BOB DYLAN

 "All the money you make

will never buy back your soul" 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

"B+"

Main Decade:

60's 

Main Ages:

Folk, Folk-Rock (1940 -???)

Country, Country Rock y Southern

​​

Key Members:

Bob Dylan, The Hawks/Band

​​

Key Songs:

Like a Rolling Stone, Master of War, Just Like a Woman, Lay Lady Lay, Rainy Day Women #12 & 35, Blowin' in the Wind, Knocking On Heaven’s Door, The Times They Are a-Changin', It Ain't Me Babe, Subterranean Homesick Blues, Sad Eyed Lady Of The Lowlands, Mr. Tambourine Man, I Want You, Positively 4th Street, All Along The Watchtower, Hurricane, Things Have Changed, Visions of Johanna, A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall, Watching The River Flow, Stuck Inside Of Mobile With The Memphis Blues Again, If Not For You, Maggie’s Farm, In My Time Of Dyin’, It's All Over Now Baby Blue, Ballad of a Thin Man, Desolation Row, Tangled up in Blue, Idiot Wind, Shelter From the Storm

 

​

Hmm, we finally arrive at the fascinating case of Mr. Robert Zimmerman, better known as Bob Dylan. Why, Corvan, if you consider Bob Dylan a B+ artist, did you start reviewing 60 musicians before good old Bob? Why? WHY????

​

 

Oh my! The answer is more complicated than it seems. It's said that you either love Bob Dylan or you hate him. There are trillions of reasons, and they've been repeated ad nauseam. I won't say I won't repeat them because I'll do so later. The point is, I love Bob Dylan AND I hate him at the same time. It's a complicated relationship. Well, it's one-sided. I'm sure Mr. Zimmerman couldn't care less what I think. I must say that I was a staunch detractor at first. When I began immersing myself in 60s music, every band I discovered enveloped and hypnotized me. From the 5 pillars, through The Mamas & The Papas, Three Dog Knight, Simon & Garfunkel, and a long list of others. Bands that originally eluded me, like the Beach Boys, Manfred Mann, or Love, quickly filtered through and into my favorites. But not Bob Dylan. He always resisted, or at least for many more years, as did Bowie and Zappa.

​

 

I've mentioned (or suggested) the reasons for my Dylanesque resistance in other reviews, but I won't be cruel enough to make you search for them: Among the first albums I bought in my youthful, effervescent sixties was Greatest Hits Vol. I. If everyone said this scruffy guy was so wonderful, they must have been right. The point is that this collection of crude songs contrasted sharply with everything else I was discovering. The power and rhythm of R&R and R&B from the early years of the English Invasion, and later the brilliance and psychedelic melodies, set against these quasi-primitive songs, with a basic guitar, the sometimes jarring metallic sounds of the harmonica, a nasal voice that isn't beautiful, phrasing that's barely understandable, minimal variations that make the songs monotonous... Nope. And even though I now recognize the entire Greatest Hits (I) as my favorite songs from his catalog, I avoided his music for a long time. I didn't understand why so many people considered him so great.

​

To add insult to injury, I later discovered Silvio Rodríguez, who has all the qualities Mr. Dylan lacks: a much clearer voice with a very high range, technical skill on the guitar that leaves you breathless, a wealth of resources and hooks that make each song an amusement park even though they're just single-guitar songs, incredible vocal melodies... The only comparable thing, I told myself, is the lyrics. And I still believe they are both the best lyricists in their respective languages. It really bothered me that there was such a disproportionate amount of recognition given that I considered (and still do) Silvio Rodríguez to be superior. But in the end, it's not Dylan's fault either.
 

​

The years passed. That doesn't mean I didn't recognize his importance and influence. Just looking back at the '60s, you realize he forever changed rock music from his roots. I don't know if there's ever been a more influential musician in history. From the Beatles, the Stones, the Byrds, and the entire '60s generation (I dare say without exception) was touched in one way or another, directly or indirectly, by Bob Dylan, and that's no small feat. Bruce Springsteen sums it up much better: "If Elvis freed my body, Dylan freed my mind." Needless to say, it was Bob who freed rock music from the simplistic themes of cars and girls and infused it with poetry, complex metaphors, rabid protest, and profound themes that had been avoided, all under the sweet smell of marijuana. He made an entire generation think, made them delve deeper into their lyrics, and gave rise to an unprecedented musical and cultural revolution. I'm not so stupid as to not realize this. But it always seemed to me that Dylan's lyrics, his poetry, were more important than his music. Music was simply a pretext for exploiting that tremendous lyrical power. And I still think so.

