Defend the indefensible - Bob Dylan.

Because if it's not I may cry.

so apologies.

(x-post)

shakey that's not true.

Chuck Berry is a nut, true, but you can boil all of his songs down to really generic topics tailor made for youthful infatuations of the day(sex, "rocking", cars, etc.)

Prove me wrong, kids.

And I don't care if Dylan would agree with me or not, what does that have to do with anything?

i think dylan took allusiveness and obliqueness to new levels in rock lyrics, but the problem fritz is with your assertion that such attributes were entirely new. you're guilty of hyberbole, that's all.

(x-post)

fritz: huh?

1,000 apologies.

Amateurist: hyperbolic, eh maybe. But really, I can't think of a single performer who placed such a heavy premium on rock n roll as a vehicle for personal expression (or the illusion thereof) prior to Dylan. Elvis was a personality, but it was obvious right from the beginning he was singing other people's songs, directed by others, singing in an established idiom (blues lyrics), etc. With Dylan, you had someone forcing you to listen to a language and delivery that was highly individualized, way more so than anyone before him. I'm not knocking his many predecessors or the styles they worked in, I just think Dylan was at the crux of a massive shift in the language of rock, and that makes him pretty, er, "defensible".

I understand what you're trying to say, Shakey, but this is fallacious. number one, Elvis directed his own sessions most of the time--something his nominal producers (Sam Phillips, Felton Jarvis) have said on the record numerous times. two, casting Elvis as merely a "blues singer" ignores not only the dozens of other things going on in his music at any given time, especially his vocal style. three, that delivery was as highly individualized as anything Dylan did--Elvis just had a prettier voice to deliver it with.

Dylan was great, and we was an innovator but he didn't INVENT what you ascribe to him

The value of Bob Dylan is connected to the voice. The 'can't sing' thing.... I think the word 'singer' is used too often, like some people think the word 'genius' is used too often. Dylan really sings. If you don't hear this, just don't bother. The lyrics are good, mostly, fantastic occasionally, but really the point of them is not to let the voice down.

HAhahahahahahahahaha. That made my day. I personally don't enjoy Bob Dylan's music at all. Never have. I've tried, mind you (after a good friend's tireless insistence that in dismissing Bob Dylan that I'm shamefully missing out on the greatest music known to man), but it just isn't there for me. That said, I'd hardly call him "indefensible". If anything. The man's deified to ridiculous degrees, and you're verily taking your life in your hands if you dare say anything against him (or at least around stodgy folkies, roots rockers, aging hippies, self-appointed poetry "slammers", aging rock critics, etc. etc.) I don't think the man should be put to death or anything, but I just don't enjoy his music.

Was Dylan the first real example of the best rock and roll vocal device ever, the SNEER? If so, he deserves canonisation just for that, regardless of any of the other factors. (Thom Yorke and John Lydon to thread.)

Then again, if I like Fred Durst's voice, it should be any surprise I can handle Dylan's.

I wouldn't be too surprised to wake up to similar threads betales, rolling stones and beethoven. its unfortunate but its ilm.

ew

(i said that.)

What's that crap?

(Dan Perry: That's not crap, that's shit, that is.)

kogan, in response: 'i know, who does he think you are? bob dylan?')

Bob Dylan=0.17Robert Forster
Bob Dylan=18.90Tom Petty

Therefore Robert Forster=111.17647Tom Petty

Alex, you rock, but 'Oh the ironing' etc

Bob Dylan is a vocalist, not a singer - crap.

sorry, for the most part bob dylan just doesn't connect with me. there's the odd song here and there that i like -- "positively fourth street," (title? it's the one where he goes "you've got a lot of nerve ..."), "lay lady lay," and "it's all over now, baby blue" -- and i recognize his importance. but my honest reaction is -- BFD. there are some things about him and his music to which i'm just not predisposed in the first place -- the singer-songwriter schtick, his "rootsy"/folksy music, and yeah his voice -- though i've made exceptions re the foregoing for certain others (neil young comes immediately to mind), i just don't connect AT ALL to dylan's music.

09/13/2005 4:04 PM, E! Online
Charlie Amter

Canadians attempting to buy Bob Dylan albums may temporarily be left blowing in the wind.

One of the nation's largest record chains, HMV Canada, has pulled the entire Dylan catalog from store shelves to protest the folk-rock icon's deal to exclusively sell his latest album in Starbucks stores, according to Toronto's Globe and Mail.

Bob Dylan: Live at the Gaslight 1962 collects songs recorded at the famed New York venue, including early versions of the classics "A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall" and "Don't Think Twice, It's Alright." It went on sale Aug. 30 at Starbucks' 4,600 outlets in the U.S. and Canada for $13.95. The coffee giant has exclusive rights to the Dylan disc for 18 months before the disc is available at regular retailers--the longest such window that Starbucks has secured yet.

Felling miffed, HMV Canada, a subsidiary of U.K.-based retailer HMV, reacted by yanking all Dylan discs for the duration of the Starbucks' promotion. The retailer's Dylan diss isn't unprecedented: HMV did the same earlier this year in retaliation for native daughter Alanis Morissette's similar deal with Starbucks.

While it's not immediately clear how much HMV's protest will end up hurting Dylan sales, the timing couldn't be worse for his Sony-based label, Columbia Records.

Columbia had been preparing for a Dylan sales renaissance this fall thanks in part to the release of Martin Scorsese's highly anticipated documentary, No Direction Home: Bob Dylan, which gets its world premiere Saturday at the Toronto International Film Festival. It will be released on DVD Sept. 20 and run on PBS the following week. The soundtrack, featuring 26 previously unreleased tracks, drops Tuesday. There will also be a companion coffee-table book. Meanwhile, Dylan's best-selling memoir, Chronicles: Volume One, has just been released in paperback.

HMV Canada's president, Humphrey Kadaner, told the Globe and Mail his company "will not be actively stocking, displaying nor promoting Dylan." He also proudly noted that his efforts in the past to stop exclusives from happening outside of his 108 stores "has prevented other exclusive products from crossing the U.S. border into Canada."

So far, the HMV's U.S. stores have not followed suit, but other traditional music retailers like Virgin and Tower are on record as intensely disliking the exclusive marketing agreements struck by record labels and retail giants like Best Buy and especially Starbucks.

Name-brand artists of Dylan's ilk have been increasingly drawn to the latte-slinging megachain; the Seattle-based company has ramped up its music efforts in recent years, catering to its customer base.

Caffeine junkies can now buy a variety of adult-alternative CDs--from Elvis Costello to Joni Mitchell to Michael Buble--and even make customized discs at some outlets. It was Starbucks that was credited with the massive success of Ray Charles' Genius Loves Company, accounting for a full 25 percent of the Grammy-winning disc's nearly 4 million copies.

Ken Lombard, president of Starbucks Entertainment told Billboard last month the Dylan exclusive was "a win-win for everybody involved."

Starbucks doesn't always get its way, however. In May, the caffeine-enabling chain was unable to lock up a deal to exclusively selle Bruce Springsteen's Devil & Dust. Starbucks tried to claim the deal fell through because of racy content on one of the tracks, but Springsteen's camp insisted the blue-collar rocker pulled the plug on the disc because he loathes merchandising his music.

I've tried to "get" Bob Dylan, but I can't get past the fact that he sounds like a knackered old mule slowly expiring in the noonday heat.

The only way I can rationalise his appeal is by concluding that some people like listening to Dylan in the same way that other people like being hogtied and sodomised with baseball bats.

I also strongly suspect there is a large subset of people who like to do both.

fuck off.

Sodomy is great! Why don't you try it?

Is that jeffk's brother or something?

His 'Theme Time' radio show is so good. I want to listen to more and more of it. He's a smart, competent and highly amusing presenter without relying on anyone else.

Its like i keep telling people "theres an important and crucial difference between having a good voice and being a good singer. Take Bob Dylan and Michael Bolton. One is a great singer with a terrible voice, the other has a fine voice, but is a terrible singer."

OTFM

Mark Ronson remix of Most Likely You Go Your Way (And I’ll Go Mine) on the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning. And Zane Low yapping about it. Ugh.

The only way I can rationalise his appeal is by concluding that some people like listening to Dylan in the same way that other people like being hogtied and sodomised with baseball bats.

I also strongly suspect there is a large subset of people who like to do both.

-- PhilK, Wednesday, August 1, 2007 4:39 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark Link

Clearly, you only enjoy the latter.

Sorry, but you really *opened yourself up* for that.

What I like most about BD isn't his voice or his lyrics (though some are very good) but the melodies he wrote. I haven't broken down what makes them work but even or especially with many of his most obvious, familiar songs like "Just Like a Woman" and "Blowin' In the Wind," the melodies just seem perfectly crafted and essential, like I can't imagine a world without them. Usually I need to get past his voice to get to them though. Often, I got into the songs via other people's covers of them.

Haha what just happened. I lol'd at the last few moments.

I found this embedded and at first I thought it was a caricature.

horace freeland judson is a historian of molecular biology

Horace Freeland Judson OTM

The film's producer Pennebaker does not believe the tirade was planned, but notes that Dylan backed off, not wanting to come across as being too cruel. However, Judson believes the confrontation was contrived to make the sequence more entertaining. "That evening," says Judson, "I went to the concert. My opinion then and now was that the music was unpleasant, the lyrics inflated, and Dylan, a self-indulgent whining show off".[5]

more on horace:

horace judson was my prof!

i guess whatever judson wrote was never published, but pennebaker claims to have a copy.

This may be old hat, but I missed it if so...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090814/ap_on_re_us/us_people_bob_dylan

By WAYNE PARRY, Associated Press Writer Wayne Parry, Associated Press Writer – Fri Aug 14, 6:29 pm ET

Rock legend Bob Dylan was treated like a complete unknown by police in a New Jersey shore community when a resident called to report someone wandering around the neighborhood.

Dylan was in Long Branch, about a two-hour drive south of New York City, on July 23 as part of a tour with Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp that was to play at a baseball stadium in nearby Lakewood.

A 24-year-old police officer apparently was unaware of who Dylan is and asked him for identification, Long Branch business administrator Howard Woolley said Friday.

"I don't think she was familiar with his entire body of work," Woolley said.

The incident began at 5 p.m. when a resident said a man was wandering around a low-income, predominantly minority neighborhood several blocks from the oceanfront looking at houses.

The police officer drove up to Dylan, who was wearing a blue jacket, and asked him his name. According to Woolley, the following exchange ensued:

"What is your name, sir?" the officer asked.

"Bob Dylan," Dylan said.

"OK, what are you doing here?" the officer asked.

"I'm on tour," the singer replied.

A second officer, also in his 20s, responded to assist the first officer. He, too, apparently was unfamiliar with Dylan, Woolley said.

The officers asked Dylan for identification. The singer of such classics as "Like a Rolling Stone" and "Blowin' in the Wind" said that he didn't have any ID with him, that he was just walking around looking at houses to pass some time before that night's show.

The officers asked Dylan, 68, to accompany them back to the Ocean Place Resort and Spa, where the performers were staying. Once there, tour staff vouched for Dylan.

The officers thanked him for his cooperation.

"He couldn't have been any nicer to them," Woolley added.

How did it feel? A Dylan publicist did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Friday.

Do cops actually DO anything?

missed it by that much

what is the meanest bob dylan song?

damn – the list is long. Any one of these:

Idiot Wind
Positively Fourth Street
It Ain't Me, Babe
Gotta Serve Somebody
Love in Vain
Neighborhood Bully

question was inspired by idiot wind - "you're an idiot, babe, it's a wonder that you still know how to breathe" is pretty cold

Like a Rolling Stone is pretty mean

the line about books in Idiot Wind is brutal

his cover of the boxer is pretty mean.

this bit from "Is Your Love in Vain" makes me laugh out loud. He's so damn sincere about it tool

All right, I'll take a chance, I will fall in love with you
If I'm a fool you can have the night, you can have the morning too
Can you cook and sew, make flowers grow
Do you understand my pain ?
Are you willing to risk it all
Or is you love in vain ?

Don't Think Twice

would go with Idiot Wind

so cruel

thinking of the 1964 live arrangement which is just so venemous

http://open.spotify.com/track/0H9ZzwIBJSxOJT3HVuAsjW

Gotta Serve Somebody

this strikes me as an odd inclusion. who is this mean towards, exactly? this song makes me laugh a lot.

the line about books in Idiot Wind is brutal

yeah thats what n/a said

aargh, my skimming is not what it used to be.

But goodbye’s too good a word, gal
So I’ll just say fare thee well
I ain’t sayin’ you treated me unkind
You could have done better but I don’t mind
You just kinda wasted my precious time
But don’t think twice, it’s all right

this strikes me as an odd inclusion. who is this mean towards, exactly? this song makes me laugh a lot.

sounds like a crackpot on this song. It's my problem with most of the xtian stuff. It's not what Christ has done for him – it's what he thinks of you for not choosing Christ.

yeah it is a funny way to begin his first born again album. "hey i just found the lord a couple weeks ago -- WHY HAVEN'T YOU????"

The song is funny in retrospect, sure. Unlike "Is Your Love in Vain," which is pathetic.

yeah my first thought was "idiot wind" too. but i was listening to "like a rolling stone" the other day and that is one bitchy jam for sure.

"Ballad of a Thin Man" should be on the list.

