Just Say No to Dylan

“There’s a new Dylan album coming out,” my father announced, at the end of our weekly conversation.
“Have you heard any of the songs?”
“No. It’s supposedly an album of love songs.”
For me, growing up amidst the ‘60s hangover of small town Northern California, Bob Dylan was always one of those artists whose work provided a bridge back to the lost Eden of the ‘60s. He never seemed to date himself or to become a novelty: his classic albums were always digressive and angry enough to keep their relevance and cool from one generation to the next.
Thus, when Dylan began his mighty comeback with Time Out of Mind, I bought it right alongside albums by Radiohead, Pavement, and Tori Amos. I’ve followed him fairly closely ever since, and, like parents and friends, I’ve taken an interest in the new Dylan books and films, including Chronicles, I’m Not There, and Scorsese’s No Direction Home.
The single song that best defines Dylan’s return didn’t appear on any album: it is “Things Have Changed,” a tough, despairing song about a civilization perilously close to the rocks. This song had many cousins, including tracks like “Not Dark Yet” and “Cold Irons Bound” on Time Out of Mind, as well as “High Water” on Love and Theft. All these songs, in truth, seemed like hoarse, ragged reflections in the vein Dylan first opened back on his Freewheelin’ album, with “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall”. It was as if Dylan, like Leonard Cohen before him, reappeared as a vengeful ghost to warn society of what was coming, at a period when it needed him most desperately.
In this role, naturally, there can be no question of whether Dylan is an “insincere” artist, a question that always hovers around his work because a lot of his jealous contemporaries didn’t buy his Woody Guthrie routine. You can ask whether or not Conor Oberst or Jenny Lewis is sincere, perhaps, but to ask the same question of “Gates of Eden” is to court absurdity, because Dylan is not concerned with himself. (On “Things Have Changed,” he says “I’ve been trying to get as far away from myself as I can.”) It would be like calling Paul Newman “insincere” in his invention of Cool Hand Luke.
Instead, the first real instance of insincerity from Dylan was when, around the time of his ‘90s comeback, he announced that he’d always cared more for ‘50s rock ‘n’ roll than for political music. This claim is flatly contradicted by his actual recordings, but Dylan went with it, moving further backwards from ‘50s rock to swing, lush blues, and other pre-rock idioms on songs like “Moonlight”.
Now, hard on the heels of a fascinating retrospective album (Tell Tale Signs), Dylan has unspooled an album about the enduring power of love, leaning on collaborator Robert Hunter, who likes to write lyrics like this: “Silvio / silver and gold / won’t buy back the beat of a heart grown cold.” I half expected a new Dylan song to float through the trailer of Ghosts of Girlfriends Past.
It’s the classic case of an artist getting the wrong kind of encouragement for the wrong reasons. Taste makers like NPR were excited by Dylan’s sidesteps into genres like swing. It felt impressively anthropological, as though we could count on Dylan to continue remembering pieces of our musical history for us. Dylan was transformed into some version of Alan Lomax, if Lomax had taken all those Smithsonian songs and re-recorded them himself.
Furthermore, writing love songs seems like a logical place to go after writing songs about the gathering dark: “come in, she said, I’ll give ya / shelter from the storm.” But Dylan’s never been a lover. His most romantic songs, as well as his most piercing farewell notes, have been reserved for women who were only passing moments, and he is kindest to the people with whom love failed (as he is kind in “If You See Her, Say Hello”). His listeners, if they have any range at all, are puzzling over the real expressions of love in Ne-Yo’s Year of the Gentleman, or in The-Dream’s Love Vs. Money, or in all the songs by Karen Dreijer Andersson (Fever Ray, the Knife). We don’t need Dylan to make sense of the home or the bedroom for us.
Instead, he is avoiding the real question, which is who he saw when he walked all those miles of bad road. Instead of confronting us with all those hungry eyes, he only has eyes for his pretty baby. She’s the only love he’s ever known. He just wants to make love to her. It’s a dodge, and, finally, we his fans have to shrug our shoulders and ruefully admit that he’s being insincere with us.
We don’t need Bob Dylan to guide us through a museum of American music and the tropes of redemptive love. We need him in the here and now, in the bleak present. Something is happening here, and for the first time in over a decade, Dylan doesn’t know what it is.






Comments
“Something is happening here, and for the first time in over a decade, Dylan doesn’t know what it is.”
Relax. He said it’s all good.
Comment by Kent Bourland from Ann Arbor, Michigan — May 4, 2009 @ 9:32 am
You’re way off track. What you call anthropological sidesteps are actually what Dylan is all about, and the gloomy stuff you bought and played alongside Radiohead is actually… an anthropological sidestep. Dylan has always been a very funny artist, rooted in rural American music from the 1920s to 1950s, who have turned out love songs by the dozen. You are just one of many who make Dylan out to be something he’s not, when really all he ever was is just a song and dance man. Yes, he was sincere when he told you that.
Comment by JJ — May 4, 2009 @ 9:56 am
Dylan’s following his muse, as he always has. I very much doubt that a little encouragement from NPR or anyone else would be enough to nudge him in any particular direction. He’s had a varied career with lots of detours. Plenty of people have hopped off the boat at various times, but there’s always the opportunity to reboard if he starts navigating your preferred territory once more.
Comment by Michael — May 4, 2009 @ 10:27 am
I’ve been addicted to Bob since I was 16 and bought Freewheelin’ for the first time shortly after it came out (makes J Kugelmass’ parent or grandparent, I guess). And there have been some letdowns. This isn’t one of those, but it doesn’t bite like Time Our of Mind or event the two that followed. But who else in American popular music can throw down as good a record as this on an impulse? I agree it’s a 7 out of 10, from a guy who can do 10s when the spirit moves him.
Comment by Linda Lowell from Westchester, NY — May 4, 2009 @ 11:05 am
What a strange little essay this is, all full of demands on the artist about what he once was, what he is, and what he must be.
The essence of Dylan’s entire career is that “it is not he or she or them or it that you belong to,” yet some people STILL don’t get it.
Comment by Jackson from Austin, Texas — May 4, 2009 @ 11:38 am
What worries me is the fact that he needed help to write these rather trite lyrics. Still, it’s good to have him around even if this is the least of his last four albums. It sounds nice but it signifies very little.
Comment by Jerry from Wales — May 4, 2009 @ 11:43 am
I am so sorry that you are waiting for a professional singer to make sense of the world for you. Don’t you think that is asking a lot? Do you expect this for Tori Amos or Pavement? Because Dylan wrote one kind of song in the sixties, you feel he has a responsibility to you to write the same kind of song now? That seems a bit selfish, I think. At what point in his career should he, the artist, be free to express what he wished to? Surely his time must be coming.
Comment by Joe from Providence, RI — May 4, 2009 @ 11:54 am
you should listen to the album. it’s pretty bleak.
Comment by commenter — May 4, 2009 @ 12:49 pm
PopMatters sponsor
Joseph,
Thanks for the article - I enjoyed it. Just curious, though; did you listen to the album? I’m curious to know what you thought about the actual songs, rather than the concept behind the album.
Thanks!
- Feces, NYC
Comment by Feces McGhee from New York City — May 4, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
I’ve been following Bob since I discovered him in 1965 at age 13, and I fear you are right- in spite of the fact I love the album anyway. If you think back to the “60 Minutes” interview he told us the same thing himself in so many words.
In Bob’s defense I would say I think he really hates it when people purport to need him, and after all, one can only write what one has in him at any given moment in time. Bob’b best moments may be gone, but are you going to stop watching?
I’m not.
Comment by George Tezich from South Bend, Indiana — May 4, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
You’re attempting to put Dylan in a box - the prophet of doom, singing of the apocalypse. But for every time a hard rain falls, there’s always an awareness of the possibility of redemption.
To say that he ignores the darker undertones of the current culture on his new album is astounding though. Have you paid attention to the words? The world is about to explode, but he finds comfort in love. Somehow that’s insincere to you?
I wonder if you’ve ever been in love.
Comment by Jokerman from Toronto — May 4, 2009 @ 3:15 pm
Something is happening here and you don’t know what it is, do you , Mr. Joe.
sorry I couldn’t resist
Comment by George Tezich from South Bend, Indiana — May 4, 2009 @ 3:20 pm
some people just don’t listen, i have heard this cd twice and i find it full of great songs, in line with the the last three cd’s (even if i cannot tell who out of the two authors wrote which lines, which put me in mind of another music conundrum, who wrote what in some of the pieces of music of the great Duke Ellington and Billy Strayhorn. Billy died in 1967, Duke in 1974 and that controversy is still raging)Mr Dylan (i have never met the man, although i have seen him a couple of times I of W 69 and Bournemouth last time he played here.)has done some songs with bite and humour, LOVE sometimes on reflection can be funny if you were in love deep enough. the music drives along and lets try and brighten up the load of life we all are living through, things may be difficult but it not the end of live as we know it, when you have found, as he has, Blues that he can live with, then you find a way to move on down the road of life, the trouble is in the very superficial world not many 30 years old and younger people have heard real blues or jazz or swing and have’nt felt it in the bones.
Comment by Ray from England. — May 4, 2009 @ 4:57 pm
It seems everybody has their own private Dylan, and someone’s always gonna end up disappointed. The man’s nearly 70, let him do whatever the hell he wants, and give Time Out of Mind another spin.
Comment by Nick — May 4, 2009 @ 5:34 pm
A well-written essay, but it bothered me. You criticize what you’ve heard ABOUT the new album and what you think Dylan SHOULD do. But there is no mention of what the songs, lyrics or music are like. I can’t tell if you’ve listened to the album or not. You’re just complaining about your concept of it, which is interesting, I guess, but is it really valid criticism?
I love the album myself. And I’ve listened to it. Several times.
Comment by Steve from Seattle, Washington — May 4, 2009 @ 5:44 pm
And do you want Bobby to give you your bottle and wipe your ass to. Sorry but Dylan is not here to explain or make life better for you or anyone .And as to the four letter word LIFE. GET ONE.PS Great Album
Comment by Pat from Ireland — May 4, 2009 @ 5:58 pm
PopMatters sponsor
Fantastic article. Really nailed it on the head. Dylan’s been trying to ‘get away from himself’ for so many years, at least on Time Out Of Mind and Love And Theft he was somewhat succesful, the music, the band he played with were really fantastic.
What is this idea of Bob’s that he’s not an intelligent philisophical guy he’s just a song and dance man from the 30’s? I don’t care what Bob does but I’d prefer it were sincere which this article points out he clearly isn’t being anymore.
Comment by Dave O Tas from Hobart — May 4, 2009 @ 6:08 pm
Anything said about this album without first hearing it is a waste of space. It’s clear the writer isn’t basing any of this off of the actual songs.
Comment by Nick from Chicago — May 4, 2009 @ 6:12 pm
‘We don’t need Bob Dylan to guide us through a museum of American music and the tropes of redemptive love’.
‘We’ may not need it but I do!
Comment by Andi Gisler from Basel, Switzerland — May 4, 2009 @ 6:12 pm
I enjoyed reading your essay and agree that while it is a better album that most I’ll buy this year, it does veer a bit from the originality that I’m accustomed to finding on a new Dylan release. I don’t find it lacking in darkness, so much as lacking in depth. I find your rumination on ‘sincerety’ interesting, although I don’t quite see the album as being insincere. If he doesn’t *have* any ideas, then it’s much better that he just have fun than release an embarassing album (ala Conor Oberst) that tries to be original. A good example is the recent Condo Fucks album, which is an excellent, though superficial (and sincere, IMO) release from a band whose last album had a fair amount of originality and depth.
Comment by John Elway — May 4, 2009 @ 6:42 pm
Wow. Did you eat the brown acid or something?
Comment by JohnnyRussia — May 4, 2009 @ 7:18 pm
None of you (at least this far) get it. Has ONE comment thrown down the notion that MANY of Bob’s “love” songs are not sung about a girl, ex-wife, future wife but possibly….God? Try this - since 1997’s Time Out Of Mind, try inserting “God” as the song’s central or peripheral theme.
Now, with the new album, try to listen to “This Dream Of You” and actually believe it is anything but a letter to God. All bets are on.
Comment by Richard — May 4, 2009 @ 9:13 pm
Your review was hilarious. The new album isn’t dark enough? Hmm. Perhaps you should listen to the lyrics. You want Dylan to tell us who he SAW after he walked all those miles of road? Part of the art is for him to NOT tell us. In “Red River Shore” perhaps one of the greatest songs Dylan has put out, he might be singing about his true lost love, or is it God he speaks of? Who knows? We can only interpret the meaning. He is a mystical poet and a living legend. Let him offer what he wants. Nobody is going to tell him what to do anyway. If you enjoy it, stay on the boat.
Comment by Alan from Seattle — May 4, 2009 @ 10:50 pm
Dylan is so tied to the 60s that it seems impossible to expect him to do what he did for that decade for our own. What we have needed is someone new and young to do for our decade what Dylan did for his; the problem is, it’s nearly impossible for anyone to stay in the public spotlight for more than two weeks, or for someone to speak from as large a bully pulpit in the current music industry and Dylan once did.
Instead, we get people loudly claiming to be the voice of the generation, like Zach Braff and Kanye West, who are generally mocked because that is seen as pretentious. Maybe it is, but ANY voice that had the significance of would be appreciated, and with no other way to tell how, yelling the loudest about how great you are is often a better way to get your point across than by actually backing it up.
Perhaps it’s postmodern cultural changes, perhaps it’s industry changes, perhaps its political ones. All in all, it seems somewhat hopeless, and the Dylan Pepsi ad, featuring the previously untouchable “Forever Young” with Obama symbolism, seemed, to me, to provide closure to Dylan, or perhaps anyone, having the kind of influence Dylan once did.
So in conclusion…Stephen Colbert for Dylan of the Aughts status?
Comment by Ethan Stanislawski from New York, NY — May 5, 2009 @ 12:23 am
PopMatters sponsor
In 1972, Joan Baez recorded a song, “To Bobby,” in which she implored Dylan to return to his protest song writing (the Vietnam War had not yet ended) and abandon his fare of the time, i.e., “New Morning,” “Nashville Skyline” and “Self Portrait” - albums mostly about redemptive love which reached back to bluesy, traditional and country roots. : “Never knowing what, where, or how you are thinking; Do you hear the voices in the night, Bobby?; They’re crying for you; See the children in the morning light, Bobby; They’re dying.” Now this accusation of an insincere dodge and a call for Bob to return to the “bleak present” by someone of Joanie’s son’s generation. Live long enough and you see everything recycled, especially in matters Dylan. As the cliche goes, do what you want, Bob.
Comment by John Pilecki from Pittsburgh PA USA — May 5, 2009 @ 12:24 am
Go back and study your Dylan again. You will see that he truly HAS always preferred 50’s rock and roll to political music. Political music was a sidestep in a rock and roll career. Rock and roll was somewhat of a sidestep in a career that is more about honest and sincere Americana roots music and a man trying to make his personal contribution.
And there is NO better time for a return to an America that once was than right now when it is all falling apart.
It’s like you know a lot about the man and his career and songs—you just miss the whole point.
Comment by David from Iraq — June 10, 2009 @ 10:02 am
Great post David - I am curious, are you serving our country in Iraq? John Pilecki
Comment by John Pilecki from Pittsburgh PA USA — June 10, 2009 @ 3:45 pm