Transcript
Page 1: DENISOFF Political Dylan

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [University of Sussex]On: 25 September 2008Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 794915429]Publisher RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Popular Music and SocietyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713689465

“Hey, hey woody Guthrie I wrote you a song”: The political side of Bob DylanR. Serge Denlsoff; David Fandray

Online Publication Date: 01 January 1977

To cite this Article Denlsoff, R. Serge and Fandray, David(1977)'“Hey, hey woody Guthrie I wrote you a song”: The political side of BobDylan',Popular Music and Society,5:5,31 — 42To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/03007767708591096URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03007767708591096

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Page 2: DENISOFF Political Dylan

"HEY, HEY WOODY GUTHRIE I WROTE YOU A SONG":THE POLITICAL SIDE OF BOB DYLAN

R. Serge Denlsoffand David Fandray

Bob Dylan appears as the most enigmatic and controversial artist of the turbulant1960s. Dylan was all things to many people, at least at one point in that decade. His fansand the media enjoyed a love-hate relationship with the singer that has rarely beenwitnessed. He was labeled a voice of a generation, yet turned his back on the role. Hisimportance was immense long before "Like a Rolling Stone" finally reached the popcharts. Very few people aware of Dylan are neutral about him. His aesthetic changeshave been roundly criticized.

The stormiest side to Dylan is in the sphere of politics. Originally heralded as the heirapparent to Woody Guthrie, Dylan was roundly condemned as an "opportunist" and a"sell-out" by the same people who championed his career. Counter culturists whobootlegged records chose Dylan as their first and main target. A.J. Weberman, a self-proclaimed revolutionary, even started a Dylan Liberation Front. The undergroundWeathermen chose thier name from "Subterranean Homesick Blues." Nowhere but inthe radical press has Dylan been so violently attacked and yet so loudly praised. Severalbiographers and critics have attempted to explain this Janus-like relationship. CraigMcGregor, perhaps, summed it up best writing "Dylan is a master of masks. If anyproof were needed, his manipulation of the mass media and his deliberate choosingamong images to present to the public are sufficient."1 Certainly there is amanipulative aspect to Dylan's career as Toby Thompson and Tony Scaduto have aptlyillustrated in their biographies.2 However, Dylan's relationship with the Left, Right, andindeed, political Middle are not merely a symptom of the man's personality.

Dylan is a child of the folk music revival which exploded upon the consciousness ofAmerican youth in the waning years of the 1950s. Triggered by "Tom Dooley," therevival found literally hundreds of guitar carrying youths wandering into the world ofGreenwich Village. The Village was more than just a string of "basket houses" such asGerde's where guitar pickers could exhibit their wares for a few dollars and an oc-casional free beer. The Village had an entire Zeitgeist. The Village was the home ofBohemianism and progressive politics going back to the days of John Reed, John DosPassos, and the literary Masses. It was here that the Almanac Singers-Woody Guthrie,Pete Seeger, Lee Hays, and numerous others—held the first hootennanies to pay theirrent and help various political causes. The short-lived Weavers paid their dues at theVanguard. Folk music as well as jazz dominated the MacDougal Street music scene.During the 1950s, folk music was mere replication of Child and Lomax ballads. OnlyPete Seeger and a handful of ex-People's Songsters continued to topical song traditionsof the post-war years. Some of the early Village artists looked with some degree ofcrypticness at topical song-writing. In 1959 Dave Van Ronk and Dick Ellington put out asatirical songbook title The Bosses Songbook: Songs to Stifle Flames of Discontent Thisis an obvious parody of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) Little Red Songbook.In the lyrics, Van Ronk and Ellington mocked the agit-prop material of previous years.One verse commented tersely:

Their material is cornyBut their motives are the purestAnd their spirit will never be broke,As they go right on with their great noble crusadeOf teaching folk songs to the folk.3

While generally discarding the political ideology of the preceeding decade, singers didfind the works of Woody Guthrie and other artists to be of considerable value. Guthriewas somewhat of a saint in the dingy folk clubs. There were few village performers that

31

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 3: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

did not toss in at least one "hard travelin" number from the Dust Bowl days. In thebeginning, artists such as Dave Van Ronk, the New Lost City Ramblers, and other"interpreters" intermingled with veterans like Brownie McGee, Sonny Terry, and ofcourse Pete Seeger. This was before the HUAC protest in San Francisco, the freedomrides, the SDS Port Huron statement. In the Village there also existed a small in-groupof singers that dominated the scene. These were the people with recording contracts.Most of these contracts were with the small esoteric labels such as Prestige and Folk-ways. There was little money, but having a record out served as a badge of honor.

In the early 1960s the underground heritage of the American Folk Music movementbegan to surface. Its uneasy alliance with the Left of the 1930s and 1940s suggestedmusical directions at a time when many collegiates were finally awakening from thedeep sleep of the 1950s. Labor songs and the topical material of Guthrie, Seeger, andLeadbelly appeared contemporary in light of Selma and the Bay of Pigs. Still, onlySeeger seemed to be carrying the political torch.

There is a good deal of controversy as to who was the first topical songwriter in theNew York milieu. Phil Ochs claims he was the first, and their is little reason to disputethat assertion. But it was Bob Dylan that drove the vehicle to stardom.

Dylan's original involvement with topical material seems to have been motivatedmore by his roommate than by any deeply felt political convictions. Tony Scadutosuggests:

Suze was working for CORE as a secretary and envelope stuffer. She spent manyhours telling Bob about the realities of the black man's life as she saw it from herdesk at CORE, where the phones rang day and night as field men called in todescribe the latest segregationist brutalities. And so one of Dylan's first protestsongs, "The Ballad of Emmett Till," was written for CORE.4 '

"The Ballad of Emmett Till" was a narrative depicting the murder of a young blackyouth in Mississippi. The true story was somewhat of a cause celebre in civil rightscircles as Till's killers went free. While not as well written as some of his later material,the song did create a pattern. The motif was a social injustice and lack of public reac-tion, or better yet indignation to it. Songs like "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll,""Percy's Song," "Only a Hobo," "Oxford Town" and "Hollis Brown" were all in thisvein. Dylan's concluding verse included "Your eyes are filled with dead man's dirt" and"Hattie Carroll" concluded with "Now is the time for your tears." His second "protestsong, "The Ballad of Donald White," an executed black, ended with "When are somepeople gonna wake up..." This type of material greatly appealed to those involved inmovement politics. A basic premise of any social movement is that if the false con-science of the public could only be eradicated, then social change would take place.

Dylan's writing of topical and protest material revived in the Village an aura of the1940s where the Almanac Singers sang for various causes, followed after the war byPeople's Songs, Inc. The role of the folksingerthen was fairly well defined by liberal and"progressive" politics. The balladeer was the social conscience of the people.* Phil Ochslabeled this orientation "the Guthrie-Seeger tradition." Needless to say, many veteransof the earlier years were only too happy to proclaim Dylan "the great white hope" of the1960s. Dylan was to be the "new Guthrie," a role which he did not originally totallyreject. In fact, his first album as well as official record company biography stressed hisheritage of the Dustbowl Balladeer. Bob Dylan included "Song to Woody" as well as thefollowing liner notes: "Although they are separated bythirty years and two generations,they were united by a love of music, a kindred sense of humor, and a common viewtoward the world." 6

Dylan's actual connection to Guthrie is different to establish. In fact, the famousHospital visit has been denied by Dylan himself on several occasions. Some observersclaim that even if Dylan did go to the Greystone Hospital in New Jersey, Woody was

32

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 4: DENISOFF Political Dylan

HEY, HEY WOODIE GUTHRIE, I WROTE YOU A SONG

incapable of communicating with his visitor. In a 1966 interview, Phil Ochs indicatedthat Dylan was in fact using the politics of the Village to further his own career. Ochs'charge may be a bit strong; however, there is little historical evidence to refute theargument that Dylan's career was substantially aided by veterans of the Old Left as wellas a new generation of politically conscious youths.

Sing Out! magazine, the dominant folk music publication, first sang Dylan's praises totheir audience in 1962. Gil Turner wrote an article introducing him as a dedicated andcommitted singer of topical and political songs who refused to have his materialwatered down ^ Gordon Friesen wrote a similar essay in Mainstream. When Broadsidemagazine first appeared in 1961, Dylan's "Talking John Birch Society" was included.Broadside was the brainchild of ex-People Songsters Pete Seeger and Malvina Reynoldswho felt that Sing Out! was not publishing enough political material. Agnes "Sis"Cunningham and her husband Gordon Friesen started the mimeographed publication in1961 with the help of Gil Turner who solicited material from his contemporaries atGerde's folk club. The orientation of Broadside was openly movement directed. Earlyissues stressed disarmament, civil rights, and anti-Radical Right songs. Dylan fit themold with "Talking John Birch Society," "I will Not Go Down Under the Ground," andin the sixth issue "Blowin in the Wind" which became an anthem for the desegregationmovement.

Because of his songs, Dylan by 1963-the year of the March on Washington-was firmlyestablished as the leading "new" topical song writer in the folk music revival. Fewpeople doubted Dylan's commitment to the cause. Pete Seeger introduced his songs atconcerts, the New York Times reported a "Bob Dillon" at a rally in Greenwood,Mississippi; and Dylan was at the historic March on Washington as well as at the finaleof the 1963 Newport Folk Festival. For the folk music revival and the protest song vogue,the 1963 Newport convention was the highpoint. It ended appropriately with Joan Baez,Peter, Paul, and Mary, the Freedom Singers, Pete Seeger, and Bob Dylan, arms linked,leading the crowd with "We Shall Overcome" and "Blowin' in the Wind."

Dylan's dedication to the civil rights movement and the New Left was questionable.Unlike his forebearers Seeger, Hays, and sometimes Guthrie-Dylan was not the voice ofany given movement. His songs may have reinforced the belief systems of those in-volved in changing the social conditions of the 1960s, but he was not physically one ofthem. First and foremost Dylan was a performer very aware of audience preferences.In the folk world tying up with the Guthrie-Seeger tradition was a definite plus.However, Dylan could never accept the demands of politics upon him.

The Guthrie-Seeger balloon was finally popped at a dinner staged by the EmergencyCivil Liberties Committee where he was given the Tom Paine Award. At the dinnerDylan denounced the participants. The reasons are not clear, but later he explained to afriend "All they can see is a cause, and using people for their cause. They're trying touse me for something, want me to carry a picket sign and have my picture taken and bea good little nigger and not mess up their little game. They're all hung up on games. Butgames don't work any more". Dylan obviously was turned off to much of the civil rightsmovement. In an interview with Nat Hentoff, Dylan admitted some affinity for theStudent Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), but later added "I agree witheverything that's happening...but I'm not part of no Movement. If I was I wouldn't beable to do anything else but be in 'the Movement.' I just can't have people sit around andmake rules for me. I do a lot of things no Movement would allow." 8 Musically Dylanmade similar statements beginning with Another Side of Bob Dylan and his farewellsong to protest and perhaps even folk music with "My Back Pages." Dylan's reasons forthe change are not totally clear. Several writers have indicated that Dylan desired toreach the youth market of popular music rather than just the folkies who could not givehim a gold record. 9 While many called Dylan's artistic retreat "opportunism" it should

33

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 5: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

be remembered that the economics of folk music revival benefited very few artists. Popacts like Peter, Paul, and Mary, The New Christy Minstrels, and several others didenjoy the bounties of the college concert circuit. However, most folksingers were almosttotally dependent upon a handful of urban night clubs and a host of coffee houses wherethe pay was marginal. Few acts had recording contracts with major labels. There Dylanwas fortunate as most of his Village contemporaries did not have the promotional anddistribution power of Columbia Records. Most artists found themselves with Prestige,Elektra, Vanguard, or Verve, companies with limited budgets who in many instancesdid nothing for the artists except press their records.

Many advocates of the Guthrie-Seeger tradition disdained the commercial aspect offolk music. The Kingston Trio, Limelighters, and the New Christy Minstrels werefrequently denounced for their "commercialism." Not surprisingly Dylan's behavior atthe Paine Awards, the Hentoff interview, and "My Back Pages" sparked a bitter debatein Greenwich Village and in the pages of Sing Out', and Broadside. Most of Dylan'soriginal critics were old-time guardians of the Guthrie-Seeger tradition. Irwin Silberattacked Dylan in Sing Out! for "selling out." Silber, a veteran left-wing polemicist,wrote "The American Success Machinery chews up geniuses at a rate of one a day andstill hungers for more...through noteriety, fast money, and status, it makes it almostimpossible for the artist to function and grow. It is a process that must be constantlyguarded against and fought."10 Paul Wolfe in Broadside labeled Dylan's "defection" asbeing "innocuous" showing utter "disregard of the tastes of the audience" and asymptom of "self-conscious egotism."11 The Silber-Wolfe articles sparked a con-siderable controversy. Dylan had his defenders. Phil Ochs, already being heralded asthe "new" master of the Guthrie-Seeger tradition, wrote "As for Bob's writing, I believeit is as brilliant as ever and is clearly improving all the time. On his last record 'Balladin Plain D' and 'It Ain't Me Babe' are masterpieces of personal statement that have asgreat a significance as any of his protest material." In the same issue a reader com-mented "I found Paul Wolfe's article 'The New Dylan' sad and depressing. It broughtme back to the old sectarian days of Sing Out-when a song was 'male chauvinist' or'racist' if it didn't hew to the left wing line."12 While much of the attack on Dylan wasideologically motivated there were also a number of underlining causes. Dylan was asymbol of what was happening to the folk music scene. Its old mentors at Sing Out! andin the Village who had long labored in the folk music vineyard were losing control of it.Record sales and recording contracts were rapidly displacing topicality as a majorcriterion of success. The star system so long condemned was entering into the scene.Dylan's ever-present entourage offended many. The reaction was generated both byfear and some jealousy, but perhaps an even more significant cause was a generaldislike of Dylan as a person. Dylan's ascendency to stardom was not filled with grace.He had used and bumped many people. Singers at Gerde's told many stories of havingDylan walk in and take over the stage. Stories abounded in the Village about hismistreatment of Suz-Rotolo. Rumors about Dylan's penchant for money were plentiful.Esquire may have labeled Dylan the voice of a generation, but many of his con-temporaries disliked and envied him intensely.

The final break between Dylan and the folk music scene occured at the Newport FolkFestival in 1965. Dylan appeared with a dreaded symbol from rock and roll: a Fenderelectric guitar. Prior to that time rock music was a source of scorn for those in the folkmusic. Rock was trivia for adolescents and another symptom of American com-mercialism. Few people in the folk music movement saw it as having any merit. JoanBaez, Peter, Paul, and Mary in fact did parodies of rock songs at their concerts. TheAnimals "House of the Rising Sun" was considered almost sacreligious. Dylan's roots,however, were in rock. In 1965 after hearing the Byrd's version of "Mr. TambourineMan" he decided to follow suit. The best description of what occurred at Newport was

34

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 6: DENISOFF Political Dylan

HEY, HEY WOODIE GUTHRIE, I WROTE YOU A SONG

provided in Dylan's first biography:The sight of the instrument infuriated the crowd. It was to them the hated emblemof rock 'n roll, the tool of performers whose only air was to take big money fromdumb kids. In the hands of the man who had been their god, it was the symbol of thesell-out.13

Jeering and heckling finally drove Dylan from the stage momentarily to return theFender to its case. He emerged with his Martin and sang "It's All Over Now, BabyBlue." It was.

Once again the pages of Sing Out! and Broadside served as a forum for another Dylandebate. Tom Paxton labeled Dylan's new sound "folk rot." Izzy Young wrote "He isforced to a brilliant obscurity in his writing so that people will continue to buy hisrecords." Irwin Silber added "I do not believe that Dylan's vision of the world is reallywhere it's at." One reader of Sing Out! wrote a poem:

McCartney sings, backed up by a celliAnd no one gets a pain in the belly.Why do folkies, then, get crampsOn hearing Dylan play with amps?

A more direct statement was "That fact is, he has caught the general ear while you haveyet to be heard above a whisper." Dylan's record sales supported his defenders.Bringing It All Back Home would in time be his first gold album. There is little questionthat Bob's artistic sense of timing was correct. The charge that he was one of the mainfactors for the dissolution of the folk revival has some merit as his success did pointother performers in similar directions.

Dylan's relationship to the progressive parts of the folk music scene is a complex one.It is too simple merely to dismiss him as an "opportunist" unless one accepts the notionthat a performer must be a "cry for justice." Dylan did go where the audience was whenhe started writing topical songs. How calculated a move this was is impossible toestablish. All artists play what people want to hear. However, there is a point whereindividual creativity interjects itself. There is little question that this-at least partially-was the case in the evolution of Bob Dylan.

Dylan's protest songs also offended another segment of the American polity: TheRadical Right. Since the early days of the Martin Dies Committee, spokesmen for theRight have taken an interest in topical songs especially those in the folk idiom. WoodyGuthrie and Pete Seeger became favorite targets of those testifying before the infamousHouse Un-American Acitivities Committee and those writing Right-wing literature.1* Anumber of folk performers-at least those not willing to "cooperate" with HUAC-wereblacklisted during the McCarthy period. Pete Seeger had to wait seventeen years tomake a network television appearance. Early in his career Bob Dylan encountered thewrath of those with a Rightist perspective. Dylan wrote and recorded "Talking JohnBirch Society" in 1962. The song was destined for the Free Wheelin' album. The talkingblues attacked the paranoia of the Right. "Found out there were red stripes in theAmerican flag...Oh Boy!" CBS Records released the album with the anti-Right numberonly to quickly remove it from circulation. The original copies are now valuablecollectors' items. Dylan encountered a similar problem with the CBS network censorswho refused to allow the song's performance the Ed Sullivan show. Dylan walked off theprogram screaming "Bullshit! I sing that or I sing nothing." At that point in his careerthe act was fairly daring as Bob could have used the national exposure provided by theSunday night program.

In 1964 Dylan became the target of numerous right wing articles. American Opinion,the John Birch Society magazine, began the attack with:

Dylan, whose personal characteristics include his scorn for baths and disdain forhaircuts and razors, has been called the 'most important writer of folk songs in the

35

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 7: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

last 20 years.' The New York Times has praised him as a moralist, a pamphleteer,an angry young man with a guitar, a social protest poet...perhaps an AmericanYevtushenko. Dylan, who usually travels with two bearded bodyguards, is astudent of old-time Communist Woody Guthrie."

Having linked Dylan with the Soviet poet and Guthrie-who was never a member of theCommunist Party-American Opinion went on to describe Dylan's songs as "filled withthe bitter polemic which characterized the Communist folk song."15 David Noebel ofthe Christian Crusade, who became the Right's authority on subversive music, devoteda chapter to Dylan calling him the "prince of rock and folk."16 Noebel's portrayal of thesinger was that of a dirty, long haired subversive who was a threat to Americanmorality and security. At another time he would write: "Dylan might not be fit to marrythe household pet, but Columbia Records feels he's fit to influence the psyche of millionsof our teenagers."17 Ironically, this description of Dylan appeared several years afterthe famous Newport incident. In 1969 American Opinion repeated its charges of Dylan'sCommunist connections.18 At the same time portions of the New left and the Con IIImovement were bitterly attacking Dylan for having sold out their values. A.J. Wever-man was launching his ludicious Dylan Liberation Front while bootleggers werereleasing Dylan tapes as a "public service." Once again the Radical Right missed theboat as Dylan was never an overt Leftist or even an ideologue.

Liberating Bob DylanBob Dylan's conversion to rock and roll seemed to substantiate all of the fears of both

the Left and the Right. Most notably through the successes of such singles as "Like aRolling Stone" and "Rainy Day Women," Dylan began to reach the mass of young rockfans who heretofore had only the Beatles and Rolling Stones to claim as major objects ofadulation. Dylan quickly assumed a position of importance in the growing youth cultureof the mid-60s. He was playing the electric music that young people wanted to hear; hehad a reputation for being critical of "the establishment"; and the songs of his Highway61 Revisited and Blonde On Blonde period, while not carrying overtly politicalmessages, reflected the general sense of alienation that was growing in young peoplethroughout America. Thus, Dylan quickly was elevated to a status equal to that enjoyedby The Beatles and The Stones among members of this group of young people. In fact, hemay even have superceded these two bands in significance, as his appeal was not onlymusical, but intellectual because of the stress placed on the lyrical side of his songs.

As a result, Dylan became the spiritual, if not actual, leader of yet another group ofpeople. This man who has repeatedly denied that he is anything more than a musicianand entertainer now had not only the Left and Right interpreting his every move andnote played, but he had this vast and unorganized mass of young people in the middlelooking to him as the symbol of America's counter culture. He could no longer functionas a mere entertainer without the critical analysis of every young person who lookedupon him as the American prophet of the 60s.

Dylan, however, did not spend much time in the eye of his newly-found public. Thesummer of 1966 brought with it Dylan's near-fatal motorcycle accident. Rumors ofdeath, dismemberment, and brain damage immediately spread across the country.Rumors continued to wax and wane throughout the year that Dylan spent in con-valescence in upstate New York. The injured prophet did little to stop the rumors andspeculation about the effects of the accident on his career. He remained quiet, main-taining little or no contact with his public.

While he was recuperating, Dylan underwent a drastic change in his orientation to hismusic. It was a change that was taking him far away from thecourse popularmusic wastaking as it moved into the summer of 1967. While Sergeant Pepper and San Franciscopsychedelicism were sweeping this country's young people and musicians into an era ofmusical complexity and experimentation, Bob Dylan was jamming with The Band,

36

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 8: DENISOFF Political Dylan

HEY, HEY WOODIE GUTHRIE, I WROTE YOU A SONG

creating music that was raw and stark in its simplicity.By the October of 1967, Dylan was ready to record again. He went to Nashville, and

recorded John Wesley Harding, an album so subdued in its country flavor that it madeeven Dylan's work that summer seem like raucous rock and roll. The Band, at least,knew how to rock, but the session man used in Nashville played with such restraint as tomake their presence on the album almost unnoticeable.

When the album was released in January, 1968, many Dylan fans were shocked by themusical style. The lyrics were unmistakably Dylan, but what did this have to do with themusic he was making on Blonde On Blonde? This shock was nothing, however, com-pared to reaction voiced the following year when Dylan released Nashville Skyline. Thisalbum appeared in the spring of 1969, and many of those who had begun to look on Dylanas a leader and symbol a few years earlier were nothing less than scandalized. Like itspredecessor, Skyline was recorded in Nashville and featured a distinctly country sound.Unlike John Wesley Harding, though, it not only featured Dylan singing duets with thelikes of Johnny Cash, but its lyrics touched upon little except the usual country themes oflove and simplicity. For those dedicated to opposing the entire way of life idealized incountry music, Nashville Skyline was worse than disappointing; it was betrayal. Dylan,

either of his own volition or due to his failure to stand up to corporate pressures, wasseen as selling out the movement he had been chosen to lead.19

Dylan, of course, was only following his own artistic impulses. Many in the counterculture, however, saw Dylan only in his role as symbolic leader of a generation. Thismade him public property; and as public property he had no right to release as little asone album every year or so, and have this precious album go against the things he wassupposed to symbolize in both the artistic and ideological senses.

While some merely criticized, others who would save Dylan from himself acted. Thus,several Dylan enthusiasts took a step that was calculated (at least in their officialstatements on the matter) to bring some of Dylan's best music to the people, regardlessof what Dylan and Columbia Records wanted to release. In doing so, they introduced the"bootleg" record to the rock music industry.

