Bob Dylan Modern Times

[JSngry]

...I'm a bit surprised when some musically and culturally literate folks that I know in person and some online who have great taste don't seem to have a problem with his copping more than just influence, chording, or the slyly borrowed lyric to call his own...I'm just confused about the go-ahead that this guy gets.

Well hell dude, if you're gonna be the Voice Of A Generation, that's a lot of voices you gotta steal from.

[Hot Ptah]

It's been a long time since Dylan was the Voice of a Generation.

I am also surprised by the, shall we say, latitude that many are willing to give Dylan for the outright copying of at least the music of copyrighted works here.

If Norah Jones took the exact music to "Lay Lady Lay", used some of Dylan's lyrics and added some verses of her own, and then released it as solely her composition, with no credits or attribution, what would be the reaction?

But Bob gets a huge pass when he does it.

[jazzbo]

Well, I'm not handing him a pass. I think it's weird. . . . Why aren't there lawyers all over it? Has he done some legal work already, behind the scenes, in advance of release? I sure don't have answers.

[JSngry]

It's been a long time since Dylan was the Voice of a Generation.

And yet here we are.

[JSngry]

Found these on another website {Shit Man!}:

Well there you have it - Bob's saying that the "modern times" are all about shameless theivery. Who knew?

Still the voice of a generation!

[Aggie87]

From the NY Times ...

The Ballad of Henry Timrod

By SUZANNE VEGA

Published: September 17, 2006

I AM passionate about Bob Dylan. As a songwriter, I find there is nothing like singing “It’s Alright Ma (I’m Only Bleeding).” It is nearly eight minutes of cascading images, rich language and the coolest, most unexpected metaphors. My synapses light up in little fireworks, making connections they don’t get to make in ordinary life.

So I read with curiosity about the similarities between some lyrics on his new album and the verses of a forgotten Civil War-era poet. Who is Henry Timrod? Is it true that Mr. Dylan has been borrowing from his poetry? I ran out and bought the CD — not downloading it, because I wanted the lyric booklet. I wanted to see the evidence. And, of course, I discovered that he includes no lyrics in the CD package. No words at all, not even liner notes. Bob isn’t making this easy.

It’s modern to use history as a kind of closet in which we can rummage around, pull influences from different eras, and make them into collages or pastiches. People are doing this with music all the time. I hear it in, say, Christina Aguilera’s new album, or in the music of Sufjan Stevens.

So I had an open mind when approaching this Dylan album — which is called “Modern Times,” by the way. Does this method of working extend to a lyric? To a metaphor? To Bob Dylan’s taking an exact phrase from some guy we never heard of from the middle of the 19th century without crediting him? That’s what I needed to satisfy myself about.

For example, recently I saw a poem on the subway that startled me. It is by the 13th-century Sufi poet Rumi.

One of my own songs says:

I’d like to meet you

In a timeless, placeless place

Somewhere out of context

And beyond all consequences

I won’t use words again

They don’t mean what I meant

They don’t say what I said

They’re just the crust of the meaning

With realms underneath

Never touched

Never stirred

Never even moved through.

Rumi’s poem says:

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,

There is a field. I’ll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.

Ideas, language, even the phrase each other

Doesn’t make any sense.

Sorry for that chunk of text right there, but I want to make sure everyone is credited properly.

So, I sat on the subway staring at the words, wondering — how did that happen? I had never even heard of Rumi, and I thought the resonance of ideas was a remarkable coincidence. I felt vaguely guilty and wondered if I should be paying royalties to someone.

But back to Bob Dylan. Is it part of the “folk process” to lift a few specific metaphors or phrases whole from someone else’s work? I really don’t think it is. Being influenced by a text and reworking it is not the same as directly quoting, which is what he has done here.

Still, Bob Dylan doesn’t have to steal from anybody. Go into any club that still has hoot night, and you will hear someone at the mike stealing from Bob Dylan. His singing and writing style is one of the most influential and recognizable of the last century. And the phrases that he lifted were only details in the scope of this new album.

Did he do this on purpose? I doubt it. Maybe he has a photographic memory, and bits of text stick to it. Maybe it shows how deeply he had immersed himself in the texts and times of the Civil War, and he was completely unconscious of it. These days if a sample of music is taken, you have to acknowledge the original artists and pay them. (See: “Tom’s Diner.”) Shouldn’t the same courtesy be extended to all intellectual property? In other words, is he really “a thieving little swine” as one “fan” puts it?

Well, I guess he is. But I am trying to imagine a Bob Dylan album with footnotes, asterisks, ibid.’s and nifty little anecdotes about the origins of each song. It’s not going to happen. He’s never pretended to be an academic, or even a nice guy. He is more likely to present himself as, well, a thief. Renegade, outlaw, artist. That’s why we are passionate about him.

Edited September 17, 2006 by Aggie87

[JSngry]

Seriously - I love the cat, but he is not without his quirks, all of which I allow him, but only some of which I feel are relevant to the music.

As for the whole "roots" thing, hey - Dylan's never been a rootateer afaic. Going electric was the truest "true" move he ever made. The rest is smoke & mirrors. Especially mirrors, which he uses in equal parts to display/reflect & to hide behind. Nothing "root-y" about that at all, and so what?

My sole criterion for a "good" Dylan album - is there at least one thing on it that makes me bust out laughing because I get the joke and find it funny.

[JSngry]

From the NY Times ...

The Ballad of Henry Timrod

By SUZANNE VEGA

Published: September 17, 2006

I AM passionate about Bob Dylan. As a songwriter, I find there is nothing like singing “It’s Alright Ma (I’m Only Bleeding).” It is nearly eight minutes of cascading images, rich language and the coolest, most unexpected metaphors. My synapses light up in little fireworks, making connections they don’t get to make in ordinary life.

So I read with curiosity about the similarities between some lyrics on his new album and the verses of a forgotten Civil War-era poet. Who is Henry Timrod? Is it true that Mr. Dylan has been borrowing from his poetry? I ran out and bought the CD — not downloading it, because I wanted the lyric booklet. I wanted to see the evidence. And, of course, I discovered that he includes no lyrics in the CD package. No words at all, not even liner notes. Bob isn’t making this easy.

It’s modern to use history as a kind of closet in which we can rummage around, pull influences from different eras, and make them into collages or pastiches. People are doing this with music all the time. I hear it in, say, Christina Aguilera’s new album, or in the music of Sufjan Stevens.

So I had an open mind when approaching this Dylan album — which is called “Modern Times,” by the way. Does this method of working extend to a lyric? To a metaphor? To Bob Dylan’s taking an exact phrase from some guy we never heard of from the middle of the 19th century without crediting him? That’s what I needed to satisfy myself about.

For example, recently I saw a poem on the subway that startled me. It is by the 13th-century Sufi poet Rumi.

One of my own songs says:

I’d like to meet you

In a timeless, placeless place

Somewhere out of context

And beyond all consequences

I won’t use words again

They don’t mean what I meant

They don’t say what I said

They’re just the crust of the meaning

With realms underneath

Never touched

Never stirred

Never even moved through.

Rumi’s poem says:

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,

There is a field. I’ll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.

Ideas, language, even the phrase each other

Doesn’t make any sense.

Sorry for that chunk of text right there, but I want to make sure everyone is credited properly.

So, I sat on the subway staring at the words, wondering — how did that happen? I had never even heard of Rumi, and I thought the resonance of ideas was a remarkable coincidence. I felt vaguely guilty and wondered if I should be paying royalties to someone.

But back to Bob Dylan. Is it part of the “folk process” to lift a few specific metaphors or phrases whole from someone else’s work? I really don’t think it is. Being influenced by a text and reworking it is not the same as directly quoting, which is what he has done here.

Still, Bob Dylan doesn’t have to steal from anybody. Go into any club that still has hoot night, and you will hear someone at the mike stealing from Bob Dylan. His singing and writing style is one of the most influential and recognizable of the last century. And the phrases that he lifted were only details in the scope of this new album.

Did he do this on purpose? I doubt it. Maybe he has a photographic memory, and bits of text stick to it. Maybe it shows how deeply he had immersed himself in the texts and times of the Civil War, and he was completely unconscious of it. These days if a sample of music is taken, you have to acknowledge the original artists and pay them. (See: “Tom’s Diner.”) Shouldn’t the same courtesy be extended to all intellectual property? In other words, is he really “a thieving little swine” as one “fan” puts it?

Well, I guess he is. But I am trying to imagine a Bob Dylan album with footnotes, asterisks, ibid.’s and nifty little anecdotes about the origins of each song. It’s not going to happen. He’s never pretended to be an academic, or even a nice guy. He is more likely to present himself as, well, a thief. Renegade, outlaw, artist. That’s why we are passionate about him.

Still the voice of a generation!

[Chalupa]

Dylan's been "borrowing", "lifting", and "stealing" for over 40 years. Why is everyone getting worked up over just now??? Frankly, I'm more upset that I just spent $15 on a so-so cd.

Much ado about nothing *

[Chalupa]

* Copyright 1598/1599 by William Shakespeare.

[Chuck Nessa]

Still the voice of a generation!

Don't wanna burst any bubbles but I'd say "a fraction of a generation". Numbers can be argued and really don't mean shit.

[JSngry]

Still the voice of a generation!

Don't wanna burst any bubbles but I'd say "a fraction of a generation". Numbers can be argued and really don't mean shit.

Are you being as ironic as I was?

[Chuck Nessa]

Still the voice of a generation!

Don't wanna burst any bubbles but I'd say "a fraction of a generation". Numbers can be argued and really don't mean shit.

Are you being as ironic as I was?

Didn't notice your ironic smiley.

[Alexander]

The thing that bugs me about Clem's attitude here is twofold:

1) Clem seems to think that in matters of taste his word is absolute law. Don't agree with him? Well, that's because you're WRONG. This Dylan album is substandard. Don't think it is? Well, you're WRONG. Clem says it's substandard, and that's what it is. Oh, you think differently, do you? Well, that's because you're a pathetic FANBOY who will forgive anything as long as it comes from one of your favorites. My favorite bit was when Clem claimed that "Modern Times" "sounds better than it is." That's like saying, "this stake tastes better than it really is. Actually, it's a lousy cut and it's been massively overcooked, but because it tastes so good you don't notice how bad it really is." In other words, "You're stupid for liking something you like. Now stop liking it right away."

2) Clem seems to be of the opinion that knowledge is virtue. He knows about something that I don't, therefore he's a better judge of music than I am. I've been listening to music my whole life (going on 36 years now) and I've been listening seriously for more than half of that time. I've amassed a huge collection of music of all kinds (jazz, blues, classical, country, rock, pop, folk, funk, soul, etc). Have I heard everything there is to hear? God, no! Do I know absolutely everything there is to know about music? No way. I'm a student of music (not in the formal sense) and I relish every opportunity to learn. I'm also constantly on the lookout for recommendations of good music I may not have heard or have undervalued. However, I am a knowledgable listener and the path I've taken has given me tremendous insight. Is it the same path Clem has taken? No. And Clem seems to think that because I've taken a different path from him, that my insights cannot be as valid as his own.

As hard as this may be for Clem to accept, I reserve the right to like anything that sounds good to my ears, even if they don't sound good to his. Even if the things I like are (shudder) POPULAR. Yes, in addition to Dylan I also like Eminem. In addition to Donald Fagen I also like Gnarls Barkley. In addition to Sarah Vaughn I also like Christina Aguilera. I listen to the Georgia Pot Lickers AND OutKast. My tastes are my tastes and I absolutely refuse to apologize for them.

[Man with the Golden Arm]

Why does clem "HATE springsteen so much"? seriously.

[Parkertown]

Haters!

[paul secor]

p/s2: do i remember a lame version of "you don't miss yr water" on "Sweetheart of the Rodeo"? feh. Gram was talented but a black southern soul singer he weren't.

Always felt that Gram Parsons was a better idea than a reality. The concept was there; the image was there; maybe some of the will was there; but there just wasn't much that was real there. For me, the Everly Brothers did it much, much better ten years earlier. I can listen to them, some of the Bakersfield cats, and maybe Percy Sledge or Arthur Alexander and hear what Gram Parsons was supposed to be. OK - he put the hippie spin on it, but, for me, that's nothing much.

Just my take. I'm sure others might disagree, but I know where I'm at on this - have been for a long time.

[Hot Ptah]

p/s2: do i remember a lame version of "you don't miss yr water" on "Sweetheart of the Rodeo"? feh. Gram was talented but a black southern soul singer he weren't.

Always felt that Gram Parsons was a better idea than a reality. The concept was there; the image was there; maybe some of the will was there; but there just wasn't much that was real there. For me, the Everly Brothers did it much, much better ten years earlier. I can listen to them, some of the Bakersfield cats, and maybe Percy Sledge or Arthur Alexander and hear what Gram Parsons was supposed to be. OK - he put the hippie spin on it, but, for me, that's nothing much.

Just my take. I'm sure others might disagree, but I know where I'm at on this - have been for a long time.

For me, he hit a career high point on "Grevious Angel", which to me is one of those albums where they caught lightning in a bottle when it was recorded. If he had lived for another 50 years he probably would not have done anything nearly as good again. The rest of his output---I largely agree with you.

[mailman]

Winter/Spring '62 for Dylan/Zimmerman's visit would fit. Actually, Spider John Koerner and Dave "Snaker" Ray had been around the U. of C. campus (singly or together, I can't be sure) shortly before or after Dylan/Zimmerman arrived. IIRC they made a better impression musically, but because Big Joe Williams was also present fairly often, certain differences were clear.

Spider John Koerner and Dave Snaker Ray. Wow. I haven't heard those guys in at least thirty five years. Do you know what they are up to these days> I used to have a great lp by Koerner called 'Running Jumping Standing Still' that paired him with a wonderful pianist and singer. Wish I still had that one. Seems like such a long time ago.

