![]() |
Shakespeare in the AlleyShow twelve--dylan and the traditions |
|
summaryThis concluding show explores Dylan’s relationship to three traditions: modern poetry, popular song, traditional song. I argue that he is indebted to all three but at the same time tries to overcome the limitations which each impose on the artist. My conclusion: he takes the best, leaves the rest. SHAKESPEARE IN THE ALLEY 12: DYLAN AND THE TRADITIONS ~INTRODUCTION: TWO TRADITIONS—TIN PAN ALLEY AND MODERN POETRY Welcome back, gentle listeners, to this concluding show in this series of shows about Bob Dylan’s poetics. In the first show I said there is no need to discuss whether Dylan is a poet. That goes without saying. This series of shows is rather about his poetics: about how his songs work, what themes run through his work, what forms he explores, and how we as audience can go further into them, not just far enough so we can say we’ve been there. This final show explores the relationship of Dylan’s songs to various traditions, beginning with American popular music and Modern Poetry.
Dylan's rejection of Tin Pan Alley parallels his rejection of the modern poetic tradition which in mid-twentieth century was epitomized by the work of T. S. Eliot. But while rejecting the failures of both of these traditions, he builds on and borrows from both modern poetry and popular music, creating a blend which draws on the strengths of each. Song, whether popular or traditional, is by its very nature unlike modern poetry. Modern poetry is written for the page, for the eye. Song, on the other hand, is not only meant for the ear, it is meant to be performed. That performance, whether live or recorded, is viewed by its audience first as entertainment, not as art. Because song is heard as entertainment, it enjoys a wide and diverse audience. Poetry, highly popular in the nineteenth century, in the twentieth century cut itself off from all that. In fact what we have come to label "Modern Poetry" seems to have purposely cut itself off from the people. Published in special reviews for elite audiences, the poetry of Eliot and Pound and others became increasingly academic and isolated as the twentieth century progressed. Certainly there was a reaction against such poetry by Robert Frost, by the Welsh poet Dylan Thomas, and by the Beatniks. But the general trend was clearly toward poetry which was intellectual, academic, and obscure. As the audience for poetry shrank, the audience for song grew as a result of the new media: the radio, the phonograph, the movies, and then television. Song flourished in these media, while poetry retreated into the groves of academe. Poetry climbed the ivory tower and isolated. ~DYLAN REJECTS ISOLATION: POUND AND ELIOT IN “DESOLATION ROW” Dylan portrayed the isolation of modern poetry in the penultimate verse to “Desolation Row.” He pictures the two chief founding fathers of this modern poetry—aloof, isolated, and guiding us toward destruction:
The Highway 61 Revisited album, released in 1965, represents Dylan at the height of his popularity, his commercial success. It contains “Like a Rolling Stone,” his first time in the top ten list. For the modern poet, such success was immediately suspect. As Dylan put it, “There’s no success like failure, and failure’s no success at all.” Another indication of Dylan’s success was the media attention. Only four months after the release of Highway 61 Revisited the New York Times ran three separate articles on him in the December 12, 1965 Sunday edition. One of them suggested the "outlaw" quality of his impact by the title: it was called "Public Writer No. 1?" Many of the articles in the press spoke of Dylan’s work as poetry. Somehow Dylan had created songs which spoke to a wide audience AND was responded to as poetry, not as “just a song.” Dylan was drawing on both traditions in order to overcome the limitations in each. Not only does this verse from “Desolation Row” demonstrate that Dylan was aware of himself as a poet working in relationship to the modern poetry tradition; it also illustrates the complexity of his poetics. The first half of the verse is filled with images and allusions from western history and mythology which are rich in connotations. Dylan gives us Nero, a Roman emperor from ancient history whose name still evokes a vivid image of Rome burning while he played his violin; then comes Neptune, the one Greek god which almost everyone can identify as the god of the sea; next he gives us the Titanic, that historic symbol of human technological hubris embedded in every modern consciousness. Then comes a line which is really the title to a song, one not widely known outside the folk song circles of the times. "Which Side Are You On?" is an old union song, suggesting the need to take sides in a fight for what is right. While it doesn’t seem to fit on first hearing, like many of those enigmatic phrases of Dylan’s, there’s more there than meets the ear. The scene portrays the Titanic's departure, so the question becomes a snobbish inquiry about one's berth place—excuse the pun, but it’s to the point. The berths, i.e., the cabins on such luxury ships were assigned by status. Those who could afford it made sure their cabins were on the portside out, seaside home. When abbreviated on reservations “Portside Out, Seaside Home” became P-O-S-H. Thus our use of the word posh which means fashionable, a word that separates the classes in America. This class distinction is seen reflected in the verse itself, where the posh images and references are all in the first half and the common, down-to-earth ones in the second. The classy and classical images in the first half of the verse, Nero, Neptune, Titanic, end with the two most famous modern poets: “Ezra Pound and T. S. Eliot fighting in the captain's tower" precisely halfway through the verse. The second half of the verse is filled with images which, while common, are also universal, even archetypal. They do not draw their power from a classical or literary or historical source but from universal experience: sea, singer, fishermen, windows, flowers. Calypso singers and mermaids, while exotic perhaps, are not upper class by any means; they continue the distinction based on class which I am making. The opposition is best seen in the contrast between those founding fathers of Modern Poetry in the tower (is it perhaps an “ivory” tower?) and the laughing calypso singers and fishermen holding flowers. More generally, it comes to represent the differences between those on board the Titanic and those not. The entire verse is unified by imagery of the sea and the Titanic’s departure.
~DYLAN REJECTS OVER SIMPLIFICATION: “ONLY A PAWN IN THEIR GAME” During the sixties many people still saw a clear distinction between right and wrong. It was as simple as knowing black from white. That’s the way Dylan puts it in “Bob Dylan’s Dream” writtenin 1962, recorded on his second album, The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan:
Dylan, after accepting these views at first, grew to resist over-simplification and the one road did indeed shatter and split. A good example of his movement beyond an over-simplified view of right and wrong is found in his response to the murder of Medgar Evers. This black man from Mississippi dared to register to vote and encouraged other blacks to do the same. When Evers was shot down on his front porch by a lone gunman, some wrote songs condemning the killer, taking a simple view. Dylan, looking deeper and writing with more poetic power, went beyond such simple condemnation to look at the underlying causes. He shows us how the murderer himself is “only a pawn in their game.” It’s not a simple black/white distinction anymore:
"Only a Pawn in the Game" presents the complexity of the situation. It goes beyond a condemnation of the act of pulling the trigger to look at the underlying causes of the act. J. W. Cash in The Mind of the South spends a hundred pages describing these causes, and Dylan condenses it all into five vivid verses. The poor white, the song suggests, pays an even greater price than the wronged black, for when they bury Medgar Evers he will be "lowered down as a king,"
It is he, the murderer, the poor white man who pulls the trigger, not the black man who dies from the bullet, who is only a pawn in their game. Avoiding people’s games is one of Dylan’s mantras. The name at which the finger fires, the name which is the most powerful expression of American racism, the name which goes without saying but is on everyone’s mind, is, of course, that most volatile of all racist terms in the American scene: "Nigger."
Dylan’s feelings about the dehumanization such racial epithets lead to is clear in a letter he wrote to the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee after accepting their Tom Paine award:
It is clear that Dylan saw much to reject in the media which dominate our society. In his memoir, Chronicles Vol. 1, published in 2004, Dylan commented on the one medium which was the primary source of music at the time he emerged on the scene. Things were pretty sleepy on the American music scene in the late ‘50s and early ‘60s. Popular radio was sort of at a standstill and filled with empty pleasantries. It was years before The Beatles, The Who, or the Rolling Stones would breathe new life and excitement into it. What I was playing at the time were hard-lipped folk songs with fire and brimstone servings, and you didn’t need to take polls to know that they didn’t match up with anything on the radio, didn’t lend themselves to commercialism….” (5-6) Dylan knew that by bringing powerful poetry to radio and phonograph, he would counter those effects that he is so fed up with. Take e.g., that fine image, "The poor white remains / On the caboose of the train." This image functions both as metaphor for the poor white's place in society and as image of the politician preaching his racist lies from a caboose, a white politician whose game is what keeps the poor white at the end of the line. In some of his earlier songs, for example, the one devoted to the murder of Emmett Till, Dylan had succumbed to the kind of over-simplification which draws easy lines of black and white.
~COMING BACK TO “DESOLATION ROW” AND THE WASTE LAND But it’s easy to get caught up in the images and overlook the closing refrain which tells us that on board the Titanic "nobody has to think too much/About Desolation Row." It is this “not thinking” which Dylan attacks again and again in his work, the very “not thinking” attitude which often is promoted by popular culture and especially popular music, that tradition which Dylan entered—over vehement objections by many of the folk song crowd—when he laid down his acoustic guitar and picked up the electric. They wanted him to continue re-writing “The Times They Are A-changin’”—which, ironically, he was doing in a new way. The difference is one of complexity, not just of lyrics but of vision—and, of course, of musical accompaniment. Compare: the anthem of change in ’63 with the one of ’65:
But Dylan knew that it was not just the mothers and fathers who had to get out of the new
Yes, “Like a Rolling Stone” shot to the number two place in Billboard top ten (just behind the Beatles), which made it appear to some a sell out. Commercial success had to be corrupt. “There’s no success like failure.” Despite this, the writers and critics who prophesy with their pens began to be discuss his song lyrics as poetry. Some made extravagant claims: Robert Shelton claimed that Dylan added more to the English language than anyone since Shakespeare. Others gave extravagant dismissals. But while “Desolation Row” was sometimes compared to Eliot’s The Waste Land, most obviously because of the titles, the two are really quite different. Eliot’s poem is for the eye and the intellect. It is so filled with obscure allusions that he had to add footnotes to identify them—and to be sure he wasn’t accused of plagiarism. Later, after Eliot converted to Christianity, joining the Church of England, and after his turn to theater as a literary form, he even said, “I wasn’t even bothering whether I understood what I was saying” in the poem. The Waste Land portrays a dead land where there is thunder but no rain, where people lead meaningless lives, waiting for some kind of redemption. Dylan’s song is really quite different. It is for the ear and appeals to both the mind and the emotions. Because it is heard on the radio and the phonograph it is experienced repeatedly, not just once. It becomes internalized because of the medium through which it comes to us. But the down side of that medium is that we may hear without listening. Desolation Row is not the place inhabited by all the bizarre characters described in the song, as many who comment about it seem to think. Rather it is the state of mind from which the speaker and his lady look out on these bizarre scenes. Listen to verse one:
The preposition “from” in the final line is so unexpected that many listeners miss it.
Those who are on Desolation Row see through the games. The super human crew and the insurance men are there to see that no one escapes to Desolation Row, to, another preposition that makes the point. The final verse makes it clear that those who do see things this way don’t want to hear from those who don’t have eyes to see or ears to hear:
To bring it all back home, let me point to the verse which relates Desolation Row to the songs of Tin Pan Alley and their phoniness. In the second verse we see Cinderella courted by Romeo, but the two of them are not star-crossed lovers. Cinderella is an inhabitant of Desolation Row but Romeo is star-struck by the phony songs from Tin Pan Alley. His vocabulary seems to be limited to the titles of sappy love songs from the fifties:
Yes, “You Belong to Me” was a big hit in the fifties:
Romeo, a victim of this kind of sappy and sentimental popular culture experience does not belong on Desolation Row. He is much like Mr. Jones who knows something is happening but can’t figure out what it is. Cinderella, however, knows the score. She sees the ashes that need sweeping up on Desolation Row. There is an apparent incongruity between the surrealistic and bizarre scenes painted in this song and the sweet and melodious accompaniment created by the smooth single string picking of Charlie McCoy. Dylan recording Highway 61 Revisited in Nashville with some of the best sideman available. This incongruity illustrates how Dylan is working to make the sound relate to the sense in his songs. This incongruity between words and music correlates with the incongruity between the world Dylan sees and our response, our unthinking response to it. For it is our world that he pictures—after changing the names to protect the guilty. We look at Dr. Filth who plays dice with the very existence of the world—we look at the superhuman crew who rounds up folks for the factory where they strap on the heart-attack machine—we look at this world of blind commissioners and riot squads—we look at this world where they sell postcards of hangings and poison us with words—we look at all this and don’t think too much about it. Those who do think about it, who do find it desolate; they are the ones on Desolation Row. ~INADEQUACY OF BOTH SONG AND POETRY TRADITIONS Dylan did seriously consider becoming a writer for the page in the time leading up to what Griel Marcus calls his crossroads experience, the recording of “Like a Rolling Stone” in 1965. He wrote a good deal of free verse poetry, most of it published as liner notes to his and other people’s record albums. He signed a book contract with a major publisher and wrote a series of prose poems for this work, but tried to keep it from publication. He consciously chose not to enter into the written literary tradition of the western world but instead to pursue the much older tradition of the poet who performs his poetry to music, for in its origins poetry was one with music. In choosing this path, Dylan establishes a more vital relationship with his audience.
As in many love songs, Dylan here is speaking of and to his audience. He wants to share with them that life is hard. That is one of the poet’s jobs, to provide “equipment for living.” That means enjoying the beauty of the sun goin’ down over the sea but also realizing that wintertime is coming.
The blues tradition provides Dylan with an entire mythology that has not been killed off like so much of the mythology which has, over the centuries, provided equipment for living, helped us deal with life when our train gets lost. And as artist, as poet, he wants us to relate to him not as a boss who tells us what to do but as a lover, as one who cares for us and about us. Dylan draws on the blues tradition for his form and his images. The second verse is almost straight out of old blues songs. And by doing so, he draws on the power of that tradition, the tradition in which the relationship is one of lover to lover. Usually a troubled relationship, certainly, but a relationship based not on money (as boss suggests) but on love. He’s still drawing on the blues mythology and saying the same thing in 2001 on the Love and Theft album:
T. S. Eliot, drawing on the dead myths of fisher kings and Tarot cards, could not evoke the kind of emotional response that this blues song does. Eliot’s early poetry is powerful intellectually but not emotionally. So much in modern poetry is like this. Wallace Stevens, William Butler Yeats, Ezra Pound. ~THE LACK OF A MYTHOLOGY The poet of today …is profoundly inhibited by the dearth of shared consciousness of myth. Our current motivating ideas are not myths but ideologies, lacking transcendental significance. This loss of myth-consciousness I believe to be the most devastating loss that humanity can suffer; for … myth-consciousness is the bond that unites men both with one another and with the unplumbed Mystery from which mankind is sprung and without reference to which the radical significance of things goes to pot. We may find Wheelwright’s final phrase, “without reference to which the radical significance of things goes to pot,” humorous today, of course, but the correlation between Dylan's and Wheelwright's perception of the contemporary situation goes far beyond the pun we tend to find. Dylan describes the predicament in his own way in that book which he didn’t want to publish, Tarantula. After it became widely available in bootleg copies, he finally agree to its publication. This seems a more poetic expression of the same point Wheelwright is making:
This picture of the unnoticed poet in his sheepskin evokes the Dylan photo on his first album cover. We can see that Bob Dylan is quite aware of himself as poet in relationship to Lord Byron (whose lengthy satirical poem Don Juan Bob read in its entirety) and Dylan Thomas (from whom he may have taken his name) and John Keats (who wrote “Ode to a Nightingale”) in the phrase “lord dylan of the nightingales.” Dylan is in a long, long tradition which includes not only these poets but many others. He knows that the poet’s job is to revive in us an awareness of life, but how is that to be done in the absence of myth, when “the battles inside their souls & gloves [are] as dead as their legends.” That is why Dylan turns to the blues, to the old ballads, to folk and traditional music. That where he finds the mythology, the legends, on which to base his songs. We’ve already seen his use of mythic images from the blues tradition in “It Takes a Lot to Laugh, It Takes a Train to Cry”. He manages to graph that tradition onto the popular music of the mid-sixties—or perhaps a better metaphor would be revival, for the blues is actually the roots of rock’n’roll which is the popular white form usually associated with mid-sixties Dylan. ~ART IN THE ALLEY, NOT THE MUSEUM
This song went to the top ten when it came out in 1965, and some considered Dylan a sell-out for that reason. But the key word here is entertainment. Presenting itself as entertainment, art does not evoke the self-consciousness which results in the "study" of a "poem." Once the academic framework is added the artist is isolated from, cut off from the audience. This problem is given historical background by Susanne Langer in her examination of aesthetic form in Feeling and Form. She outlines the developments since the arts lost the protective patronage of the church where they were birthed and nourished. The arts all began as an expression of religious mythology. Greek tragedies such as Oedipus Rex by Sophocles were presented as part of the Dionysian festival in the spring, a religious festival. The great paintings and sculptures of the medieval and renaissance period such as Leonardo’s “Last Supper” and like Michelangelo’s David were created for the church. And music? Bach and Mozart and Beethoven did their best work for the church. Eventually all the arts were evicted from the sacred space, of course, as they became increasingly secular. Susan Langer points out the loss art suffers when leaving the church. She writes, While the visual arts are Langer's primary example, all the arts have undergone the same process of secularization at some point in history, music later than painting, painting after drama. The important point, however, it the fact that music, dance, and drama, while they all developed as expressions of religious myth, have gone on to find their place in the world as entertainment. This is why Dylan rejects the museum in that wonderful and complex song “Visions of Johanna”:
A museum perverts relationship of art to its audience. “Infinity goes up on trial.” The natural relationship which exists in the theater and in the music hall is not there. People go to museums to see art preserved, sterilized, judged, not performed. Art, to be experienced, needs a natural relationship to its audience, and the next best thing to the church is, ironically, the world of entertainment. Dylan works within the "new rules" of the situation which faces the poet today. He must create his poems within a medium which, because it is accepted as entertainment, provides an audience which receives the work within a natural context. This is why Dylan once called himself a song and dance man. But he’s so much more than that. And he asks for us to give him a chance:
Further, he must build these poems out of communal elements available to the popular mind, avoiding the esoteric and transforming the familiar, redeeming the commercial. Finally, he must draw upon whatever mythic resources that remain vital. The new rules are strict. It is little wonder that as an artist in the marketplace Dylan once called himself a trapeze artist. He is describing the artist’s situation in “She Belongs to Me” :
~COMPARE DICKENS/NOVEL TO DYLAN/SONG (omitted in the radio show itself) I have made numerous comparisons of Dylan to Shakespeare who worked in the entertainment field. The theater was not a reputable place in Shakespeare’s day. But the same can be said of the novel. Charles Dickens worked in that popular medium which was still considered vulgar by the cultured aristocrats of his society in the mid-nineteenth century. In 1783, Hugh Blair’s book Rhetoric was considered an authoritative source. He refers to the novel as "an insignificant class of writing," and exhibits the same form of discomfort as some literary critics today when Dylan is called a poet. They try to qualify in some manner, sometimes by using a hybrid term like "song-poet" instead.5 Dickens was quite aware of the low status of the novel.6 Dickens once said: "If I have an object in life, it is to leave my calling (as I do believe I shall), much better than I found it." Certainly the novel has achieved full acceptance into the literary canon, but not because of Dickens’s work. His novels did not come into acceptance by the critics until the 1930s, long after his death. Dylan, on the other hand, did much more to transform song writing into an art form—and one widely discussed as such. Much more so than Dickens, Dylan transformed song—or should I say, he demonstrated the potential for song as poetry—almost single-handedly. We can hear that longing to reach the potential of the form in one of those songs from his moderate man period as the 60s turned into the 70s:
~CLOSING
But I must draw this series to a close. It has not been my purpose to analyze all of his songs but to provide a perspective from which his artistic achievements can be appreciated by raising several major questions. One is the relationship of art to popular entertainment; another is the question of the mythic basis of poetry. I have argued that the Democratic poet who avoids intellectual obscurity can bring a wide audience back to poetry after having been turn off by what Modern Poetry became during the first half of the twentieth century. And of course by now the gentle listener who has paid attention sees that eternal dichotomy of moderation and excess in the joker and the thief. I hope that you will look forward to further explorations of these themes in later editions of Shakespeare in the Alley. Until then, this is Bill King saying, so glad you came around. END OF FINAL SHOW (Epilogue, Show 13 in progress) 5Cf. George Monteiro, “Dylan in the Sixties,” South Atlantic Quarterly, 73: 2 (Spring 1974), 164-72: “it is apparent to me that no poet has worked the comic apocalypse with as much success as the ‘song poet’ Dylan has” ( 169). Also Laurence Gonzales, “Persona Bob: seer and fool,” Costerus, 3 (1972), p. 53: “I have deliberately refrained from comparing Dylan with great artists because ht is a songwriter.” 6George Ford, Dickens and His Readers (New York: Norton, 1965), p. 23. Chapter one ofThe Artist in the Marketplace, my dissertation on Dylan's poetics, is available online. Click on the title. |
||||||||
| SHOWS | ABOUT | DYLAN | RESOURCES | CONTACT | SEARCH | SITEMAP | HOME © Shakespeare in the Alley, 2004. All Rights Reserved. Website Design by Juliana Harrisking |