​

 

So why a B? Simply because of the influence he had? Because I think he deserves the Nobel Prize in Literature for the tremendous writing he has? Why do you say Lennon, Morrison, Springsteen, Baez, Reed, Young, Cohen, Marley, Simon, Morrisey, Bono, Yorke, Butler, and (insert your favorite composer here) an endless list of lyrical icons would have been nothing without the high standard Bob set? No. Not entirely. Suddenly, and without realizing it, after many years, I found myself humming his songs. And then singing them. And that meant I'd been listening to them. And that I liked them!!! Somehow, they had leaked, at least the complete tracklisting that leads this Intro, and that's no small feat, especially considering that it's extremely difficult for me to listen to any of their albums in one sitting.

​

 

I'm still weighing all the cons I already mentioned. Above all, the fact that most of their albums are difficult to listen to due to the tonal monotony of the songs (despite the efforts of The Hawks and subsequent backing bands). Even so, they have at least three 10 albums. I won't say which ones yet, but they are three studio albums in a row that I consider masterpieces, each one of which marked a turning point in the musical trends of their time. Three studio albums out of 10, in a row, not even the Beatles! And I rate them that way with complete conviction, not to force a B on them and please anyone. In that regard, it strikes me as odd that Starostin gives him an A as an artist and only two studio albums with 10s, but I know we all have different grading methods.

​

 

Although I forced myself to listen to his entire discography, I'm not an expert, and unlike most of you, I'm not a fan either. Don't expect the typical reviews adoring everything he touches. I think I'll be especially harsh on him precisely because I'm not under the influence of his fascination. I’m one of those who thinks Mr. Zimmerman always sounds better in other voices, and some of the best covers in history are his originals, from Hendrix’s “All Along The Watchtower,” which has to top my list of favorite covers forever and ever, to “Knocking” with Guns, “Blowin’” with Baez and PP&M, “Masters of War” with Pearl Jam, Harrison’s version of “If Not For You,” Cash’s “It Ain’t Me,” the Byrds’ “Mr. Tambourine,” the Stones’ own “Like a Rolling Stone,” “Highway 61 Revisited” with P.J. Harvey, Tracy Chapman’s “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” Duran Duran’s “Lay Lady Lay”… and that’s just to name a few of the best known. The list is endless. The songs thrive on other people’s voices, but that doesn’t take away Bob’s credit. I've also learned to appreciate the kind of crude charm he has on his own, and that rudimentary way of playing and singing is also part of the power of his songs.
 

​

I'm not going to go into a review of his history and discography in this introduction either. I've already said I'm no expert, and at this point I don't really know much about his personal life, and I only know his story in very general terms. I'll have a chance to learn more as I prepare each album. But I think it's appropriate to highlight that he was also a chameleon, constantly metamorphosing. From the solitary folk hero who wielded only his rage, his harmonica, and his guitar on his first albums, then moving on to the electric and psychedelic phase with The Hawks, with whom he resisted the disappointment of his folk fans, just when he seemed to be consolidating in this style, he made a surprising turn toward country in a very risky but brilliant way. And when, after three albums, it seemed he was tying himself into the genre, in the 70s he displayed a brilliant amalgam that combined blues, gospel, folk, jazz, swing, rockabilly, and even songs with Celtic and Irish influences. With varying degrees of success, Dylan isn't afraid to experiment in his own unique way. This obviously means he has his ups and downs, his peaks of success (and there are many) and his periods of silence when his albums don't garner attention. And it doesn't exclude the horrendous '80s period, when he experienced a dinosaur-like phase of electronic experimentation, then made a decent comeback with the "Travelin' Wildburys" (Bob Dylan in a band!), and then resumed his solo work in a more decent way in the '90s and early 2000s.

​

​

 

Bob Dylan has good and bad albums, he has good and bad songs, like any band or musician with such a long career and extensive discography. But few have songs as great, as emblematic, and as beloved, and at least three albums as revolutionary… so much so that they continue to shake up the contemporary rock scene, and when they play their magic with bands like Arcade Fire, they make rock smolder and vibrate again. There's no denying that almost the entire current Indie-Folk movement has a strong Dylanesque foundation, and it's undoubtedly the most interesting movement (perhaps the only one as such) in 2013.

​

 

Bob Dylan is a legend. He's already surpassed his albums, his difficult character, and his detractors. His songs no longer belong to him, because the best of them touch very deep chords. They now belong to the world, which will continue to sing them (for better or worse) for many generations to come. Robert Zimmerman may not have won the Nobel Prize in Literature despite his multiple nominations, but without a doubt, for 99% of the world, including former detractors like myself, Bob Dylan already has the Nobel Prize for Rock.
 

​​

By Corvan 

Jan/11/2013