Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Aesthetics is not just the eye of the beholder; there are conditions of symmetry and dynamism, sensory reactions, as well as defined theories of why some art works better than others (within a given context).  



    Agreed.  But now try to apply this to the question at hand, that is, take these principles and use them to objectively and clearly explain the artistic merit of Bob Dylan's music.  This I would like to see. 

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to devildavid's comment:

    This is more in line with my thinking. I would even argue that the quality of the Beatles music could be seen at the tme they were releasing their songs. Pespective over time is helpful, but not essential.



    This would likely apply to the melodic qualities of the Beatles songs.  But what about the intellectual components, the literary values?  Beatles songs were often initially analyzed for 'hidden meanings' which later turned out not to be there at all.

    Some artistic works that have a lot of intellectual content have puzzled audiences and critics immensely at first, then gradually been recognized as works of genius - say for example, Waiting for Godot or 2001: A Space Odyssey.

    This might have some application to the Dylan question, because arguably, a lot of the appeal of his songs is intellectual rather than sensory.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    "Taylor Swift" (not quite the category header, but you get the idea) was a category in Double Jeopardy! tonight on the college edition semi-finals.  I was home b/c the gym was closed, so I caught it. 

    One of the contestents is a champion debater at Harvard.  She said she travels all over the world with the debate club.  Wish I could have gotten her into this thread.

    The category was the last one chosen, after all of the other categories had been cleaned up; it  seemed the brainiacs didn't want to touch it.   

    Anyhow, they only knew 3 of the 5 questions, I think, and I knew them, too (they were very easy).  All this to say that if anyone wants to use this as "evidence" of Taylor Swifts' importance in popular culture, please feel free to do so. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    I guess the question is, do Taylor Swifts fans view her as the music poet of their generation?  Is she that much different from her contemporaries that would allow for such a comparrison. If they do, than this argument has some merit. If her music reaches her fans in the way that Dylans has reached his, than this argument has some merit. However, she is young, but has been at the top for a while now, and I am yet hear one of her peers make the comparrison.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    Taylor Swift reaches millions upon millions of "fans" b/c of social media.   Facebook and Twitter alone connect her to the audience that relates to her, and they don't know a world without social media, so this does make them feel 'connected' -- in a way that old Bob Dylan could never have achieved back in his day, other than through the purchase of his records, and of course, by seeing him in concert.   No live streaming, no youtube, nothing.  

    She's had all that to take advantage of and use in her marketing strategy, and she has certainly used it to her advantage, just like all of her peers. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Aesthetics is not just the eye of the beholder; there are conditions of symmetry and dynamism, sensory reactions, as well as defined theories of why some art works better than others (within a given context).  

     

     



    Agreed.  But now try to apply this to the question at hand, that is, take these principles and use them to objectively and clearly explain the artistic merit of Bob Dylan's music.  This I would like to see. 

     

     

     



    Would that I could.  Yet, I'm not nearly informed enough on matters of music theory or practice to speak to that level of detail.

    So, I could speak more generally about Dylan's ability, say, to interpret folk music (and blues, gospel and country) for a more urban(e) audience and with a harder, more cynical edge, to weave poetry of Rimbaud and Thomas into his lyrics, to challenge and editorialize about both authority and the counter-culture, or to tell compelling stories about america's other half (plus his own personal, internal struggles).  Not to mention advancing the concept that one could be a popular singer without a traditionally good voice.

    Note most of that is reference to lyrics and songwriting, which are easier for me to grasp.  Using more concrete examples would strengthen the aesthetics argument.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to polar123's comment:

    I guess the question is, do Taylor Swifts fans view her as the music poet of their generation?  Is she that much different from her contemporaries that would allow for such a comparrison. If they do, than this argument has some merit. If her music reaches her fans in the way that Dylans has reached his, than this argument has some merit. However, she is young, but has been at the top for a while now, and I am yet hear one of her peers make the comparrison.



    That's a good point.

    Other artists of Dylan's day started to cover his songs almost immediately, and they haven't really let up since.  And even many who didn't started to emulate his writing and persona.

    Given that covering artists may have been less litigious in those days, I don't know if today's artists are giving the same attention to Swift's songs.

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:



    Would that I could.  Yet, I'm not nearly informed enough on matters of music theory or practice to speak to that level of detail.

    So, I could speak more generally about Dylan's ability, say, to interpret folk music (and blues, gospel and country) for a more urban(e) audience and with a harder, more cynical edge, to weave poetry of Rimbaud and Thomas into his lyrics, to challenge and editorialize about both authority and the counter-culture, or to tell compelling stories about america's other half (plus his own personal, internal struggles).  Not to mention advancing the concept that one could be a popular singer without a traditionally good voice.

    Note most of that is reference to lyrics and songwriting, which are easier for me to grasp.  Using more concrete examples would strengthen the aesthetics argument.



    Thanks.  I think you've just clinched my argument that devildavid's idea about fans being able to explain why an artist is great, and to support their claim with evidence, is a non-starter.

    You are way, way above average in your level of knowledge about music and your ability to articulate it.  But your attempt to explain Dylan's greatness is, by your own admission, inadequate.

    You would have to prepare a mini-thesis to give devildavid what he's looking for.  And even if you did, he would probably take issue with it on a number of points.

    So interesting idea, devildavid, but clearly a doomed one. :-)

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:



    Would that I could.  Yet, I'm not nearly informed enough on matters of music theory or practice to speak to that level of detail.

    So, I could speak more generally about Dylan's ability, say, to interpret folk music (and blues, gospel and country) for a more urban(e) audience and with a harder, more cynical edge, to weave poetry of Rimbaud and Thomas into his lyrics, to challenge and editorialize about both authority and the counter-culture, or to tell compelling stories about america's other half (plus his own personal, internal struggles).  Not to mention advancing the concept that one could be a popular singer without a traditionally good voice.

    Note most of that is reference to lyrics and songwriting, which are easier for me to grasp.  Using more concrete examples would strengthen the aesthetics argument.



    Thanks.  I think you've just clinched my argument that devildavid's idea about fans being able to explain why an artist is great, and to support their claim with evidence, is a non-starter.

    You are way, way above average in your level of knowledge about music and your ability to articulate it.  But your attempt to explain Dylan's greatness is, by your own admission, inadequate.

    You would have to prepare a mini-thesis to give devildavid what he's looking for.  And even if you did, he would probably take issue with it on a number of points.

    So interesting idea, devildavid, but clearly a doomed one. :-)

     

     



    Sorry, but I don't think so.  You're judging based upon your own standard of what is an acceptable explanation.

    Given time, I could certainly state a better case.  But I also don't feel what I wrote is 'inadequate'; it is what it is, and you can take it or leave it.

    I also dispute how 'above average' I am... given that I can't talk TO the music as well as I can talk ABOUT the music (or the artist).

    See the difference?

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Sorry, but I don't think so.  You're judging based upon your own standard of what is an acceptable explanation.

    Given time, I could certainly state a better case.  But I also don't feel what I wrote is 'inadequate'; it is what it is, and you can take it or leave it.

    I also dispute how 'above average' I am... given that I can't talk TO the music as well as I can talk ABOUT the music (or the artist).

    See the difference? 



    When I said 'inadequate' I thought you were admitting as much when you said

    "Would that I could.  Yet, I'm not nearly informed enough on matters of music theory or practice to speak to that level of detail."

    When you say "Given time, I could certainly state a better case."  Yes, of course.  But exactly how much time and how much work would you have to put into it?  And would the results satisfy devildavid?  Who knows?

    What he's asking for is simply not realistic.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to polar123's comment:

    I guess the question is, do Taylor Swifts fans view her as the music poet of their generation?  Is she that much different from her contemporaries that would allow for such a comparrison. If they do, than this argument has some merit. If her music reaches her fans in the way that Dylans has reached his, than this argument has some merit. However, she is young, but has been at the top for a while now, and I am yet hear one of her peers make the comparrison.



    That's a good point.

    Other artists of Dylan's day started to cover his songs almost immediately, and they haven't really let up since.  And even many who didn't started to emulate his writing and persona.

    Given that covering artists may have been less litigious in those days, I don't know if today's artists are giving the same attention to Swift's songs.



    She has been called "the" poet laureate of her generation (or puberty)  many times, from many sources.  Does that mean she is?   Does it mean that just b/c a "reviewer" or a "critic" says so, she has that status?   I've never seen them define what they mean when they use the term, however.   Would her 'fans' use such terminology or does someone else assign it based on observation, or Swifts' talent or ...?

    Again, if we're not all playing with the same standards, using the same criteria, nothing matters or holds any water.  If I said "60 Minutes" called her a poet, would that have any weight?  Or is it just the media hype?  What critic(s) hold the power?

    Good luck.  I think I lost track of the focus of the thread at this point.  Sorry.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Sorry, but I don't think so.  You're judging based upon your own standard of what is an acceptable explanation



    Well, I think that all ties back into what I was saying on the other page of the thread. We all have our own standards of acceptable explanation, from narrow to broad.

     

    But there really is no truly objective criteria out there.

    The number of covering/imitating artists, the number of viewers who like it, the number of learned critics who praise it, the complexity of the rthym, theories about conditions of symetry/dynamism/sensory reactions, and so on...

    ...these still all ultimately trace down to collections of subjective appreciation.

     

     

     

     

    Now, I'm not saying that that means it's purely in the "eye of the beholder" and not subject to analysis. I'm saying that the "analysis" is not truly objective, it is a conglomeration of subjective factors. I'd call it quasi-objective. 

    Ultimately, it's that maybe a strong majority of people like symmetric qualities. Though there are undoubtedly other people who don't like it.

    Unless we can get universal disapproval of something theorized as bad assymetry, and we can run brain scans of people in the process of disapproving of it, and those are uniform, how can we say that a given symetrical quality is objectively better than its asymetrical opposite? If it's not consistent across all persons, it cannot be a truly 'objective' truth or measurement.

    I think that given the quasi-objective nature of any analysis in this area, we can make out an argument that Dylan is 'better' than Swift. If we've incorporated all the factors discussed, probably a strong majority of people will agree. But the people who disagree aren't necessarily wrong because there really is no objective truth about good vs. bad music floating around in the universe....like there are laws of mathematics governing chemistry, physics, thermodynamics, etc.

     

     

    I just cannot see a full escape from the subjectivity trap.

    Dylan may be objectively more influential than swift, but whether or not that matters in terms of how good the artist is subjective - even if 95% of listeners/critics would agree that "influence" is an objective measure, it's still a subjective judgment about the importance of influence.

    While I think that Muddy Waters is infinitely more talented and produces infinitely better music than Justin Bieber, I think I have to be comfortable with the fact that this is not a provable objective fact about reality.

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Sorry, but I don't think so.  You're judging based upon your own standard of what is an acceptable explanation.

    Given time, I could certainly state a better case.  But I also don't feel what I wrote is 'inadequate'; it is what it is, and you can take it or leave it.

    I also dispute how 'above average' I am... given that I can't talk TO the music as well as I can talk ABOUT the music (or the artist).

    See the difference? 



    When I said 'inadequate' I thought you were admitting as much when you said

    "Would that I could.  Yet, I'm not nearly informed enough on matters of music theory or practice to speak to that level of detail."

    When you say "Given time, I could certainly state a better case."  Yes, of course.  But exactly how much time and how much work would you have to put into it?  And would the results satisfy devildavid?  Who knows?

    What he's asking for is simply not realistic.

     



    Well, I don't really have adequacy issues.  :P

    But for me, it's sufficient as a summary of things that elevates Dylan's lyrics - and thus his songs - to above the average and as possessing lasting quality.  I could delve into each one of those aspects to make them more substantive, but I don't really know how long it would take. 

    It's certainly realistic to ask; how realistic to deliver is another question.  Then, you're dealing with matters of esoterica which may only matter to a select group.  The question again is to whose standard the piece measured.

    The "33 1/3" series has done this well by constraining the subject to a single album.  Each author them offers their view via thesis statements, method, and evidence to, at the least, merit the discussion in the first place.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    And I must note, that I think we're getting a glimpse of why it is that the metaphysical branch of philosophy had such battles over whether or not a priori reasoning exists (See: Kant, etc).


    If there's no a priori reasoning, then the empirical objective fact is the only type of fact that can be objective. They wanted there to be objective facts provable by reason alone (ie, can we set out logical criteria for saying that a musician is objectively better than another)

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to polar123's comment:

    I guess the question is, do Taylor Swifts fans view her as the music poet of their generation?  Is she that much different from her contemporaries that would allow for such a comparrison. If they do, than this argument has some merit. If her music reaches her fans in the way that Dylans has reached his, than this argument has some merit. However, she is young, but has been at the top for a while now, and I am yet hear one of her peers make the comparrison.



    That's a good point.

    Other artists of Dylan's day started to cover his songs almost immediately, and they haven't really let up since.  And even many who didn't started to emulate his writing and persona.

    Given that covering artists may have been less litigious in those days, I don't know if today's artists are giving the same attention to Swift's songs.



    She has been called "the" poet laureate of her generation (or puberty)  many times, from many sources.  Does that mean she is?   Does it mean that just b/c a "reviewer" or a "critic" says so, she has that status?   I've never seen them define what they mean when they use the term, however.   Would her 'fans' use such terminology or does someone else assign it based on observation, or Swifts' talent or ...?

    Again, if we're not all playing with the same standards, using the same criteria, nothing matters or holds any water.  If I said "60 Minutes" called her a poet, would that have any weight?  Or is it just the media hype?  What critic(s) hold the power?

    Good luck.  I think I lost track of the focus of the thread at this point.  Sorry.

     



    That's like all of those exclamations that show up when a new movie comes out.  Who's saying this? What is their expertise?  Are they believable?  (and does it even matter?)  "Best Comedy Of The Year!" doesn't mean very much in the middle of April or May.

    And yet, if we had a trend of 5 or 6 or 12 critics saying 'poet laureate', then it might carry more weight.  As I said, artists like Neil Young, Stephen Stills and James Taylor have all praised Taylor Swift.  To me, their endorsements are couched in some authority (for others, maybe less)

    I remember an interview with one of the Motley Crue guys where he dissed REM's music, and I thought, 'well, his opinion might mean more to someone else, but it means quite less to me.'  

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    There once was a time when I saw comparisons of Kurt Cobain to John Lennon.

    I think Nirvana made some incredible music and they inspired many others. However, Kurt Cobain's influence does not come close to the impact that Lennon had , not by a long shot. Even if Cobain had lived as many years and recorded as many songs I do not think he reaches as many people as Lennon did. 

    I prefer not to compare anyone to giants. This is not fair , Taylor Swift may be very, very talented and a very, very wonderful musician and singer. If I was a painter and someone tried to compare my art to the great impressionists , I would prefer they didn't.....it is unfair. 

    Why must we do these things?

    We should not compare hockey players to Bobby Orr. We should not compare baseball players to Ted Williams. We should not compare Rock bands to the Beatles. We should not compare comedians to George Carlin. We should not compare football coaches to Vince Lombardi. We should not compare guitar players to Jimi Hendrix.

    I don't think it's fair to compare anyone in the music industry to Bob Dylan. He is a giant , we will never see another Bob Dylan. The world will never see another Frank Sinatra, Ted Williams, Bobby Orr, George Carlin, Lombardi, Beatles or Jimi Hendrix.

    These people were pioneers, they chance arrived at the right moment in history and they did not disappoint....they went above and beyond all expectations ( if there were any). They were the brightest stars that outshined the rest. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    I'll venture back into the fray to try to clarify my position. Bob Dylan is called a poet by some and a great poet by others. I call Bob Dylan a great songwriter and a lyricist. Calling him a poet is a short cut to saying he is elevated above ordinary lyricists because poets operate at a higher, more profound level than mere lyricists. If this is not the intended meaning of poet, then what is the point of calling Dylan a poet? What is so different about his songwriting that puts him at the level of poet? Or does calling him a poet have no meaning other than his lyrics sometimes appear to be poetry?

    What if I were to say Taylor Swift is a poet? Should I be challenged in that assertion? Or to use another songwriter, say Chuck Berry is a poet. But have we ever heard Chuck Berry being called a poet? And are his lyrics any less sophisticated than Bob Dylan's? Maybe in some ways Chuck Berry is a more original poet, creating his own vocabulary instead of borrowing from actual poets. I could make that argument, but I see no point to it. I'd rather let poets be poets and songwriters be songwriters and judge their skills in those specific areas.

    If someone wants to say Dylan changed the vocabulary of rock music, there is eveidence to support that. But he really didn't single-handedly change rock music from simple "She Loves You Yeah Yeah Yeah" lyrics to imponderable profundities. Rock lyrics already had a variety of subject matter and different levels of sophistication before he ever came on the scene. Many of Roy Orbison's songs have very strange lyrics and the aforementioned Mr. Berry was not simply singing silly love songs.

    And on the subject of love songs, what makes a love song less poetry than a Bob Dylan hate song such as "Positively 4th Street"? This guy named Shakespeare was writing love sonnets back in the 16th century. Love is a fine subject for poetry.

    Some of my favorite Dylan songs are also his most simple lyrically. "Blowin' In the Wind" is seen as a protest song, which it is on one level. But I see it more as a fine, moving song about the frustration with man's evil nature and not knowing what the answer is. "When You See Her, Say Hello" is a direct song about lost love, deep hurt, and being unable to completely let go of it.

    "Blowin' in the Wind"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWwgrjjIMXA

    "If You See Her, Say Hello"

    http://vimeo.com/56724107

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to devildavid's comment:

    I'll venture back into the fray to try to clarify my position. Bob Dylan is called a poet by some and a great poet by others. I call Bob Dylan a great songwriter and a lyricist. Calling him a poet is a short cut to saying he is elevated above ordinary lyricists because poets operate at a higher, more profound level than mere lyricists. If this is not the intended meaning of poet, then what is the point of calling Dylan a poet? What is so different about his songwriting that puts him at the level of poet? Or does calling him a poet have no meaning other than his lyrics sometimes appear to be poetry?



    I'll venture an answer. Dylan is called a poet because of: his capacity for storytelling; his skill at rhyming, meter, cadence, all the technical aspects of poetry; and his effective use of imagery.

    But perhaps the greatest indicator of Dylan's powers as a poet are the indelible, instantly recognizable phrases he has fashioned, that have entered forever into the consciousness of the music culture.  Many of the phrases are in the song titles themselves:

    Blowin' in the Wind

    A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall

    Don't Think Twice, It's Alright

    The Times They Are A-Changin'

    My Back Pages

    It Ain't Me Babe

    Subterranean Homesick Blues

    Mr. Tambourine Man

    It's Alright Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)

    It's All Over Now, Baby Blue

    Like A Rolling Stone

    Just Like a Woman

    All Along the Watchtower

    Lay Lady Lay (Why wait any longer for the world to begin?)

    If Not For You

    Knockin' on Heaven's Door

    Forever Young   

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to devildavid's comment:

    And on the subject of love songs, what makes a love song less poetry than a Bob Dylan hate song such as "Positively 4th Street"? This guy named Shakespeare was writing love sonnets back in the 16th century. Love is a fine subject for poetry.



    Now this borders on a cheap shot.  Dylan has written many fine love songs, and Shakespeare penned many vitriolic, in fact murderous, passages.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    I suppose we should also mention that Jim Morrison has been called a "poet", and why not, he did write poetry.

    Patti Smith also was considered a "Rock Poet."

    Donovan has been referred to as a poet. 

    And so has Paul Simon.

    I really don't consider myself an authority on what is "poetry" and what is just a "song", has anyone ever called Ozzie a "poet?" ....and why not?..I mean his stuff rhymes..."Mr. Crowley, what went on in your head? ...Mr. Crowley, did you talk to the dead?...sounds like great poetry to me.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

    There once was a time when I saw comparisons of Kurt Cobain to John Lennon.

    I think Nirvana made some incredible music and they inspired many others. However, Kurt Cobain's influence does not come close to the impact that Lennon had , not by a long shot. Even if Cobain had lived as many years and recorded as many songs I do not think he reaches as many people as Lennon did. 

    I prefer not to compare anyone to giants. This is not fair , Taylor Swift may be very, very talented and a very, very wonderful musician and singer. If I was a painter and someone tried to compare my art to the great impressionists , I would prefer they didn't.....it is unfair. 

    Why must we do these things?

    We should not compare hockey players to Bobby Orr. We should not compare baseball players to Ted Williams. We should not compare Rock bands to the Beatles. We should not compare comedians to George Carlin. We should not compare football coaches to Vince Lombardi. We should not compare guitar players to Jimi Hendrix.

    I don't think it's fair to compare anyone in the music industry to Bob Dylan. He is a giant , we will never see another Bob Dylan. The world will never see another Frank Sinatra, Ted Williams, Bobby Orr, George Carlin, Lombardi, Beatles or Jimi Hendrix.

    These people were pioneers, they chance arrived at the right moment in history and they did not disappoint....they went above and beyond all expectations ( if there were any). They were the brightest stars that outshined the rest. 



    I would add that it's especially unfair to make these comparisons early in the younger person's (athlete, singer, etc) career.

    Who knows how Taylor Swift's career will develop? For instance, had The Beatles disbanded prior to Revolver and there were no Revolver, Rubber Soul, Sgt. Pepper, etc., we wouldn't look at them in the same light. Early Beatles hits -- "I Want To Hold Your Hand" or "Love Me Do" or "She Loves You" and others are great songs, but not nearly as sophisticated or impactful of songs as they would later write. Lennon and McCartney matured as songwriters throughout the '60s.

    So as Taylor Swift gets older, maybe her songwriting matures and have a greater impact and maybe 20 years from now, we're looking at her in a different light.