'like a rolling stone' is maybe the best karaoke sound

and the live versions are so venomous

(can't stop using the word venomous today)

I've been listening to a lot of both Idiot Wind and Pos. 4th St. lately. This is my favorite line:

Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth, Blowing down the backroads headin' south

this rewritten live version of if you see her say hello is pretty mean
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZILewH38ASc

Well I know she'll be back someday, of that there is no doubt
And when that moment comes Lord, give me the strength to keep her out

Idiot Wind seems so much more biting and personal than the more abstract imagery in Rolling Stone imho

I was going to vote for Idiot Wind and may still but

You hand in your ticket
And you go watch the geek
Who immediately walks up to you
When he hears you speak
And says, “How does it feel
To be such a freak?”
And you say, “Impossible”
As he hands you a bone

^^^gay

You should be made to be wearing earphones, Shakey.

So sorry

j/k I have always found the gay imagery/subtext of Mr. Jones interesting is all

BOB DYLAN WAS A HERO TO MY PARENTS' GENERATION BUT HE NEVER MEANT SHIT TO ME

mf him and history mayne

Ballad in Plain D is shitty mean. from the wiki:

Dylan, when asked in 1985 if he had any regrets about "Ballad In Plain D", replied: "Oh yeah, that one! I look back and say "I must have been a real schmuck to write that." I look back at that particular one and say, of all the songs I've written, maybe I could have left that alone."

that story upthread about the cops not knowing who bob dylan was is like something out of a bob dylan song.

'like a rolling stone' kind of transcends ordinary meanness; the sound is so exuberant and generous and full that i can't really hear it as a hateful song. whereas 'idiot wind' feels genuinely spiteful and petty and uncomfortable, like listening in on somebody's worst argument with their spouse.

That's exactly why I omitted it. I interpreted Dylannesque "meanness" as a pinched, sour lack of generosity, the more I think about it. "Positively 4th Street" is in the "Like a Rolling Stone" category, while "Is Your Love in Vain" and "Gotta Serve Somebody" and "Neighborhood" are in the former.

Do you think there's any song you could name that us haters might enjoy? I have tried, but I just don't hear the good in there. I just hear boring music with self-absorbed, extra-boring singing on top of it. I want to UNDERSTAND what you're on about

some of the best mean ones are indeed the you're-going-to-hell ones; they're like deliberately funny chick tracts. some kind of decadent philistine fortune-telling prostitute in "foot of pride":

she'll do wondrous works with your fate
she'll feed you coconut bread
spice buns
in bed
IF YOU DON'T MIND SLEEPIN WITH YOUR HEAD FACE DOWN IN THE PLATE!!!

there's a lot of bitterness in "someday baby" (WHEN I HEARD YOU WAS COLD / I BOUGHT YOU A COAT AND HAT / I THINK YOU MUST HAVE FORGOTTEN BOUT THAT) even if i don't think he actually breaks up w you.

ultimate "idiot wind" version meanwise is the one from hard rain, where sara is in the audience and he just ladles sarcasm upon "and it makes me feel SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SORRY."

"gotta serve somebody" makes perfect sense as the first track on his first christian album: it's an explanation.

It's a splutter.

It's not "mean" in the personal sense a lot of you are going with, but "Masters of War" is pretty vicious:

And I hope that you die
And your death’ll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I’ll watch while you’re lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I’ll stand o’er your grave
’Til I’m sure that you’re dead

Dag.

And of course, preceding it:

Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul

Masters of War was the song that turned me into a Dylan freak. The hair on my neck stood up first time I heard it, and my mind was blown. This song is not funny, but a lot of Dylan stuff is very funny and it's one of the things I've come to like best about his stuff.

Upthread Bob Shaw mentioned Dylan's delivery. He has superb delivery, though he's not what I call a "technical singer". The only thing indefensible about Dylan is the goddam harp.

I think of "She's Your Lover Now" as a pretty mean song, probably because it alternates nasty asides to her current flame ("And I see you're still with her, well / She'll be standing on the bar soon, with a fishhead and a harpoon / You'd better do something quick ...") with sad sincere regretful memories ("Your mouth used to be so naked, your tears used to be so few").

"Idiot Wind" does this too, some of it is beautifully wistful but then "I can't even touch the books you read," damn.

idiot wind is pretty mean, but he does turn it back on himself at the end there -- "we're idiots, babe"

and YOU -- you just sit around and ask for ASHTRAYS; can't you REACH?

haha, one of the best lines. that whole song is so amazing.

Where to put this ... ?

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/1961l9kkpz4iujpg/ku-bigpic.jpg

The Welding Minstrel

bob dylan is one busy 73-year-old.

"Mmm...this is how Lou did it, right?"

Don't tempt fate there

Bob Dylan will outlive every musician of note save Ringo.

When I Fabricate My Masterpiece

He had good album closers imo

I would probably swap Restless Farewell and I'll Be Your Baby Tonight with Cats in the Well and Wedding Song. What do you have against Don't Fall Apart on Me Tonight?

I love Roll on John.

man is that JFK song awful

Meant to add about Roll on John: but then I don't really think of it as a personal response to John Lennon's death, so much as an elegy for a historical tragedy like "Tempest" and now "Murder Most Foul." It reminds me a bit of Kipling's "A St. Helena Lullaby."

I like that he goes back from the Titanic to the docks of Liverpool, and just keeps rollin' on, encouraging/acknowledging Jawhn, his fellow figure, through the streets of history.

Meant to add about Roll on John: but then I don't really think of it as a personal response to John Lennon's death, so much as an elegy for a historical tragedy like "Tempest" and now "Murder Most Foul." It reminds me a bit of Kipling's "A St. Helena Lullaby."

― The fillyjonk who believed in pandemics (Lily Dale)

but worse

I give him points for doing it at all. (Dylan, not Kipling; fuck that guy.)

i kinda love highlands, kinda love that whole album though

"i'll be your baby tonight" is probably my favorite of these. the way that the mood gradually changes over the course of that album -- from some of bob's bleakest songs to some of his most genuinely upbeat and joyful -- never fails to amaze me.

I thought Saved and Shot of Love were both better listens than their rep. They kinda rock at points.

I mean, yeah, they’re both awesome! (is that not their rep?)

I kind of thought they were supposed to be critically considered some of Dylan's worst records.

To be fair, I did not sit and read the lyrics. It is not some of Bob's clearest diction on some of the tunes too.

I always the Xtian themes were not appreciated at the time and the music a bit of a mash.

There are definitely some Dylan tunes with backing vocal treatments that get weird, but I thought the backing vocals on these were pretty good.

It's probably the production era, but the music was a bit more rocked up guitar wise. I guess that is Fred Tackett playing some of those leads.

their rep is that they're a terrible joke. I even have a christian friend who's a dylan fan who thinks that. truth is they RULE quite hard.

so many Bob Dylan threads, thought I'd post this one in the thread that had the most appropriate subject line for the situation

https://www.tmz.com/2021/08/16/bob-dylan-sued-sexual-abuse-assault-groomed-sex-12-year-old-girl-1965/

Very brave to charge after 56 years, I cannot imagine the pain it must have been during all these years.

Flagged

Oh god I read that as being sarcastic sorry.

I'm surprised this isn't a bigger story - at least not on my social media TLs, don't know about any of yours but no one seems to be talking about it here so I guess it's not just me?

is it everything else going on in the world? I saw some people who were actually talking about it bring up some evidence via his touring history or something that he couldn't have done it? idk

uh idk it's all over my Twitter feed

it's also a story that broke at night

Dud

Have you heard his version of "Vogue," map?

evidence via his touring history or something that he couldn't have done it? idk

The complaint says the abuse happened btw. April & May 1965. Looks like Dylan was on the West Coast for chunks of April, and then the UK through at least May 12. That timeline doesn’t rule it out, I guess. It’s a pretty extraordinary claim. Beyond the allegations in the complaint and the denial by Dylan’s team, nothing else really to go on at the moment (unless similar allegations have surfaced in the past to support it).

Thanks for that info. Twitter seems to have decided to restrict access so I can no longer read through Twitter threads without logging into an account.

I just did my own digging now; others may know or have found more.

I'm generally seeing it everywhere. For comparison's sake, Sting was sued for statutory rape months ago, and I didn't see it nearly as much.

I'm not seeing too much gossip or immediate presumptions of either guilt or blackmail, which is probably for the best. Dylan could very well be guilty, but for many reasons it will be extraordinary if these allegations can be proven - as mentioned, this was a time when he was very visible, incredibly active professionally and publicly, and his day-to-day activities were pretty much tracked by obsessive fans.

Also forgot, he was followed and filmed for Dont Look Back around this time, especially during May.

I had the impression that he had 15 people and a camera crew in the room with him 24 hours a day in 1965.

He didn't enjoy much privacy, that's for sure. Again, a pretty extraordinary claim, but I guess we'll see how it plays out

Twitter seems to have decided to restrict access so I can no longer read through Twitter threads without logging into an account.

this was happening to me too - clearing my Twitter cookies fixed it for me

This is starting to look highly implausible. The complaint says this took place over the course of six weeks in NYC between April and May 1965. Problem is, Dylan was touring - besides the West Coast, he was in the UK and Europe from the end of April through May, and as mentioned, was being filmed too. This is pretty well-documented, public information which makes it especially bizarre, so unless the accuser got the dates wrong - and it's pretty stunning if her attorney didn't bother to look into those dates - I can't see how this can be proven in court.

Actually it really is impossible for those dates to be correct - Dylan was in the Pacific NW performing from late March to late April and flew directly to London from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. His UK tour finished on May 10, then travelled to Portugal with Sara where they stayed until the end of the month. He was then in London on June 1, recording at the BBC, and flew back to the US on June 2.

Where are you finding these detailed itineraries?

Ah, here’s a Twitter thread:

In March 1965, Bob Dylan had left his home in Woodstock for an American concert tour with Joan Baez. 1/5 pic.twitter.com/AswpV0RN3v

— Anne Margaret Daniel (@venetianblonde) August 16, 2021

Not every citation in that thread is backed up with screenshot receipts, but the clippings do convincingly document that he traveled to Portugal after the UK tour, and then returned to London (where he spent time in the hospital).

as for her attorney not looking into the dates in question - do lawyers in the States, with its overly litigious culture, even tell clients "hey, you got a real clunker of a case here, I'd advise you not to proceed" or is it just go go go go go

I mean, they're not supposed to do that - you can see the Verification signed by the plaintiff's attorney at the end of the Complaint, where he attests under penalty of perjury that the allegations are "true to as to his knowledge" or that he "believes them to be true." Obviously, there are unscrupulous attorneys.

I tried looking him up, not finding much, he seems to be a personal injury guy. There's also another attorney who signed the complaint itself, with a little more of a paper trail.

I mean obv you should believe your client (or be willing to fight for them in court lol) but I mean more in a "there's no way your case will be successful, honest advice"

Here's more on the second guy (Gleason). Sounds like a colorful character: https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/-article-1.1039461

(yes, a lawyer should definitely advise a client if they don't believe they have a case)

(when I wrote "they're not supposed to do that," I was referring to "just go go go go go")

I’m also finding suggestions that after buying his house in Woodstock, Dylan later “returned” to the Chelsea with Sara in Fall ’65 to write Blonde on Blonde.

This would mean he wasn’t living at the Chelsea (or in NYC at all) in April/May, but I’m just filling in the blanks. Maybe the Chelsea Hotel book from which that except is drawn (second link) has a more detailed accounting.

Brittanica.com says he “kept an apartment at the hotel from 1961 to 1964,” which tracks with the above (no citation though).

It sounds like at the very least the dates are wrong.

I don’t think I could personally deal with this being true. Not that that matters—the truth is the truth, and I and everyone would need to reevaluate Dylan if he was proven to be a child molester. But no other artist has meant as much to me—I would never have gotten interested in poetry if not for Dylan.

So yeah—I hope this can be resolved conclusively in one way or another

Of course, but at this point we'll just need to hear more evidence. I'm sorry I have to say this, but a brief complaint with inaccurate details isn't much to go on. I've already had two "oh shit" moments in the past year with Biden and Alexander Payne, and both of those complaints turned out to be completely false once they were put under thorough scrutiny.

if Dylan was out of the country during the dates in question, who was house sitting for him at the time?

Here's the first article I've seen to report on the timeframe questions:

Dylan fans online have been quick to point out that the stated timeline in the lawsuit appears to be at odds with his schedule during that period. In April and May of 1965, Dylan was on tour in England followed by a vacation in Portugal. J.C.'s lawyer tells NPR that the dates of those events "are not inconsistent" with what his client alleges.

So, whatever it means, they're sticking with the April/May 1965 dates.

That seems like a bad move to me. "I was on the other side of the continent/a different continent performing in front of thousands of fans and here is video from half that period" seems to be a good defense.

I assumed the plaintiff would try amend the complaint to state a different (earlier) time period - Amending the complaint poses it's own problems, since the Child Victims Act that amended the statute of limitations to allow abuse cases like the one against Dylan expired the day after the suit was filed and plaintiff would need permission from the judge to amend. The judge would probably grant this, but who knows.

Regardless, looking forward to the jury having to watch all of "Don't Look Back" during the trial.

I've seen speculation online that (if the allegations have truth to them) perhaps the girl was traveling as part of Dylan's coterie. But then you would think there would be other people aware, one way or another.

hey birdistheword fuck you

considering everything we know about 60s rock stars this is far more believable than not but I'm dreading how much worse the backlash is likely to get

Left, if there is pretty substantial contemporary video, documentary, and other evidence that Dylan was not in NY during April-May 1965, would you say that a jury should believe the presumed testimony that contradicts that evidence?

I'm not saying it couldn't have happened, but it apparently have happened when and where alleged in the Complaint, which was why I anticipated it would be amended to state a different time.

apparently could not have

Hey Left, fuck you too!

Dylan biographer is skeptical:

Heylin said he can’t figure out when any meetings between Dylan and the accuser could have taken place.

“It’s not possible. Dylan was touring England during that time, and was in Los Angeles for two of those weeks, plus a day or two at Woodstock,” in upstate New York, Heylin told HuffPost. “The tour was 10 days, but Bob flew into London on April 26 and arrived back in New York on June 3.”

“If Dylan was in New York in mid-April, it was for no more than a day or two,” he added. “Woodstock was where he spent most of his time when not touring. And if he was in NYC, he invariably stayed at his manager’s apartment in Gramercy, not the Chelsea.”

Heylin also said the singer didn’t start living at the Chelsea Hotel until autumn of that year.

oh the dylan biographer clearly not invested any particular interpretation of events here

ignoring the shit about what the legal system should or would do except to point out that the carceral logic here works as well to absolve certain people as it does to condemn others

"everything we know about 60s rock stars" -- lol, what disingenuous bullshit this is (unsurprising considering the source)

birdistheword is otm

Left: do you believe it is possible that Dylan did not do this?

for decades rock stars have literally been celebrated for openly raping children and the same people are seen as beloved martyrs or elder statesmen today. these are the most egregious and least secretive ones. this was and is the culture

not entertaining the rest of this apologist bs. gross but preditable display

No one is apologizing you dolt.

OK I'll bite with this one: I believe dylan did this. uninterested in answering that question specifically

to treeship

OK I'll bite with this one: I believe dylan did this. uninterested in answering that question specifically

― Left, Tuesday, August 17, 2021

To be as polite as possible, why then post on this thread if this is your position?

I tend to believe this generation of male artists is more likely guilty of criminal sexual behavior without my adjudicating on guilt.

I wasn't going to until seeing the familiar playbook being employed so readily pissed me off enough

also frankly the biden thing. that's not dylan's fault exactly

Of course it is

The familiar playbook of pointing out the mountain of documentation of his whereabouts during the specific alleged dates.

(I don’t agree that the Biden allegation was thoroughly disproven though)

The idea that Dylan could not have done this because he is a great songwriter is pure ideology.

The idea that Dylan very likely did this because other rock musicians of his generation exploited minors is also pure ideology.

Each case needs to be considered on its own merits. There is not enough information now to determine what is going on with this lawsuit.

There is not enough information now to determine what is going on with this lawsuit.

― treeship., Tuesday, August 17, 2021 8:57 PM (sixteen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Yes 100%, belief and knowledge are two different things. No one knows what happened really. However it's okay to have beliefs, as long as you respect others.

More of Peter J. Gleason’s weird litigation history: https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-reality-tv-private-eye-20181029-story.html

I’m pretty sure the other lawyer, Daniel W. Isaacs, is former Chairman & CEO of the New York Republican County Committee.

so to answer my earlier question, no they wouldn't tell a client if they had a loser case

this guy

Here’s a lot more on Gleason

Maybe he and Isaacs are GOP buds:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E88t9VPVcAshaij?format=jpg&name=small

New statement by Isaacs (to Daily Mail):

The complaint and allegations were thoroughly vetted and factual details were provided by our client.

There's all sort of things we found that back up her claims, on the internet, various sources and blogs and all that. A lot of research went into this. We'll prove our case in a court of law.

There's all

lawyer penalty: -3 points

"on the internet, various sources and blogs and all that"

It's fascinating that Isaacs cites those same public sources everyone else is looking at. Even accounting for time gaps when Dylan could theoretically have returned to NYC, no one seems to have found anything definitively placing him there, let alone anything involving a girl (either in NYC or traveling with him).

That statement gives me some Jacob Wohl vibes.

As we all know, information sourced from blogs and "the internet" is irrefutable and almost certainly wouldn't be among the first things the defence counsel rips to shreds in presenting their case.

Honestly, if the allegations weren't so serious it would be hilarious. The statement above was pure Lionel Hutz.

It seems like the lawyer — at least — is a skeeveball and the timeline — at least — doesn’t add up. Is it ok to say that, if this is just some stunt, then it is very unfortunate that Dylan has had his name linked with child molestation in the popular imagination? Or are we not supposed to take that into account?

Again, who knows what information the client put before the lawyer. Maybe this is a stronger case than it seems. But if so, this is a bad lawyer.

just to be clear, i'm very much in the "wait for more info" camp. it doesn't appear to be a strong case. the lawyer seems dumb, but so do a lot of lawyers. you can be an extremely dumb lawyer and make it to the top of your field. you can even run for president or land on the supreme court, it doesn't fucking matter. maybe it never did.

but i'm not going to be in the captain save a bob camp and freak out either. we don't know anything yet. bob dylan attended roughly 134014 parties in the 1960s, and this was during a time when virtually all rock bands and singers were talking about having the hots for teenagers. who knows what the fuck he did.

Aye, the entire range of possibilities is there, from "totally made up" to "totally true" with a ton of other scenarios between. On the surface it looks and sounds like a shakedown where someone's hoping for nuisance money, if you broaden this from sex-abuse allegations to complaints filed 55 years after the fact about behavior by rich people in general. But we don't have to make any assumptions, it can play out or evaporate as it will.

how much lifting is "and all that" doing

xxpost it is absolutely unfortunate if it proves to be groundless, as that kind of sleaze tends not to rub off. I don't think any justification is necessary.

Hard as it is for me to picture Dylan indulging in the same kind of behaviour as his rock star contemporaries(he always seemed, I dunno, a bit too aloof for that), I would also be in the wait and see camp. If there's anything more than gossip and hearsay to implicate him then it needs to be heard.

Yeah, I don’t mean to totally dismiss it, and I’m obviously biased in hoping it’s not true. There’s just a lot that makes me dubious - Dylan in mid-65 was one of the most in-the-spotlight people you could imagine, and seemed to have an entourage with him all the time. And I think the view of Dylan in 1965 was fairly different than, say, Led Zeppelin in 1970. I’d say that “holier-than-thou protest singer is secretly degenerate pervert” would be a big story if a reporter got wind of it, it wasn’t like much of the press was worshipful of him.

But, y’know, I don’t know, he certainly had a lot of power within his scene and could probably get away with a lot. Just seems hard to believe that with all the turns in his career and all the people he pissed off at one point or another that this would never be mentioned.

The Dylan who emerges in Heylin's first oral history was a real asshole to women, going so far as to steal his best friend's wife during a sodden period in the mid '80s. Like tipsy, I can believe all manner of behavior, though his MO is not sexual predator/stalker.

G.E. Smith comments as character witness

not with that hair he won't

I'm sure you could get lots of people who worked with [fill in well-known sexual predator here] to give similar testimony as GE's. obviously I would prefer for this allegation not to be true, and it does seem *very* shaky at the moment, but yeah, we'll have to wait for more info.

Sleeping with another man’s wife is nothing like being a pedophile. Xp

Not looking forward to the defense that reveals what Dylan *is* into.

jugglers and clowns iirc

Yeah I think Phylicia Rashad shows the limits of co-worker testimonials.

Sleeping with another man’s wife is nothing like being a pedophile. Xp

― treeship.

I implied otherwise?

It just seems like an irrelevant data point

if you sayso

i always kind of assumed he was a womanizer, but not really the predatory type. just kind of had all the right moves; free love, so to speak. so idk, maybe he did.

but, that being said, the initial accusation as we know it now doesn't seem very plausible.

Not looking forward to the defense that reveals what Dylan *is* into.

Poor old Dylan fans, how you must be suffering.

imagine the corns

In this thread I discovered people way too much about Bob Dylan.

Something I've never been able to forget was this brief gossip item that ran in Spin around '99 about Dylan's people reaching out to Elastica's management about bringing them aboard as a support act on the Never Ending Tour, with the ulterior motive that Dylan had seen some photos of Justine Frischmann and got really hot for her.

None of these other gossip items = child abuse, and the fact we're discussing them illustrates why the G.E. Smith testimonial is as valid as anything else right now (apparently Dylan's first manager, from the early '60s, spoke up too). That isn't anything like Phylicia Rashad standing by Cosby despite everything we know to be true in his case. All we have is a civil complaint with a shocking claim and no other real details, and the lawyers who filed it speaking to anyone who contacts them, saying (in effect) "Trust us." They're using the press to their advantage (and no doubt increase pressure for a settlement, which is their right), so it's reasonable for those whose initial reaction is doubt to respond to questions as well.

No one should feel bad for Bob. He's rich and barring any revelations he and his reputation will come through this fine. What Weberman did to him was probably worse.

Is it possible that they are going to allege some kind of long-distance phone abuse?

Someone I know (not well, my wife know her better) had fairly recent experience of him being into watching other people have sex (she didn’t oblige).
― Alba, Wednesday, 18 August 2021 18:28 (one hour ago) link

Yeah we've heard "Visions of Johanna"

The one thing the lawyers seem really specific about is "we know she was with him at the Chelsea" — so that suggests some kind of documentary evidence, a photo or something, or corroborating testimony. Unless they're Sidney Powell-ing it, in which case it could all be imaginary.

Sidney Powell-ing it,

For the times, they are a Kraken

Maybe you guys could all do a podcast about each time a beloved popular male artist was accused of rape, and you could use all the evidence you've found on the internet to vindicate them and call their accusers liars. I mean 90% of the episodes would eventually need to come down but it would be fun for awhile

Maybe 100% really but who's counting

No one's really swinging evidence around, other than the fact that it's a super well known time of his history, where he was, what he was doing, etc. If it was during his time when he didn't tour after his motorcycle crash I could see it being more believable for sure.

Also not sure 100% is accurate here, here's one famous example of a false accusation.

https://pitchfork.com/news/55965-conor-oberst-drops-libel-suit-over-rape-accusation/

I guess that podcast about Conor wouldn't have to get taken down.

Dylan's also been famous for 60 years of his life. It's a shocking claim. There also may be truth to it, which is why at least I'm so concerned about / engaged with the topic. Also, no one here (afaik) has called his accuser a liar. We do not know the accuser's story, we only how it is sketchily presented in the legal brief.

Carry on then

Like I said, just wait for more evidence to be presented. The claim gave very few details and since they don't line up with what's known, obviously there has to be more to get this to trial - so wait for more and go from there. It doesn't help that the lawyers have bad reputations, sure, but let them present their argument first.

FFS, "of course he's guilty, he's an old white guy" is NAGL either

Death to Europe and Bob Dylan.

Have you guys ever wondered why so few women post here anymore?

If so - wonder no longer!

Fuck you for that. What a disingenuous prick you are.

?? I think i’ve been pretty forthright!

In fact I’d call that accusation…. baseless!

I like Dylan enough to privately hope this isn't true, because it's deeply horrible and I hope it didn't happen for reasons selfish and not. But since it obviously *could be* true, I wonder why people engaged in sleuthing this out don't hesitate to leave this trail of posts? On a micro level, won't you feel terrible? On a macro level, he fact that a powerful, famous, and well-liked man has a legion of fans (not just here obvs) immediately on the case trying to disprove the charge without him having to do a thing sends a disturbing message to anyone thinking about coming forward with their own story.

I don't know any departed women posters, so I can't speak to their reasons, but a few have in the past explicitly posted similar sentiments to Tracer

No one here has called the accusation "baseless" (afaik). Why would we hesitate to leave this "trail of posts"? I will feel terrible if it's true, not because I discussed the charge on a board.

personally i feel terrible either way

You guys realize this is not a criminal case where authorities have investigated and decided there is enough evidence for a case, correct? It's a civil claim with a vague but devastating charge, filed by lawyers who have then been up in the press every day. If your position is that the details of the charge should not be discussed out of some sense of decorum, I strongly disagree.

Why would we hesitate to leave this "trail of posts"?

Because it will retroactively make it look like your first instinct was to side with an abuser. I guess that isn't fair, but I'm surprised it doesn't factor into people's behavior nonetheless.

I don't think you can neutrally "discuss" this charge. Or if that's too broad: I think it sends a message that people react to this news by, on their own time, searching for and posting exculpatory evidence.

It's not a "criminal case" but you thought this was a good post to make:

G.E. Smith comments as character witness

― Shallot Shortage 2021 (morrisp), Wednesday, August 18, 2021 1:37 PM (yesterday)

If he had said, "I'm not surprised, Dylan's always kind of been a creep," I would have posted that too.

When accusations about famous people surface in this day & age, they're often followed by others reporting similarly bad experiences. If that doesn't happen here, it doesn't mean there couldn't still truth to the charge. But I'd be more concerned if people *weren't* saying "that doesn't sound like the Bob I know."

Your position is apparently that only the two lawyers who filed the suit are allowed to speak.

i'd like to think that if there was evidence that implicated Dylan, we would be equally willing to post it here

"of course he's guilty, he's an old white guy"

you see it's shit like this

daily mail comment section worthy

old white guy "60s rock star"

i know it's hard when someone's work has meant a lot to you but regardless of the facts in this case is it really so hard to avoid using the exact same little turns of phrase that we have been hearing for years to defend other people whose behaviour is (now) widely acknowledged? that is what set me off initially. and is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby "hey check out this other false accusation"? for fuck's sake

bob dylan's work doesn't mean shit to me fwiw, but your being a sanctimonious cunt to everyone on this board since your very first post does

i don't remember my very first post but my first real "incident" on here was when i had the temerity to suggest that woody allen was what he is, just throwing that out there

how's this for sanctimonious: i know people get touchy when it's pointed out that not many women post here these days but everyone knows why and some people clearly prefer it that way

"is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby "hey check out this other false accusation"? for fuck's sake"

Was made harder when someone else said 100% of accusations are true

Nobody said that.

Have you guys ever wondered why so few women post here anymore?

― Tracer Hand, jeudi 19 août 2021 10:36 (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

If so - wonder no longer!

― Tracer Hand, jeudi 19 août 2021 10:39 (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

With respect, I wasn't waiting for a man to give me the answer.

lol

Sorry. "Maybe" 100% are true.

is it really so hard to avoid using the exact same little turns of phrase that we have been hearing for years to defend other people whose behaviour is (now) widely acknowledged? that is what set me off.

THIS would have been more helpful than a flat out "fuck you" or even the the following "is it so fucking hard to avoid the classic /r/mensrights standby 'hey check out this other false accusation'? for fuck's sake"

In those two cases, I jumped on the "they're guilty" bandwagon and regretted it. But from the perspective laid out in italics, it's easy to see how expressing that can also have consequences I don't intend or want.

Because it will retroactively make it look like your first instinct was to side with an abuser.

b/c this is still bugging me - if you go back thru the posts where I was poking online into the timeline, you'll see I was very careful to note that nothing I was finding absolutely proved that Dylan couldn't have been in NYC in April/May. Such exculpatory evidence is what I hoped to find, but it's not enough for someone online to say "this biography says he and Joan went to Mimi Farina's party upstate for the rest of April" - I want to see what is said in the text. That's why the newspaper clippings in that Twitter thread showing he and Sara visited Portugal after his May UK shows were good, but also not entirely enough.

And indeed, Isaacs is now saying “There are dates that he wasn’t touring for several weeks in April and this will all come out at that appropriate time.” So that's what they've narrowed the timeframe to - and if no one can definitely account for Dylan's activities throughout April, then it is still an open question.

Honestly I almost ordered that Chelsea Hotel book to see what the author says in full about when Dylan was there, but that seemed a bit much.

can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want to post on a board where ppl regularly greet each other with “fuck you” and warn against leaving an incriminating “trail of posts”

That was the very first time I've ever posted "fuck you" to anybody anywhere, and it was also in response to the first time anyone's ever posted that in my direction. As mentioned, it was needless.

I regret saying "trail of posts"; that was inflammatory.

I just meant there's a (sometimes silent) audience for our posts here, however dwindling. And my perspective is that searching for and publicly distributing exculpatory evidence—for whatever motive or however non-prejudicially—contributes to rape culture by sending a message that victims of sexual assault need to make sure their accounts of inherently traumatizing and psychologically altering experiences are airtight before coming forward. If you disagree, that's fine, but then we don't have much to talk about, so as Tracer said, carry on

i don't remember my very first post

As best as I can figure it was

tulsi is no republican, she's just a self-aggrandizing narcissist

― akm, Sunday, February 9, 2020 11:31 AM (one year ago) bookmarkflaglink

you don't have to be a republican to be fascist supporting islamophobe

― aaaaaeeeeeeooooooooooo (Left), Sunday, February 9, 2020 11:42 AM (one year ago) bookmarkflaglink

rob otm, this thread has been very weird to read

not that it hasn't tracked with the greater conversation about this on the internet, i just expect a little better of ilx, uh, lol

xxpost: i wasn’t trying to single anyone out it just gets exhausting to post and wonder if anyone’s going to decide to respond with a “fuck you.” obviously there are times when it’s called for (i think using it to respond to someone who’s already said it to you is fine).

I am genuinely asking this: is there no way to discuss the allegations or is that off limits?

I don't think there's any way for *men* to productively discuss it, tbh, as we have seen here already

Basically never expect better of ilx is how i break it down to an extent.

Now look what you made me do, I posted on ILM. Get it off get it off

so why don't the mods just strip out all of the posts from this thread since the first post on this and be done with it?

xp

that's a very extreme response

the immediate and sustained turn this thread took for the investigative was just kinda shitty, a lesson to learn from in the future

There is a way to productively discuss these things as men, and evidently there is an urgency to do so, it just involves not waltzing in and saying ‘fuck you’ and accusing people for contributing to rape culture and to the lack of female posters, or making wild assumptions about someone’s character. We are mostly all anonymous here, we don’t know each other personal lives, maybe someone who is tracking down Dylan’s life looking for evidence could also be a victim of sexual assault. If you take the time to read the actual posts, no one has made the claim that Dylan is innocent.

I don’t know, I feel like I have loved this board because it seemed a respite from twitter-like activity but sometimes O think the virus has caught on here too.

discussion of sexual assault is triggering, period. maybe there should be a trigger warning added to the thread title?

yes vhs, the thing for the men to focus on itt is how they're being attacked

come the fuck on

like i said earlier, this time period has been well documented, I think that's one reason you're having so many people chime in

xp

You think attacking people leads to productive conversations? If you believe that the investigative turn is the wrong thing (which is my opinion too btw), do you believe you are going to achieve anything positive by just saying it's shitty and you expect better of posters? It seems to me that's more policing than idk sharing of ideas and explanations.

And my perspective is that searching for and publicly distributing exculpatory evidence—for whatever motive or however non-prejudicially—contributes to rape culture by sending a message that victims of sexual assault need to make sure their accounts of inherently traumatizing and psychologically altering experiences are airtight before coming forward.

I support women coming forward to tell their story. I disagree with you that I or anyone else who discusses this timeline in Dylan's life as contributing to rape culture. Framing it as evidence seems a little presumptuous as well.

the immediate and sustained turn this thread took for the investigative

Welcome to Dylan fandom.

I appreciate your larger point even if I disagree a little bit.

wow the manstigating on this thread is really bumming me out. Trader hand etc otm :-(

it’s 2021

ok I’m off my high horse

I like Trader Hand. It’s even more wild west than my real handle.

It’s always confusing and horrible when someone whose art you’ve loved is accused of something terrible. I get it. How do you process it? What do you do?

I think we owe it to the board to be really careful about how we process it. Going on and on about the different ways that you think the alleged victim’s story doesn’t add up is grotesque. THAT is the “attack” - on every victim of sexual assault. And yeah it’s going to provoke some strong reactions. Or at least it had better.

Considering buying materials in order to continue the sleuthing I think is probably a sign that you are too invested in your image of Bob Dylan as a good guy to have a fair judgment about it. Why go to these lengths? Who possibly could have a fair judgment about it right now? We have to live with this shitty stink around Bob Dylan for awhile and no amount of sleuthing of going to counter that, unfortunately.

