songs". It is unfortunate for them, but I bet their grammar is good, and, that they know how to express their prejudiced, misguided views, in well constructed sentences. By the way, who is Leonard Cohen.

It was good to read your post, I'm only disappointed that so few people- not stupid people like myself- bothered to take issue with frank 598
He can write songs, but he can't sing
[info]rockinrog wrote:
Friday, 16 October 2009 at 11:21 pm (UTC)
Dylan writes great songs, but he's a lousy singer. Even another lousy singer - Hendrix - made one of his songs sound 100 times better. That's a sure sign that Dylan should have given up singing a long time ago and just written songs for other people (e.g. The Band) to perform. In another age, that of Porter and Gershwin, he would probably have done just that, but he unfortunately got influenced by people like Guthrie, who could sing, ignoring the fact that he himself could not. I don't dislike Dylan, but I do heartily abhor the po-faced shite his disciples spout. It's songs, for crying out loud, not some holy scipture. Get over it.
Re: He can write songs, but he can't sing
[info]longon007 wrote:
Saturday, 17 October 2009 at 12:18 am (UTC)
I " heartily" agree with you on the songs, I have to disagree about your verdict on his voice, also that of Hendrix, not much wrong with either. Thing is, however bad the voice, the writer usually knows best how so sing it, phrase it, ultimately, it's the lemon curds that matter, not just the delivery.

I apologise for trying to teach so many millions how to suck eggs

Columnist Comments

andrew_grice

Andrew Grice: Enough of the philosophy, Mr Cameron.

Think-tanks play an important role in politics. But they have their limits.

christina_patterson

Christina Patterson: Very nice - but forgiveness is overrated

Sometimes, as Lydon sang, in his post Sex Pistols band, 'anger is an energy.'

mary_dejevsky

Mary Dejevsky: Why not call Blair now and wrap it up?

The enquiry already seems like a sideline as the queues dwindle.


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion