• commentary
  • THURSDAY AUGUST 24 2006 10:00 AM

Blowing Chunks in the Wind

Submitted by johnnyfu

Edited by Rahodeb

Tags: Bob Dylan, Black Sabbath

I hate Bob Dylan so much it's hard to express it. There is no more overrated figure in modern music, and none more bizarrely worshipped. As far as I can see, there's only one good thing about him: watching desperate pundits explain the demented ramblings of the dottering Emperor Ming-looking motherfucker.

Everything that's supposed to be good about the artist formerly known as Zimmerman is something bad. Even though he was over-lauded in his early 60s Woody Guthrie rip-off phase, he "bravely" stopped playing protest music at pretty much the only point in American history protest music could have mattered. He courageously "went electric" after the Beatles and Stones proved it was big business, and only altered the then-popular-music-model by injecting a killer lode of pretension and shitty singing. And his over-praised impressionistic lyrical style has been the inspiration for so much bad high school poetry that he and all of his children should be burnt at the stake.

He's supposed to be the main avatar of smart pop music. I got news for him and all of his fans; "War Pigs," written and performed by allegedly dumb metal ensemble Black Sabbath is an infinitely more succinct, direct and accurate anti-war, anti-elite statement than anything in the catalog of Dylan, Baez or any other coffee shop staple. And it rocks.

So when the voice of an obsolete generation says "I don't know anybody who's made a record that sounds decent in the past twenty years, really," it's cause for grim celebration.

Really, you whiny, nasally voiced troubadour. Have you listened to any of the records you've put out in that span of time? I'm just spit-balling here, but I have a feeling that like most of your surviving audience, you put each one on once and shelved it along with the rest of your faded hopes.

And why would 1986 be your cut-off point? I mean, shit, they're not even my favorite band or anything, but that was the year the Pixies put out their first record. And that's just one example, one that doesn't require going into the deep cut record bins.

The continued existence of Bob Dylan is embarrassing for everyone. Sometime around 1966, Dylan was in a motorcycle accident. If he was the genius everybody claims he is, he wouldn't have pretended to have survived it.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
papawheelie

papawheelie

Fisty, KY
February 2003

AUG 24, 2006 10:05 AM

back away from the glue-bag

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:09 AM

Hilarious bullshit from someone who lists travelling nostalgia baby boomer act the Rolling Stones as their favorite band. How edgy!

truthbealiar

truthbealiar

Providence, RI
July 2006

AUG 24, 2006 10:10 AM

Good lord this news section is a joke.

zyryx

zyryx

Tyler, TX
April 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:16 AM

did you follow and read this link? might add a bit more perspective

Electric_Mayhem

Electric_Mayhem

Olympia, WA
January 2006

AUG 24, 2006 10:18 AM

uhhhh he was referring to the overly processed digital studio recordings where songs are so littered with crap that they sound nothing like they do live. I sould have expected that the main point of your article would have been founded on confusion when almost everthing you said is just so many levels of wrong that i read it three times to make sure i was not missing some fear the reaper esque sarcasm.....no, no sarcasm just ignorance. but hey, congratulations you inspired my first ever comment on this site.

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:20 AM

The funniest thing is that the writer of this piece clearly didn't read what Dylan said.

He was talking about the sound and how the material is recorded and mastered, not the actual music, genius.


Bob Dylan [says modern recordings sound "atrocious," and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the studio than on disc.

"I don't know anybody who's made a record that sounds decent in the past twenty years, really," the 65-year-old rocker said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

Dylan, who released eight studio albums in that time, returns with his first recording in five years, "Modern Times," next Tuesday.

Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway."

"You listen to these modern records, they're atrocious, they have sound all over them," he added. "There's no definition of nothing, no vocal, no nothing, just like ... static."

Dylan said he does his best to fight technology, but it's a losing battle.

"Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."


so, yeah, that's a pretty brilliant article you just wrote.

DhD_No_Pants

DhD_No_Pants

Katy, TX
May 2006

AUG 24, 2006 10:23 AM

PointBlank said:
The funniest thing is that the writer of this piece clearly didn't read what Dylan said.

He was talking about the sound and how the material is recorded and mastered, not the actual music, genius.


Bob Dylan [says modern recordings sound "atrocious," and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the studio than on disc.

"I don't know anybody who's made a record that sounds decent in the past twenty years, really," the 65-year-old rocker said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

Dylan, who released eight studio albums in that time, returns with his first recording in five years, "Modern Times," next Tuesday.

Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway."

"You listen to these modern records, they're atrocious, they have sound all over them," he added. "There's no definition of nothing, no vocal, no nothing, just like ... static."

Dylan said he does his best to fight technology, but it's a losing battle.

"Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."


so, yeah, that's a pretty brilliant article you just wrote.



Ya'll got to the point before I could. I am so slow.

SignalNoise

SignalNoise

USA
February 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:24 AM

That "commentary" tab is the like the worst thing to happen the news wire since ever. 'Cause pretty much all it seems to encourage is ridiculous polemics that are working really hard to be super hip and mostly just sound like, well, like stupid polemics.

legionnaire

legionnaire

Belgium
November 2003

AUG 24, 2006 10:35 AM

SignalNoise said:
That "commentary" tab is the like the worst thing to happen the news wire since ever. 'Cause pretty much all it seems to encourage is ridiculous polemics that are working really hard to be super hip and mostly just sound like, well, like stupid polemics.


Hey, I love my stupid polemics. tongue (every article I write is filed under "commentary" to avoid the "is this really news?" questions)

As to the original post, I've never really understood what's supposed to be so great about Bob Dylan's music. But I don't really get the vitriol that's being thrown at him either. At worst he's mildly entertaining, and there are people who care a lot more about music than I do who seem to think he's great, so I'm guessing there's probably something to it.


jvcturntable

jvcturntable

Columbus, OH
February 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:36 AM

Johnnyfu makes some excellent points. I could never understand how Dylan got to be so worshipped after watching him drunkenly argue in "Don't Look Back". "I just want to know who threw that glass, man!"

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

AUG 24, 2006 10:38 AM

legionnaire said:

SignalNoise said:
That "commentary" tab is the like the worst thing to happen the news wire since ever. 'Cause pretty much all it seems to encourage is ridiculous polemics that are working really hard to be super hip and mostly just sound like, well, like stupid polemics.


Hey, I love my stupid polemics. tongue (every article I write is filed under "commentary" to avoid the "is this really news?" questions)

As to the original post, I've never really understood what's supposed to be so great about Bob Dylan's music. But I don't really get the vitriol that's being thrown at him either. At worst he's mildly entertaining, and there are people who care a lot more about music than I do who seem to think he's great, so I'm guessing there's probably something to it.


The commentary, or someone saying they hate Bob Dylan, doesn't bother me at all (especially seeing as how I have a chance to respond in the comment section), but it's sort of lame that the author, through ignorance or deliberate manipulation, has tried to make it seem like the guy said something he didn't.

jaggy

jaggy

Austin, TX
October 2003

AUG 24, 2006 11:02 AM

oooooh, this is from the "Commentary" ..we should have a "Humor" tab . maybe this shit should go under that.

nobodaddy

nobodaddy

Burlington, VT
August 2003

AUG 24, 2006 11:12 AM

The author and the editor should be embarrassed for not understanding what they are writing/editing about.

As for what Dylan is actually talking about, he's been saying that for a while, and of course he's dead right. It made me recall the Wikipedia entry for Time Out of Mind.



Those records were made a long time ago, and you know, truthfully, records that were made in that day and age all were good. They all had some magic to them because the technology didn't go beyond what the artist was doing. It was a lot easier to get excellence back in those days on a record than it is now. I made records back then just like a lot of other people who were my age, and we all made good records. Those records seem to cast a long shadow. But how much of it is the technology and how much of it is the talent and influence, I really don't know. I know you can't make records that sound that way any more. The high priority is technology now. It's not the artist or the art. It's the technology that is coming through. That's what makes Time Out of Mind... it doesn't take itself seriously, but then again, the sound is very significant to that record. If that record was made more haphazardly, it wouldn't have sounded that way. It wouldn't have had the impact that it did. The guys that helped me make it went out of their way to make a record that sounds like a record played on a record player. There wasn't any wasted effort on Time Out of Mind, and I don't think there will be on any more of my records.

Maude

Maude

I'm lost
July 2005

AUG 24, 2006 11:37 AM

i am dreading the release of the new Dylan album. the regular customers at my store are aging neo-hippies and they eat this shit right up. i'm hoping i won't hate the new album anywhere near as much as i hated the newest Neil Young and Paul Simon albums. they all try to talk to me about these artists as if i am also infatuated with them. i didn't grow up in the sixties, i'm not nostalgic for mediocre artists with obnoxious voices and exponential pretentiousness.

stupid aging neo-hippies. mad

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

AUG 24, 2006 11:51 AM

Oh, look, another new newswire editor with another strident, inchoate rant.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

featured interviews