It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Bob Dylan Has Been Awarded the 2016 Nobel Prize for Literature

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Dylan's impact on contemporary culture is so great it's immeasurable.

He wasn't just a musician, he was the voice of a generation.




posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Yes

Lightning in a bottle that boy

‘Poetry for the ear’: Bob Dylan wins Nobel Prize in literature


Tributes for Dylan — as well as the Nobel’s unconventional choice — came from across the world and spanned from the worlds of politics to letters.

“Dylan is the brilliant inheritor of the bardic tradition. Great choice,” said a Twitter message from British novelist Salman Rushdie. Chile’s president, Michelle Bachelet, called the honor for Dylan a “joy” and recalled “many fond memories from my adolescence are associated with his music.”

Just after 7 a.m., songwriter Rosanne Cash was in her New York home when her husband John ran down the stairs “like an elephant.”

“Dylan won the Nobel prize,” he shouted.

“No,” said Cash, “that can’t be true.”

Cash, whose legendary late father, Johnny, was a friend and sometime collaborator with Dylan, spent the rest of the morning beaming. She also received a flurry of text messages, everyone from songwriter Marc Cohn to her literary agent.

“The chatter is this pride and that finally he gets recognized in this way that equates songwriting with great literature,” said Cash. “I can’t tell you how many times people have said to me, because I also write prose, ‘oh, you’re also a real writer.’ It’s so offensive. Like songwriting doesn’t require the same discipline. So the fact that he’s recognized lifts all of our boats.”


Here's just how much buzz, joy and controversy.....


edit on 10/13/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: ETA: fun



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I think awarding Bob Dylan the Nobel Prize for literature is a terrible travesty. It is hard to take the Nobel Prize for Literature seriously after this. Bob Dylan did write some good songs but he also wrote an amazing amount of drivel and passed it off as art in a typically (for the music industry) cynical way.

He is quoted on this, somewhere, as saying that he himself didn't understand some of the drivel he wrote. I tried to find it for this post, but was unable to do so.

There should be a Nobel Prize for pop culture icon. He is certainly eligible for that.

You want to hear a song that should be awarded the Nobel Prize for literature, in which Bob Dylan has a walk on part?




posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit



You want to hear a song that should be awarded the Nobel Prize for literature, in which Bob Dylan has a walk on part?


Was thinking about Joan this morning - and this song. Was wondering what she might say

We'll have to agree to disagree

Love Joan - but she was a huge Dylan fan. Love twists stuff up something awful though...



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I'm glad that a song writer has been recognized in this way. Song writing at it's best is a branch of poetry and deserves to be included under the umbrella of literature. Bob Dylan, during the early part of his career, was an important central figure in popular song. He was a folk singer who managed to cross over into the rock world, but in doing so, I think he lost his relevance in a field crowded with talented competitors.

Dylan, unlike Woody Guthrie, compromised his art to follow the money. The world of the folk singer was being swept out of the public imagination anyway, except for niche audiences.

This award to Dylan, of all people, not George Gershwin, not Cole Porter, not Hoagy Carmichael, not Neil Young, not Lennon McCartney, is a bizarre attempt by a committee to generate a little buzz for an award that is increasingly seen as a political instrument.

For me, Dylan's Nobel Prize is similar to the one given to Barack Obama. They are like cheers erupting from the corner of a crowded pub, where somebody is being toasted, for reasons that are unknown and unsought.



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit


This award to Dylan, of all people, not George Gershwin, not Cole Porter, not Hoagy Carmichael, not Neil Young, not Lennon McCartney, is a bizarre attempt by a committee to generate a little buzz for an award that is increasingly seen as a political instrument.

See - how preference influences all of us? Gershwin - but not Dylan? :-)

I love the controversy in all this. It is a political instrument - there's an ideal involved that won't work for everyone in the same way. The choices have all been controversial to some extent because not everyone can agree on what makes great literature great. Who deserves more recognition - Homer or Masahide? Why?



Nobel's choice of emphasis on idealism in his criteria for the Nobel Prize in Literature has led to recurrent controversy. In the original Swedish, the word idealisk translates as either "idealistic" or "ideal".[3] In the early twentieth century, the Nobel Committee interpreted the intent of the will strictly. For this reason, they did not award certain world-renowned authors of the time such as James Joyce, Leo Tolstoy, Anton Chekhov, Marcel Proust, Henrik Ibsen, and Henry James.[4] More recently, the wording has been more liberally interpreted. Thus, the prize is now awarded both for lasting literary merit and for evidence of consistent idealism on some significant level. In recent years, this means a kind of idealism championing human rights on a broad scale. Hence, the award is now arguably more political.[3][5]

The Swedish Academy has attracted significant criticism in recent years for its handling of the award. Some critics contend that many well-known writers have not been awarded the prize or even been nominated and others contend that some well-known recipients do not deserve it. There have also been controversies involving alleged political interests relating to the nomination process and ultimate selection of some of the recent literary laureates.[5] Some, such as Indian academic Sabaree Mitra, have noted that, though the Nobel Prize in Literature is significant and tends to overshadow other awards, it is "not the only benchmark of literary excellence"

Source

I've always thought the world might be split down the middle - Dylan people and Not Dylan people. Been reading the comments out and about - all over the web. It really is so interesting



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I think there are more grounds for disapproving of the choice of Dylan than simple personal preference, but if the choice pleases people, fine.

