THE MUSIC BLOGGING HIVE MIND

Intellectual Duel: John Lennon and Bob Dylan vs. The Press

Posted over 2 years ago
I watched ??Imagine?? again a couple months ago, and I came away with a couple insights that I wouldn't have had when I watched it as a teenager. 1. John Lennon was the first "Reality Star" of any merit.* 2. John had worked his thinking pattern into his own frenzied logic that wasn't really as deep as we often believe him to be. He often uses a "it means everything, it means nothing" argument - that when he's taken to task for what he has said or done, seems to make him realize that his actions have no effect, or don't really accomplish anything more than to stand as entertainment for the world. In this interview, I actually find myself siding with the interviewer more than Lennon and Ono's blind eyed optimism of "have you ever seen some one smile when they try to kill someone? If you smile, you don't want to kill..." mentality. Of course Yoko's flaky post modernism didn't help with the insulated life that stars of Lennon's fame are forced to (or have to) live in.
I don't fault Lennon for coming off the way he does in this interview. I think that since his "Bigger Than Jesus" comment, he realized that everything he said would be put under the microscope. I think this made him kind of commit intellectual suicide, because he had to over analyze every statement he would make to the press. He's got ??I Am The Walrus Syndrome?? : I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together. Spiral logic that spins takes the long way to get to a much simpler point or thought that you kind of started out with.
The Beatles sheer enormity and reach was created by being the multimedia pioneers that they were. They were great music, but they were also merchandise - Beatle boots, figurines, and mop top wigs, too. I think John Lennon's psyche was a casualty of being such a multimedia presence.
John Lennon interview:

Bob Dylan on the other hand seemed a little more aware of the pigeon holing, at least a little earlier than Lennon. Dylan's greatest career move may have been to take on Albert Goldman as a manager. Goldman knew how to manage a talent and catalog such as Dylan's, by having other artists in his stable record Dylan's music, Dylan's thunder was heard way before his lightning was ever seen. The Beatles were everything at once - an image, a sound, 4 distinct personalities, a representation of youth - Dylan on the other hand was heard through the voices of many more suited singers and performers, and then upon the revelation of who Dylan was (a creaky voiced Jewish folkie from Minnesota) there was still so much mystery to try to solve. And once people were pretty sure they had Dylan pegged, he offered himself up to the electric gods - a sure suicide at the time, and still managed to come out the other side, where he wouldn't look back.
Perhaps it's exasperating putting yourself into music, only to have to talk about everything you felt you already said in the song. Perhaps we all need to create a certain image to hang onto in order to describe the person that creates something so abstract as music. Just when you think a song says what it does, someone tells you it says something else. The singer is often the narrator in the 3rd person, even when using the words "I" and "Me" in their music. So when the journalist asks the musician what they actually meant when they said that, it's like Abraham asking God what exactly he meant when he asked him to kill his first born son. Sometimes, if you don't get it, you just don't get it.*I will elaborate on this in the comments section if asked.

Comments (14)

