Dylan’s Nobel: Don’t Think Twice, It’s Alright

A.M. Juster
October 27, 2016
It was a big surprise to hear that Bob Dylan has been awarded the 2016 Nobel Prize for Literature. But it won’t surprise anybody who has attended a “Mumbles” concert to hear that he hasn’t thanked the Swedish Academy or even returned their calls. He treats his audiences with equal disdain. Maybe that’s why many critics rushed to condemn the award. But as rude and inscrutable as he can be, writes A.M. Juster, Dylan deserves the Prize because most of his lyrics make far more sense than most contemporary poetry, and provide enduring insights on matters of liberty, morality and faith.

The announcement of Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize shocked many people. Even before a Swedish Academy member called Dylan “impolite” and “arrogant” for his standoffishness about accepting his Prize, the Academy’s selection ignited more attention and debate than any literature award in decades.

Praise swamped criticism, but within the literary establishment there was a spirited backlash. Outrage seemed to come even from the grave as angry detractors exhumed Kurt Vonnegut’s 1991 Hustler interview in which he called Dylan’s lyrics “gibberish” and Dylan himself “the worst poet alive.”

Some of Dylan songs undeniably descend into jokey self-parody.  “Wiggle wiggle like a bowl of soup/wiggle wiggle like a rolling hoop” or “If dogs run free, then why not we/Across the swooping plain?” are indefensible but we can’t judge writers by the worst five percent of their work. After all, Shakespeare wrote Titus Andronicus and Eliot wrote cat poems that provoked an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical only marginally less dreadful than Webber’s suicide-inducing Starlight Express.

The success of Hamilton teaches us that lyrics are an increasingly important genre of literature in an increasingly nonliterary culture. As important as they are, it is a mistake to judge lyrics apart from their musical context. Shaggy English teachers straining to be “relevant” in the Sixties earnestly made that mistake with marvelous lyrics of the Beatles, Paul Simon and others, but it never worked. Dana Gioia’s libretto for the regrettably ignored opera Nosferatu works scarily well as poetry on the page, but such accomplishments are rare.

Juster - Inset

Dylan’s Nobel selection endorses the judgment that lyrics are a form of poetry that we must judge on its own terms. Moreover, his selection is a slap at the “postmodern” English-language poetry guild, an inbred group that denounces clarity, craft, values and ideas. This guild has walled off poetry from the public so that it has become just a stimulus for mutual back-scratching, laughable jargon, sloppy criticism, and easy ideological pronouncements. It goes without saying that postmodernists have drained music and musicality from poetry – the very features that made poetry popular ever since humans began to brood about topics other than what we should eat next.

While the Nobel Committee’s formal statements rarely reveal their true rationales, it is inescapable that they valued Dylan’s lyrics for their success in stirring pleasure and inspiration – and rightly so. More people can recite Dylan lyrics than any lines from all the top modernist poets combined. Around the world Dylan has inspired more political change than all our think tanks combined.

What the left-wing Nobel Committee probably missed – as did the 1960’s counterculture – is the libertarian strain in Dylan’s lyrics, a strain he acknowledged in “I Shall Be Free No. 10” (“Now I’m liberal, but to a degree/I want everybody to be free”). Steeped in American history and most genres of traditional American music, Dylan’s greatest songs denied the nihilism of “revolution for the hell of it”:

 

Disillusioned words like bullets bark

As human gods aim for their marks,

Make everything from toy guns that spark

To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark,

It’s easy to see without looking too far

That not much is really sacred.

While preachers preach of evil fates

Teachers teach that knowledge waits,

Can lead to hundred-dollar plates.

Goodness hides behind its gates,

But even the president of the United States

Sometimes must have to stand naked.

“It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)”

Underneath the superficial pessimism of “not much is really sacred” is Dylan’s implicit insistence that many things should be sacred. In fact, there is a stubborn optimism underlying even Dylan’s darkest songs because he embraces faith in people and democratic institutions, as in his iconic anthem, “The Times They Are A-Changin’” (“Come senators, congressmen/Please heed the call./Don’t stand in the doorway;/Don’t block up the hall.”)

Dylan’s moral vision resisted the sudden secularism of the Sixties and stood proudly on religious underpinnings. His first album included “Gospel Plow,” and he fueled some of his most powerful lyrics with religious imagery and rhetoric:

 

Like Judas of old

You lie and deceive.

A world war can be won;

You want me to believe.

(“Masters of War”)

 

Through the mad mystic hammering of the wild ripping hail

The sky cracked its poems in naked wonder

That the clinging of the church bells blew far into the breeze

Leaving only bells of lightning and its thunder.

(“Chimes of Freedom”)

 

I dreamed I saw St. Augustine

Alive as you and me

Tearing through these quarters

In the utmost misery

With a blanket underneath his arm

And a coat of solid gold

Searching for the very souls

Whom already have been sold.

(“I Dreamed I Saw St. Augustine”)

Dylan’s earliest fans usually ignored or dismissed Dylan’s religious messages and metaphors, so he got explicit with 1973’s transcendent “Knocking On Heaven’s Door” and his devotional songs of the late Seventies and early Eighties, such as “Gotta Serve Somebody” and “When He Returns.” As Dylan evolved from “The Times They Are A-Changin’” to the 2006 album “Things Have Changed,” he wrote less evangelically, but always in innovative, often playful, ways that demand moral introspection.

Dylan’s Nobel honors his words for their musicality, accessibility, and ideas. His recognition may help to drag scholars, MFA programs, and literary journals away from their postmodernist tedium and toward a welcome revival of poetry that provokes and delights the public. For that reason alone, as others flame about Dylan’s Nobel don’t think twice – it’s alright.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

A Political Giant Passes the Torch

The expression “he’s earned his retirement” could have been written for Preston Manning. The party-founding Canadian political original, onetime Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, prolific author and tireless public affairs commentator has accomplished enough for any five regular folks. He’s nearly 78, has grandchildren, a ranch and loves to ride horses. But with distant echoes of the early Roman republican Cincinnatus or the late Roman emperor Diocletian, crises of the state and confusion among the citizenry press upon him. So Manning finds himself doing double-duty as the most politically experienced member of Alberta’s Fair Deal Panel and, today in Toronto, launching a nationwide tour to promote his new book aimed at the current problems of democracy and conservatism in Canada. Paul Stanway reviews.

The Ford Government’s Formula for Relief of Public-Sector Labour Pain

With fiscally-conservatives parties in power in most provinces and deficits plaguing nearly all of them, contentious labour negotiations with entrenched public-sector unions seem inevitable, and strikes are very likely to follow. Ontario’s current teachers’ strike is thus a sign of things to come, with Alberta probably close behind. So how should politicians prepare themselves for the pain of long, drawn-out public sector strikes – perhaps even avoiding the typical ignominious climb-down? Peter Shawn Taylor reveals how one provincial government came up with a simple, parent-friendly strategy to buy itself time for credible negotiations.

Future of Conservatism Series, Part II: The Harper Victory Formula

There are two components to any political movement: theory and reality. A coherent political ideology is crucial to any functioning party, but so too is recognizing a viable path to success. Few Canadians have as much direct experience fusing political theory with political reality as Tom Flanagan − scholar, author and senior decision-maker in three major conservative political organizations. In the second installment of C2C Journal’s Future of Conservatism Special Series, Flanagan reveals four important lessons from the recent past as the Conservative Party of Canada reassembles the shards of its devastating October electoral defeat.

The Commissioner of Canada Elections vs. Ezra Levant: A Faux Pas de Deux

Secret video recordings. Former counter-terrorism policemen interrogating a lone journalist over his recent book and promotional lawn signs. Insults and accusations of bullying. Potentially draconian fines and even jail time over spending $501 or more on a perfectly legal service that thousands of businesses use daily. Grant A. Brown chronicles Act I of the tragicomic battle between free speech warrior Ezra Levant of Rebel News and the Commissioner of Canada Elections – and warns that free speech rights for all of us are again under threat.

Where’s the Veto for Common Sense?

It’s difficult to imagine that even Canada’s activist appellate courts truly intended what they eventually wrought with the doctrine of “aboriginal consultation”. But here we are, with tiny minorities-within-minorities seeking vetoes over critical projects, oblivious to the impact on tens of thousands of others. The federal government, meanwhile, is busily deepening the hole as it kowtows to UN directives as ignorant as they are arrogant. Gwyn Morgan evaluates the farcical melodrama and issues a stout “Stop!” Will the politicians listen?

An Endless Cycle of Despair

No one will disagree that there’s something terribly broken with Indigenous child welfare in Canada. But is the solution for the rest of the country to give up caring about native children altogether? That’s the plan behind new federal legislation that aims to ‘fully Indigenize’ child welfare services. Drawing on his own deep experience with the tragic consequences of the current system, former Manitoba provincial court judge Brian Giesbrecht reveals why Ottawa’s new approach will simply perpetuate Canada’s long history of failure to protect native children from the real causes of family dysfunction.

Share This Story

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required