    But it's unfair to athletes, actors, musicians, etc. when they're just a couple of years into their careers to compare them to the greats.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    ...and roy, maybe she fizzles out like the Bay City Rollers or the Knack. (Although it's likely she has already bypassed those two...in fact without knowing much about her, I could almost guarantee it.

    If this artist compares with Dylan in about 30 years or so, this won't be a discussion it will be a fact. If I'm a gambling man I wouldn't bet the farm on it....but as I've said before, since I don't have a farm, I've got little to lose betting against it.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    My poor misunderstood thread. This is not about the specific comparison of Bob Dylan to Taylor Swift. It is about how we judge, label, and categorize musical artists using some sort of criteria but no one seems to know what the criteria are. I think the very popularity of artists and the reactiosn of their fans muddies the waters.

    Those who see Dylan in a category beyond comparison yet say everthing is basd on opinion want to have their cake and eat it too. If we reduce everything to mere opinion, it becomes a numbers game. How many people like artist X and how many people's opinion is that artist X is a game changing philospher poet superstar and whatever other superlatives you want to add. It is one thing to like or dislike an artist and entirely another to deem them great or garbage.

    If I say I don't like Bob Dylan's music there is nothing to discuss. That's merely my personal taste. It makes no judgement on the quality of his music.

    If I say Bob Dylan's music is garbage that is another matter. Now I am saying that there is something qualitatively lacking with his music.

    The question for me is: can every statement of opinion be reduced to like/dislike? And if so, what really is the point of my opinion or opinion in general?

    So ultimately my approach has failed. I got your attention, but the discussion got hung up on the specifics instead of the general point I was really hoping to make. I guess some buttons are too hot to push.

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    In response to devildavid's comment:

    My poor misunderstood thread. This is not about the specific comparison of Bob Dylan to Taylor Swift. It is about how we judge, label, and categorize musical artists using some sort of criteria but no one seems to know what the criteria are. I think the very popularity of artists and the reactiosn of their fans muddies the waters.

    Those who see Dylan in a category beyond comparison yet say everthing is basd on opinion want to have their cake and eat it too. If we reduce everything to mere opinion, it becomes a numbers game. How many people like artist X and how many people's opinion is that artist X is a game changing philospher poet superstar and whatever other superlatives you want to add. It is one thing to like or dislike an artist and entirely another to deem them great or garbage.

    If I say I don't like Bob Dylan's music there is nothing to discuss. That's merely my personal taste. It makes no judgement on the quality of his music.

    If I say Bob Dylan's music is garbage that is another matter. Now I am saying that there is something qualitatively lacking with his music.

    The question for me is: can every statement of opinion be reduced to like/dislike? And if so, what really is the point of my opinion or opinion in general?

    So ultimately my approach has failed. I got your attention, but the discussion got hung up on the specifics instead of the general point I was really hoping to make. I guess some buttons are too hot to push. 



    Sorry, but I think I did try to respond to what I understood as the specific questions you were raising.  I even presented some evidence of Dylan's poetic abilities above.  But you rarely responded directly to what I was saying in my posts.

    I think what you should have done to clarify yourself was give us an example of exactly you were looking for, perhaps using another artist that you have a lot of regard for.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Analyze this equation: Taylor Swift=Bob Dylan

    What still remains somewhat unresolved has now been touched upon. Can there be both objective and subjective assessments of the quality of songs?

    It does appear it is neither objective or subjective, but a blend of the two. There still are labels we give that I question the value of. Certain musical artists works get called poetic or literary. I could make the argument that all songs could be considered that. Once again we run into the trouble of our definitions and cultural values placed on the written word. I could argue that hip-hop/rap is poetic and literary. To make it simple, the argument can be made for all lyrics. If we agree to this premise, we move on to the next step. Is one songwriters poetry better or deeper or more important than another's and why? Once again, it may be blend of objectivity and subjectivity. 

    Being a blues fan, my view is that music is handed down and reinterpreted and no single performer is bigger than the continuum of a song. Popularity and popular culture can distort our view of the importance of any one musical artist. I love the recordings of Howlin' Wolf, but he is only the next one in a long line that included Charley Patton before him. Each performer puts his own stamp on the song and the genre in general, and it's that personal stamp that appeals to us. Bob Dylan is part of the folk continuum, and has put his unique personal stamp on it. Other artists before and after also added their personal stamp in folk music with varying degrees of notoriety. I think is important to give proper weight to assessing artistic merit without being too swayed by imagery or popular opinion.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share