  1. HelenMarie says Hub & I were just watching this dylan clip last night...damn to coincidences! Dylan's a living legend and your words are fine interpretation of how I took the two. Interpreting songs though is a difficult thing, I'm constantly reading lyrics to see what's really going on with the song, but seems some people just like to associate the music with their life...which I think is okay too (and probably happens a lot with all of us whether we like or not) Good stuff here contra!
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  2. contrabandwidth says I might have side tracked a little from my original point, but I thought it was an interesting comparison between the two being interviewed. Dylan seems to have his claws out, and he keeps the interviewer (perhaps) thinking about the relevance of what he is going to right about Dylan, before he eve writes it. Like Dylan says "I don't need Time magazine..." and he didn't, his "truth" is in his music, it's a somewhat vague but universal truth. Where as Lennon just kind comes up with, the best I can offer you is an ad campaign for Peace. They both kind of say it doesn't matter how you perceive me, I'm of this moment. Dylan's interview sticks with me a little more, where as Lennon's seems flakier, less tangible.
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  3. ouvintes says Saw the Dylan clip on Boing Boing (I think) today. I actually like instrumental music better because it is not actually saying something. It is saying many different things at once and they all depend more on the listener, the ear and mind of the beholder. I've always been more attracted to sounds than words. It must be really boring to be explaining your lyrics to anyone really. I know many times you as a writer aren't really sure what you mean because many times is just stream of thought when you write lyrics. Or sometimes you're just working with the sounds of the words and how they fit together. Still, there will always be music press and fans' curiosity and people will always ask about it. Gotta live with it. Some artists like to play with that... Nice comparison and a cool post.
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  4. contrabandwidth says "Scrambled Eggs, Darling How I Love Your Legs" -McCartney's original lyrics to "Yesterday". Your point, exactly. A quote attributed to Elvis Costello (though I've gone down the wormhole of the web, and not found any one person to attribute it too) was "Talking about music is like dancing to architecture" supposedly he told this to an interviewer who asked him to explain his music. Of course if I truly believed this, I wouldn't Mog.
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  5. meko says Here is another opinion we all have them, one song will meen somthing difrent to all who listen to it, why do we have to make such issues , if you didnt under stand what they ment Ask them, not point the finger at you contra just genraly speaking. It seems like they want to catch you at something. LOL
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  6. contrabandwidth says No offense taken. I have known amazing painters, but when you asked them about their work, they couldn't talk about it to save their lives. Perhaps we expect to much for our artists to be able to be clear and concise about how exactly they feel, when really they don't exactly know themselves. That's why they wrote the song. Even though a lot of songs containe words, sometimes they're more than words (no Extreme jokes please).
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  7. meko says TOUCHE'
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  8. HelenMarie says Gotcha Contra-definitely interesting to see and compare the two interviews. Dylan's idea's have always seemed more grounded and Lennon's just a bit more out of reach, like you said. Perspectives are always interesting to hear (for the open minded at least-some people can get pretty damn angry hearing other people's perspective... esp religion and politics). I agree with meko about just asking if you want to know. A lot people come up with their own conclusions without ever asking for the truth.
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  9. contrabandwidth says Art and Truth are both subjective. There certainly is no one answer to truth, just as there is no one interpretation to any piece of art.
    Permalink posted 09/18/2007
  10. dermahrk says In the post-Beatles world, Lennon was the biggest disappointment - to me, anyway. While Dylan certainly had his rough patches over the years, he's making excellent music today - not as earth-shattering as his early stuff but still great music. It's possible that, if he'd lived, Lennon would've been great again but, given all of his solo stuff, I doubt it. If the Beatles had re-formed he might have been spurred to a higher, less lazy level of musicianship.
    Permalink posted 09/19/2007
  11. contrabandwidth says I tend to think McCartney's Wings era stuff is atrocious. But I think you really see that McCartney was the Melody, and Lennon the brains (for Beatles stuff, at least). I also tend to like Lennon's solo stuff more, but it is at times just like he's holding up a mirror, and not leaving enough to the imagination. But between Dylan and Lennon, Dylan all the way. That was one of the saddest parts of Imagine was around the time of his death, Lennon is being interviewed and he says that he would love to get back with the Beatles if it was only about the music. You see him realizing that they were such a great song making team. I'm sure anyone who heard this at the time was so optimistic (I was very very young and didn't have any idea about music) only to have it shattered by his death.
    Permalink posted 09/19/2007
  12. Jonh Ingham says When you said Intellectual Duel, I thought you meant this....
    Permalink posted 09/19/2007
  13. dermahrk says The most revealing quote in the Beatles' Anthology book was Paul's statement that everyone else in the group was kind of competing for John's attention and approval (paraphrasing here). He was the "leader" and acknowledged as such in the early days. After the rush of success, though, I think fame fucked him up pretty badly (besides eventually and literally killing him), and did George Harrison no favors either. McCartney came to dominate the group more and more as Lennon lost interest and was definitely the best musician and most talented (at least, after the 63-66 Lennon peak), thus producing bad feelings for the rest of the group being his "sidemen". Though Macca has produced his share of crappa, I love SOMETHING off of everything he's released (ok, maybe not the Oratorio or the Fireman experiments) and think his post-Beatles solo career stands head and shoulders above the rest of them. Not that any of them could come close to what they could produce together. Ah, defending McCartney. My OTHER full-time job....
    Permalink posted 09/22/2007
  14. brz says Contra- i haven't watched the interview videos, and i can't say that i'm a fan of the Beatles, Lennon, or Dylan (although i have definetly enjoyed some Dylan covers), but i wanted to say that i thought this was an excellent post. we're certainly not going to figure out who's "better", but it doesn't mean we can enlighten ourselves with the discussion. i want to thank you for your take on the Dylan vs Beatles question - specifically "... Dylan’s thunder was heard way before his lightning was ever seen. The Beatles were everything at once – an image, a sound, 4 distinct personalities, a representation of youth – Dylan on the other hand was heard through the voices of many more suited singers and performers..." i think that's a really insightful take on both, and i'm curious now, armed with that perspective, for what other groups could it be said "... were everything at once...", and what other solo-artists were "...heard through the voices of many more suited singers and performers..." [or vice versa]. i would offer Billy Joe Shaver as being heard through others, although he's still not very well known. also, to throw in 2 cents about people describing their work... somewhere along the line i've heard it said, perhaps quite famously, that "i wouldn't paint (cook, dance, ... i can't remember the verb) if i could say it with words". now, obviously, lyrics are words, but i think most of us would agree that they more than _just_ words, or we wouldn't be here. and i'd bet that Lennon and Dylan likely felt the same, at least for some of their songs. so if there's any truth to the quote, and if it says anything about Lennon or Dylan, it think it says a lot about how hard it would be to talk about your songs.
    Permalink posted 10/08/2007

Comment on this Post

Login using email and password below.

Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?
Join MOG. It's Free!

© 2006-2009 Mog Inc. All Rights Reserved