All you have to do to see how important and influential Bob Dylan was, is to go to a list of the all time best selling pop artists. He is well down the list. At the top are the Beatles and Elvis Presley. I think record sales are a very good indicator of the influence a pop artist has on the public. Bob Dylan sold a lot of records but many other artists sold many more.

en.wikipedia.org...

The idea that the Nobel Committee would choose Bob Dylan over Lennon/McCartney is perverse. (Paul McCartney, even during his post Beatles career, has sold more records than Bob Dylan.)
edit on 13-10-2016 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I live in Sweden and read the news with disbelief today. I, too, would like to compare this to the Obama peace prize.

I do not mind Dylan, even though I have never really listened to him. The Swedish media is filled with interviews with people that now HAS to say that "he has ALWAYS been my favourite artists and yeah, he REALLY is such a wonderful poet". A bit superficial, in my taste. And he also got the musical equivalent prize - the Swedish Polar prize in 2010.

The cause for giving him the prize according to the secretary of the academy, Sara Danius, was his political work (ending in the late 60´s?), his new expressions within the American song tradition (I can think of many others that I deem more important) and last but not least - his fantastic ability to rhyme!

I have never heard of the plagiarism but that truly makes me depressed.

Oh yeah, did I mention that he also gets ca 1 million dollar along with the medallion?



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit


(Paul McCartney, even during his post Beatles career, has sold more records than Bob Dylan.)


So - you see this s being about commercial success? Popularity?

Interesting



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Floridagoat
a reply to: pteridine

So true, Obama got a peace prize, Dylan get's a Literature prize. Time to evaluate who is doing the judging and awarding.


You get to do that as soon as you donate $482 million to fund the prizes. Until then you don't really have any skin in the game, do you?



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 06:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

So - you see this s being about commercial success? Popularity?

Interesting


That remark is interesting too.

Maybe I need to go back and listen to a lot of Dylan. Back in the day I bought the "best of" collection on vinyl because I didn't think much of the rest was worth the trouble. I can't deny, though, that a lot of people think he's great.

His singing style was certainly influential. A lot of people with untrained singing voices were shown the way by Bob Dylan. Mark Knopfler sounds somewhat like him and Jimi Hendrix credited Dylan with giving him the idea that he could sing his own songs.

For me Dylan had his greatest impact as a folksinger during the early part of his career. After that he steadily diminished in artistic importance, though not in public stature.

I think he made one of the quickest transitions from artist to poseur in the history of music, something that probably would not have been noticed, except that his reputation continued to linger, sustained by fumes of hippie nostalgia, for so long after his talent was gone.
edit on 14-10-2016 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit

There's no point in evangelizing for art, or an artist. We like what we like. I believe you can learn to appreciate different kinds of things, but even then you have to want to. I've changed my mind about a few people here and there - styles and movements too

And anyhow - not everything someone produces is golden. It's not possible

Yesterday when I woke up this was one of the first things I heard on the news and my first thought was - oh no you didn't. I'll bet there will be some discussions in schools now, hopefully all of them debating - why Dylan?


I think he made one of the quickest transitions from artist to poseur in the history of music, something that probably would not have been noticed, except that his reputation continued to linger, sustained by fumes of hippie nostalgia, for so long after his talent was gone.

Your girl Joan might agree with you - or she did. She was a little pissed at Bobby for not buying into the whole populist, savior, icon diva bit

Bobby bailed on all that - I respect him for it. He pretty much told a lot of people to go get bent. More than once

I read some of the comments and I have to wonder why people need to push the plagiarism angle in order to justify why they think Dylan is a bogus choice. Makes me wonder (not wondering actually...) if some of this doesn't break down politically

I would have loved a real discussion. Not going to happen here I guess :-)




edit on 10/14/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis




Anyhow, I would have loved a real discussion. Not going to happen here I guess :-)


Sad but true. Non artists or wanna be's continue to think ART is somehow a competition sport or do their damndest to turn it into one.

Everyone's a critic...



edit on 14-10-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Yup. Gonna have to LOL at that

When people think that the Nobel prize is based on sales - time to jump ship

:-)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

When people need reading comprehension assistance, and have "attitude" problems, I have to agree.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit

I will absolutely cop to the attitude problem

Reading comprehension? Naw - I got that :-)

You think Lennon/McCartney deserved it before Dylan. A lot of people agree with you

Maybe next time...people are picky about what they think qualifies as literature. Time changes everything



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
There should be a new category for the Nobel Prize. There should be an award for the media, called Media Levitation, awarded for holding an object or person aloft for the longest period with no visible means of support. And this year's nominees are . . . The Menace of Russia, The War on Drugs and Bob Dylan. lol.
edit on 15-10-2016 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra
So, the Nobel Committee has reached a new height of idiocy. I mean...Bob Dylan? For literature? No disrespect, but this is a mockery. Should we expect "Madonna" or whatdoyoucallit "Miley Cyrus" to be awarded next time for anything?

Maybe they just do not freaking know what actually literature is? You can't just lump together Dostoyevsky with Bob Dylan.

Time should decide what literature is, not a bunch of Swedish freaks.

Anyway, I am no one to judge, it is just my opinion.
edit on 2016 by JedemDasSeine because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Dylan...prize....

did anyone else create Maggies Farm / Blowin in the Wind / etcetra

'bout time his talent & genius was noted



new topics




 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join