Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by tinear (A) on February 04, 2010 at 11:58:41

In Reply to: RE: You seem unable to keep on topic. Dylan was an individualist. What does that posted by Jazz Inmate on February 04, 2010 at 09:40:31

is spot-on.
You see, Jazz, I lived through that period. Dylan was excoriated for going electric, just as Simon and Garfunkel were. It was exactly the same thing. The two most intelligent folk artists (okay, 2 out of 3: I'd put Joan [Baez, not Collins] in there, too) went electric and this drove the "purists" crazy.
Certainly, Dylan's increasingly apolitical and nuanced lyrics upset folks but you seem unable to appreciate that, as with S & G, leaving behind more political commentary isn't exactly going over to the other side.
As far as what "anti-establishment" meant, you're very misguided. The establishment was for going slow, for the status quo, for aggressive American foreign activity. Civil rights was a "lefty," "liberal" thing and it got through Congress because of a massive, grass-roots movement and lots of arm-twisting by an unlikely player, a Southern Democrat named LBJ. Anti-war, anti-corporate America, anti-racism, anti-arms race--- these were the anthemic threads of the liberal "youth movement."
They still are.
Dylan is an artist, of course, and not a shill. He indeed did mature as an artist though, as with earlier Beatles tunes, the excellence of the younger material remains. Does his 70s conversion and enthusiasm for Christianity dull his earlier works? I don't think so. I think it's merely a progression along the same path.