Bob Dylan as Richard Wagner – The New Yorker

The announcement that Bob Dylan will be given the Nobel Prize in Literature set off a predictable but not entirely pointless controversy. Is Dylan literature? If so, does he deserve a place next to Thomas Mann and T. S. Eliot? And, even then, is there a pragmatic argument to be made against giving another big prize to a pop-culture colossus at a time when so many worthy writers struggle in obscurity? Although my Dylan fandom is as immoderate as anyone’s–in 1998, I followed him around the country for several weeks and wrote about the experience for The New Yorker–I’ve been half-swayed by the less huffy protests. As the novelist Hari Kunzru has observed, a Nobel citation can exponentially increase a writer’s audience and help keep independent publishers afloat; in 2016, that opportunity was lost. On the other hand, Dylan did write the line “Behind every beautiful thing there’s been some kind of pain.”

Alex Ross makes an interesting comparison of Bob Dylan and Richard Wagner (Ross’s favorite composer), suggesting that they were both artists of Word and Tone.

However, I’m irked by the way Hari Kunzru’s odd comments have been amplified in many fora. This author seems to think that the Nobel prize is meant as a marketing tool to be granted to the downtrodden and unknown. Suggesting that the Nobel should help “keep independent publishers afloat” is ludicrous. The Nobel is a prize that rewards an author’s body of work, the work of a lifetime, it’s not a glib nod toward some unknown writer who toils in obscurity, meant to shower them with sales. It may often work that way; at least, it may be seen that way by Americans, who know little of foreign literature (though Mr. Kunzru, not being American, may have a better awareness of authors writing in languages other than English). But the fact that a novelist assumes that its purpose is to spur sales is, to say the least, surprising. I’m afraid I’m not familiar with Mr. Kunzru’s work, and perhaps he felt that he deserved this prize, in order to increase his audience… This is an astonishing sense of entitlement from an author seeking more attention.

I discussed that and other anti-Dylan arguments in this article.

And read what an editor for a small press that publishes a number of Nobel prize winners has to say.

Source: Bob Dylan as Richard Wagner – The New Yorker

4 thoughts on “Bob Dylan as Richard Wagner – The New Yorker

  1. ““Behind every beautiful thing there’s been some kind of pain.””
    Gee, how profound.
    If Bob Dylan’s body of work is of high quality and has lasting value, how would you sum up its point/purpose?

  2. ““Behind every beautiful thing there’s been some kind of pain.””
    Gee, how profound.
    If Bob Dylan’s body of work is of high quality and has lasting value, how would you sum up its point/purpose?

  3. I agree with you, Kirk, in your opposition to the “Noble Prize as marketing tool” assertions popping up in too many places. Among other problems with the idea, it is like claiming someone else “stole” my chance to win the lottery. If there are a hundred thousand under-appreciated authors in the world, surely a low estimate, then the Nobel committee couldn’t reward them all in 100,000 years. The winner must be living, after all. It’s silly to claim that naming Dylan harms this group in any meaningful way.

    Regarding the article that you linked, the author draws some interesting comparisons between Wagner and Dylan, while exploring the relationship of words and music. I wonder if Gilbert and Sullivan might have been a more enlightening, or at least entertaining, comparison. What I found most curious was his criticism of the third verse of “Simple Twist of Fate”, one of two poems that he quotes. What he calls “a little flat and feeble” I think is a superb piece of the poem. Each of the six lines presents an additional concrete visual image, which together paint both the location of the poem and disolution of the relationship, and then weave smoothly and meaningfully into the restatement of the refrain/title. It is evocative and metaphoric, while being clear and comprehensible. Dylan didn’t always aim for understandable, and I like his obscure verses as well. But while he has penned some lines that might rate the author’s criticism, the selected verse soars a great distance from it.

  4. I agree with you, Kirk, in your opposition to the “Noble Prize as marketing tool” assertions popping up in too many places. Among other problems with the idea, it is like claiming someone else “stole” my chance to win the lottery. If there are a hundred thousand under-appreciated authors in the world, surely a low estimate, then the Nobel committee couldn’t reward them all in 100,000 years. The winner must be living, after all. It’s silly to claim that naming Dylan harms this group in any meaningful way.

    Regarding the article that you linked, the author draws some interesting comparisons between Wagner and Dylan, while exploring the relationship of words and music. I wonder if Gilbert and Sullivan might have been a more enlightening, or at least entertaining, comparison. What I found most curious was his criticism of the third verse of “Simple Twist of Fate”, one of two poems that he quotes. What he calls “a little flat and feeble” I think is a superb piece of the poem. Each of the six lines presents an additional concrete visual image, which together paint both the location of the poem and disolution of the relationship, and then weave smoothly and meaningfully into the restatement of the refrain/title. It is evocative and metaphoric, while being clear and comprehensible. Dylan didn’t always aim for understandable, and I like his obscure verses as well. But while he has penned some lines that might rate the author’s criticism, the selected verse soars a great distance from it.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.