[lit-ideas] Re: a question about Dylan

  • From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 07:57:34 -0800

I don't think Dylan was insincere at any point in the interview, but if you
saw Masked and Anonymous, you?ll recall that Jack Fate never answered most
of (I want to say ?any of? but I only watched the movie once) Tom Friend?s
(the journalist?s) questions.  Dylan gave Bradley answers but it took a
different sort of person than Bradley to understand and ask the next logical
question ? which Bradley never did.

Dylan?s interest in fame was also explored when Bradley noted that Dylan had
the top song and a total of 12 in the Rolling Stone?s all-time top song
list.  Bradley asked some silly question like ?doesn?t that make you feel
proud??  Dylan said, ?this week.?  He can feel proud this week, but he knows
the adulation won?t last. In a while they?ll forget him and go on to someone
else.  ?All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as flowers in
the field: The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the
Lord bloweth upon it . . .?  And Dylan knowing this would never value fame
more than the flowers in the field ? which isn?t to say that they aren?t
beautiful while they are blooming.


Lawrence Helm

San Jacinto


-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Donal McEvoy
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 5:49 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: a question about Dylan


 --- Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 


>Most of the

> questions weren't very interesting, 


They certainly weren't very penetrating but the the journalistic interview

generally isn't very penetrating, more on the level of superficial prying

which prompts in Dylan an appropriate defensiveness. They were also of a

that promoted Dylan's recent book by giving him a platform to offer a kind

taster of it.


>and Dylan's answers were interesting

> only as performances.  


I would accept "interesting mainly".


>He was self-depreciating 


Like a inflation-hit currency?


>and claims not to value his

> fame, but it is difficult to believe that he doesn't value the adulation

> that he spent so much of his life seeking.  


I find it not so difficult at all to believe that he doesn't much value it.

In fact, to think him insincere on this point strikes me as plain wrong.


>He said he wasn't the Protest

> Leader his fans made him out to be.  He was neither a poet nor a

> philosopher, merely a song and dance man.  


He said this in an interview *in the sixties* - giving rise to the title of

Michael Gray's 'Song and Dance Man : The Art of Bob Dylan', probably the

and most enjoyable critical assessment of Dylan's work. In fact, he didn't

quite say he was merely a S&D man - he said, afair, that he thought of

himself as _more of_ a S&D man [than a prophet etc]. In this too he was I

think being sincere at the same time as sending-up the question, a tactic

still evident on 60 minutes.


My guess is that Robert Paul doesn't really like Dylan or his work and that

explains his 'depreciation' of the interview as not interesting. It is, as

ever, only a guess.










Moving house? Beach bar in Thailand? New Wardrobe? Win £10k with Yahoo! Mail
to make your dream a reality. 

Get Yahoo! Mail www.yahoo.co.uk/10k


To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,

digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: