- After the depression of “I’m not there” then where is Bob?
- Dress it up better have it all; she’s not there!
By Tony Attwood
If you have managed to read some of my ramblings on this site over the past 18 years or so, you may not agree with me, but I like to think I know quite a bit about Bob Dylan, his recordings, his compositions, his writings and his performances. On the other hand I don’t know that much about Picasso, although I have meandered around numerous galleries and do have in my house a number of books on the subject of 20th century art – some of which I have even read.
And indeed I am taken by Andy Warhol’s comment on Dylan to the effect that “he created a brilliant new style. He didn’t spend his career doing homage to the past…”
So a book that contains quotes from Warhol on an introductory page and explains to me a lot about the work of Picasso that I didn’t know, is bound to go down well. And that is exactly what Janes Charnley’s book, “Dylan-Picasso: Memory, fate and coincidence,” does, among other things. It helps me understand Picasso’s work, and puts Dylan’s compositions and performances within the context of 20th century art movements.
But… although I do recommend this book to you if you have an interest in the 20th century beyond playing Dylan records, and watching films of Dylan on stage when you have the chance, there is another point.
Picasso was a visual artist, so that is what we consider – his visual art – and this book has many illustrations in it to help us do that. And Dylan was a songwriter, which in his case means he wrote lyrics and music. And yet is very little about Bob’s music (which is to say the notes and rhythm) in this book. There’s a lot about his use of language – but not so much about the music.l
Now that doesn’t bother me too much because I trained and worked as a musician before moving across to forging a career in writing, but I do constantly feel the need to make the point that Bob wrote (and for all I know still writes) music. Indeed as far as I know he is also responsible for the musical arrangements that we hear in each concert.
This is not to say there is anything wrong with what is in the “Dylan-Picasso” book – and indeed I have learned a phenomenal amount about Picasso and how his work may be considered alongside that of Dylan, from reading the volume. Further, I have never previously thought of linking Dylan to Picasso, but now the point has been made, I can see the validity of the link. But for me, even if no one lese, there is a big issue to be considered here.
As this volume says, Picasso and Dylan matter because their works touch our hearts and conquer our minds. Now that has been said to me I can see it is true in the works of Picasso, and I would immediately agree it is true with Dylan. But in the case of Dylan it is true because of the way he uses music.
So yes I agree “Dylan crossed folk, rock n roll, blues and poetry to reinvent modern music,” and I don’t want to make the music more important than anything else, but I want to include the music when we talk about Bob’s work.
And this is a vital thought when one notes Dylan saying “If it’s not for all time, it’s not worth doing”. But then how do you make popular music “for all time”? Bob found the answer to that by combining elements of folk song with the utterly contemporary musical format found in songs, such as “It’s alright ma” – a work that is musically in total contrast to earlier pieces such as “Don’t think twice”.
Dylan also had the amazing ability to combine the lyrical style of popular music through songs like “Blowing in the Wind” with his own remourceless declamatory musical style emphasising the collapse of our culture and civilisation in “Its alright, Ma, I’m only bleeding”
This is not in any way to say that Charnley has got any of this wrong – in my view he is quite right to link Dylan with Picasso, but if Dylan had only written poetry I am not sure I would be devoting time to running this blog for the past 18 years.
What I am saying is that Charnley’s work in linking Dylan and Picasso as great artists of our times, is indeed insightful and valuable. Just the simple notion that neither genius wanted to be part of any group (remember how often it has been “Bob Dylan and his band”) is vital to understanding Dylan so the writing of the music does not diminish Dylan’s expression of genius – it enhances it.
So when Howard Alk noted that Dylan wanted to fracture reality, we can understand this so much more easily by playing “It’s Alright Ma” and for once listening to the music, noting how the melody such as it is hammers away on one note while bass line gradually descends until that slight relief at the end of each line. And so it continues until that more fulsome release with the title line sung (with variations) at the end of each verse, as the chord that holds the music together finally is allowed to change. For me, that is part of the power and drive as much as the lyrics.
What Charnley does give us is real understandings of both Picasso and Dylan – the simple phrase “Picasso, the definitive modern artist… reached a long way back to go forward” really does hammer home to a non-visual artist like me just what Picasso was doing.
Thus I think that for me, as a musician, and most certainly not a visual artist, the entry point to Dylan’s work is quite different from that of the visual artist, and thus the conclusions are bound to be different. But I can accept that in the 60s Dylan was at the point where Picasso had been decades before, disrupting, exploring, overturning. And I can fully agree that, “The albums he [Dylan] released and the performances he delivered between 1963 and 1968 were breathtaking in their originality, audacity and brilliance.” Indeed exactly as it was for Picasso sixty years before.
So maybe I am being picky, doing my usual thing of trying to drag commentators on Dylan away from the lyrics and onto the music. But hopefully, if you have any interest in Bob’s place in 20th century culture you will use this volume to see Bob alongside Picasso as one of the great revolutionaries and leaders of his chosen art form.
Indeed in this volume there are vast numbers of Dylan comments that make one stop and think “What???” (such as the notion that Hank Williams had the voice of God) but each is informative in its own way, and each lingers in the mind.
You cannot find out too much more about Dylan the musician here, but Dylan the lyricist, with a disregard for all that has gone before, is most certainly here. As when talking about his change of name Bob dismisses any link with the Welsh poet by saying simply, “I’ve read some of Dylan Thomas’ stuff, and it’s not the same as mine.”
“Dylan-Picasso: Memory, Fate and Coincidence” by James Charnley, published by i2i Publishing, Manchester, UK. https://i2ipublishing.co.uk
- Recent posts….
- After the depression of “I’m not there” then where is Bob?
- Dress it up better have it all; she’s not there!