I probably have been over-invested in following every angle here - but not because of some image of Dylan a "good guy" (I've never been too interested in his private life) but because the claim is so horrible (and the available details so minimal - we don't even know the plaintiff's "story," just how it's being characterized in the brief) that yes it would be devastating to me as a fan of his music if it has truth to it. Honestly I think you're underplaying the magnitude of what's being alleged. I won't post any more "sleuthing" if it's not welcome here though.

I would get personally skeeved out if people were trying to dig up personal details of the accuser, but I haven't seen anything like that on this thread.

Going on and on about the different ways that you think the alleged victim’s story doesn’t add up is grotesque.

No one is going on about the victim's story, because we don't know the vicitm's story. We do know a lot about the person accused of these crimes, and where they were, and that's what I think some people are not understanding. No one's calling the story into question, we just know about the accusation.

And shaming people for buying a book is not a good look imho

ILX is not perfect but from what i've seen, posters have responded to the numerous accounts of abusive/predatory behavior from musicians in the last few years with sympathy and support for the victims and anger and disappointment towards the musicians, and I have not seen much in the way of demanding more proof or mounting defenses of the accused. I do think this case is an outlier - the alleged offense being 56 years ago, how famous the accused is and was at the time, and the question of whether this could even have taken place as described based on the facts that exist. I totally understand being uncomfortable with 'sleuthing' but I don't think it's terrible, or an attack on all victims of sexual assault, to admit skepticism about the accusation as it stands now. My opinion may change if/when more facts emerge, and perhaps I would need to re-examine my judgment.

And my perspective is that searching for and publicly distributing exculpatory evidence—for whatever motive or however non-prejudicially—contributes to rape culture by sending a message that victims of sexual assault need to make sure their accounts of inherently traumatizing and psychologically altering experiences are airtight before coming forward.

But this is essentially just what our legal system does, and this is a lawsuit that the lawyers want addressed in court. And when those lawyers respond to issues that are certain to come up in court with "we've got blogs" I think there's some reason for skepticism.

not that i'm trying to defend how awful and traumatic our legal system is to victims of sexual assault btw.

I heard a rumour on this very thread that Bob Dylan "makes" people shovel bees down their dick.

oh great comedy just what we need

xp you're right the legal system reproduces rape culture. i don't understand the point or what it has to do with how ordinary people should talk about a case although the legal system is a great example of *how not to do it*

If anyone needs some comedy, it's you

i know i need to lighten up and take a joke and stop being so easily offended eh

the accusation exists in the context of a lawsuit, in our legal system. I think it's reasonable for people to wonder how something is going to hold up in court, especially when the lawyers provide a buffoonish non-answer to pretty obvious questions.

Have you wondered enough yet?

yeah I’ll shut up now

i dont post bc news like this makes me shut down

i can’t even give my energy to speculation of ~any~ kind because it’s just so sad in and of itself

i think that’s the bigger picture as i see it - not that anyone’s accusing or exonerating anyone

but ilx collectively just has this way of intensely interrogating things immediately re subjects that leave me reeling and sometimes it’d be good if you all just took a breath FIRST and read the room as a whole subject-wise, instead of getting all grassy-knolled out about literally everything all the time

thank you VG, otm

vg otm

I haven't been posting because - frankly - I'm very much in the "I hope he didn't do this" camp, and I've felt sick ever since the story broke. And tbh I'm grateful to the people posting about the conflict of dates etc. because it gives me some hope that's letting me, like, go about my day and eat meals and not just curl up in a ball as I wait for more information to emerge. Because as a woman - and speaking only for myself - I would feel devastated and betrayed if it turned out that a male artist whose work I love, and who I've felt a deep sense of personal gratitude toward at many points in my life, turned out to have done something like this. So I'm strenuously hoping he didn't do it, awaiting more information, and doing my best not to completely lose it in the meantime. And I haven't posted because I'm afraid if I say something like that I'll be called a rape apologist, and I'm not good at being in internet fights, I tend to take them personally.

Also, one of the things I generally like about ilx is that people know each other and don't have to make the kind of assumptions of bad faith that you see in, like, large-scale Twitter arguments. And yet on this thread I get the impression people are reflexively assuming bad faith anyway, and that bothers me. So I've stayed quiet because I'm uncomfortable when ilx gets like this. It doesn't have anything to do with thinking ilx is supporting rape culture. Maybe for other people it does, idk. We women are not a monolithic group.

i feel that *hoping they didnt do it* element too, definitely going through a bit of that as well
lily, thank you for stating that so eloquently

that's real, lily <3

I'll be in the camp of "now that we've had a full circle of accusations (Bob Dylan, lawyers, biographers, internet, twitter, ILX, legal system), can we stop panicking, go back to being patient, and leave the alleged victim and accused their full respective rights ?" Or does it have to be a shitstorm all the time.

Personally I won’t post about it (unless/until I guess something definitive happens, if it ever does). Posting here was my way of “processing” and dealing with the pit in my stomach. I have more I could discuss about the emotional impact but I guess we have other threads for that, and the time may not be ripe for a while.

The lawsuit has been permanently withdrawn after the plaintiff asked the federal judge overseeing the case to dismiss it “with prejudice,” meaning it will be permanently closed and cannot be refiled. The move came after she was accused of deleting key messages and threatened with monetary sanctions.

peak Dylan

https://archive.org/details/s-08b_full/02.+THE+MAN+IN+ME.flac

nice!

that's a mean cold irons bound too

This show is pretty freaking great. Can anyone recommend me a complete live show on archive I need to hear from the Larry Campbell-Charlie Sexton period?

If I had to pick one, the one at Halle Münsterland in Münster, Germany on October 1, 2000.

Or, if you prefer Dylan on piano, the one at Pauline Davis Pavilion in Red Bluff, CA, USA on October 7, 2002.

great recordings thank you

i love that live album with the flute. budokan. that is my idiosyncratic favorite.

he appreciates the plasticity of his own songs and is essentially devoted to live performance. i love that.

elsewhere on this site i have written about being at the 1999 show at tramps in new york, which was great (elvis costello was there and got on stage for an encore, singing 'i shall be released'). great audio from the soundboard. incredible version of Visions of Johanna. crowd VEWRY rowdy.

https://www.wolfgangs.com/music/bob-dylan/audio/20022342-814.html?tid=54412

https://www.boblinks.com/072699r.html

i'm sure i remember the flacs being available somewhere, or on youtube

Bizarre Bob Dylan melody -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBe8zZ0OKlk

Only actor/singer George Maharis is credited, but there's also folk duo Joe and Eddie, Dionne Warwick and the Animals (their classic line-up) doing a very not-like-the-Animals-at-all rendition of "It Ain't Me, Babe."

Enjoying “philosophy of modern song” and an accompanying playlist on YouTube.

Extraordinary

hoping for some defenses of the indefensible: bob dylan today