[ghost of miles]

Re: Webb Pierce, I still intend to pick up that Bear Family box one of these days--still in print, I believe. All I have right now is a single-disc promo I nabbed while I worked at a Chain That Shall Go Nameless. My buddy Greg turned me onto him--Clem, I know you do a ton of listening, but if you're ever bored in NYC on Monday night between 7 & 9 EST (unlikely, I'm sure, but just in case), you might want to check out his show on our community radio station here in B-town: Rhythm Ranch (a lot of the links aren't live yet--he's adding content whenever he gets a chance). He's got an incredible amount of knowledge & music and presents his shows very well... not too much gab, just enough interesting info, and a LOT of obscure folks who've fallen through the cracks of our current musical history. Direct listen live link here. (Though if you happen to tune in tonight, you'll hear a bunch of fund-drive pitches, no doubt... they just kicked off their autumn one. Cool station, though... it's where Greg & I got our start, doing a vintage music show called--thank you, Tina Brooks--"Back to the Tracks.")

Based on what I've read here, I won't be rushing out to buy the new Dylan. Wasn't expecting too much from it anyway... he seems to be in a real retrospective phase, which, given his age (65?) seems natural; anyway, at this point I'm more interested in something like CHRONICLES than I am in new recordings by him.

[Adam]

Honestly, Bug Music could/should sue Dylan for claiming authorship of Rollin' and Tumblin, on behalf of the estate of Muddy Waters.

That said, right now Rollin' and Tumblin is my favorite cut on MODERN TIMES, but I've listened only 3 times or so. Musically, I don't find the album very interesting, but I want to spend more time with the lyrics, and the songs.

[paul secor]

Clem has mentioned John Koerner. Haven't heard him in a long time - didn't grab me then, but perhaps he or I or both of us have changed over time. (I hope we both have.)

Anyway, I'd like to add Michael Hurley's name and music to the mix - anyone who's interested in later (or perhaps any) Dylan could do worse than to check his stuff out.

[bluesbro]

Honestly, Bug Music could/should sue Dylan for claiming authorship of Rollin' and Tumblin, on behalf of the estate of Muddy Waters.

That said, right now Rollin' and Tumblin is my favorite cut on MODERN TIMES, but I've listened only 3 times or so. Musically, I don't find the album very interesting, but I want to spend more time with the lyrics, and the songs.

And the estate of Robert Johnson should follow by suing the Muddy Waters estate for claiming autorship of 'If I had possesion over judgement day'. And then....

[Adam]

re: folk process, this IS complicated question in light of "Modern Times" dullardness, I'm not inclined toward sympathy. ALSO--

1) why EVER credit old blues blurring into p.d. songs?

2) why the FUCK did Bob do "Good As I Been to You" & "World Gone Wrong"?

consistently inconsistent, i remain--

c

I'll take on 2 first. I think he was dry of new material, and felt a need to recharge by covering some old stuff. As I like those albums, I think it was a fine decision for him to make. What is wrong with cover versions? They were trifles in the overall Dylan oeuvre, but still all right.

As to 1. Well, since I'm in the midst of licensing or not licensing a whole bunch of old folk songs for a box set of music & film from Hal Willner's concerts organized to honor Harry Smith and the Anthology of American Folk Music, I can say honestly that there is no rhyme or reason to it. Some people got a claim of authorship in after 1923, and it's held up. Other songs we can show predate 1923, so we are calling them traditional. There are both song writing and arrangement credits possible, and people will usually claim an arrangement credit even on an old song. (See Springsteen's Seeger sessions credits). Others, such as the songs of Blind Lemon Jefferson, are now PD just because no one really claims ownership.

Oh, I would imagine that the publishing for Robert Johnson (King of Spades publishing, contact through Music & Media Ltd.) could sue in theory, but they probably know that some evidence exists that the song actually predates Johnson.

It really goes on a case-by-case basis, and all only makes sense in terms of a system of making sure people make money.

I mean, "Happy Birthday to you" still is "owned" by a publilsher, although the music is known to date to a 19th century children's song. But the lyrics were an incredible innovation. :-)

Edited September 18, 2006 by Adam

[Chuck Nessa]

Have you heard this obscure old blues song, "Rollin' & Tumblin'"? It's sumpin' else!! (Parts 1 & 2.) Originally released Aristocrat single 412, in 1950, writer credit to one McKinley Morganfield, Watertoons Music, BMI adm. Bug.

c

***

p/s: check that--

"Watertoons Music, owned by The Estate of McKinley Morganfield administered by Bug."

Clem, your might have "stepped on your dick" here. I believe the Chess/Aristocrat recording was a cover of Baby Face Leroy Foster's recording (with Muddy and Little Walter) on Parkway done a month earlier. Little Walter always claimed authorship. Delmark issued this on vinyl (DL-648) and cd but I strongly recommend the lp - they robbed the cd of the recording's soul.