The practice of bootlegging is an old, and almost venerable institution. In generalpractice, bootleggers take records or tapes of what they consider to be significantperformances that are no longer, or never have been available through commercialrecording companies. Using these sources, they transfer performances to a mastertape; which is, in turn, taken to a commercial pressing plant, where the performancesare put on record. These records are then distributed to anyone interested in having acopy of the performance.

Bootlegging has been common among fans of jazz, blues, and classical music.Through the practice, historical performances that would never have been availablemay be obtained and preserved. (A good example of this is the bootlegging MariaCallas' performance of Verdi's Macbeth-a performance that has never been availablecommercially). In blues, jazz, and the classics, the practice has largely been condonedby record companies because it can be seen as a preservation of history, and thebootleggers have rarely tried to compete with the companies by issuing recordings ofcommercially available performances.20

Bootlegging was introduced to rock and roll in the fall of 1969. At this time, a plainlypackaged album that became known as the Great White Wonder appeared on theshelves of record stores on the West Coast. Although it has been traced to a tapelibrarian at Columbia Records the exact producer of the original Great White Wonderremains unknown. Whatever the album's origin, however, it quickly became a fast-selling item.21 What made it important was the fact that it was Dylan. The double-albumset consisted of some tracks recorded in 1961 in a hotel room in Minneapolis, most of thesongs recorded by Dylan and The Band in the summer of 1967 (the legendary "basement

37

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 9: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

tapes" which included such notable selections as "This Wheel's On Fire," "I Shall BeReleased," and "Tears Of Rage"), and one song recorded from Dylan's appearance onJohnny Cash's television show.

The recording quality was poor, and the performances were unpolished, but the setcaptured Dylan before he has eaten "country pie." In the face of Nashville Skyline, thisalbum was extremely important to those who saw Dylan's music as something sacred toa generation. In addition, by 1969, anything recorded by The Beatles, The Stones, orDylan was considered important due to the growing infrequency of their releases.22

By December of 1969, the album was available in major cities across the country. Onthe West Coast, its price ranged from seven to twelve dollars. Its cost rose as it becameavailable in the east, reaching a price of $20 a copy at one store in New York City.Despite the high price, it was estimated that between 60,000 and 100,000 copies had beensold.23 In addition, two more Dylan bootlegs had become available. TroubledTroubadour was a single-record set that contained some material from the first bootleg,plus a few new songs. Stealin', another single-disc set, was a collection of alternate takesfrom Dylan's Bringing It All Back Home and Highway 61 Revisited sessions. Therecording quality of this latter record was so good compared to the other two thatColumbia believed the tapes had been stolen from its own vaults.^*

As sales the figures indicate, the bootlegs were warmly-received by the public. Musicfans were merely glad to obtain new music by Dylan.Thosewho saw Dylan as a culturalsymbol welcomed the bootlegs because they were seen as a public reclamation ofDylan's music, and an attack on the corporate system of which he and ColumbiaRecords were a part. It was considered a political act; and once again Dylan was pulledinto the middle of an ideological confrontation.

The bootleggers' primary line of justification drew on both political and artisticelements. As one told the Los Angeles Free Press:

Some of the songs are better than the shit Columbia has released. They just keepsitting on them, so you might say in a sense, we're just liberating the records andbringing them to all the people; not just the cnosen few.^

Grail Marcus, who gave some modicum of legitimacy to the bootlegs by reviewingthem in the Rolling Stone, did not give the records unrestrained approval. However, hedid note:

In a way, the bootleg phenomena may well force artists to respond to what thepublic wants-or lose a lot of bread. One obvious way to squelch the Great WhiteWonder album, without arousing any bad feelings, would have been to issue thebasement tape. ...the bootleggers might well force more albums out of The Stonesand Dylan, in particular.26 ' •

It must be noted, however, that for all of the claims of benevolence made by thebootleggers, they were making money. Since they paid no royalties or recording costs,they had few expenses other than the cost of delivering the records and the costs ofmanufacturing them, which was probably little more than $.35 an alburn.^

The response to bootlegging by the recording company and the artist was immediateand unfriendly, however, Columbia's initial reaction to the first bootleg was:

We consider the release of this record an abuse of the integrity of a great artist. Byreleasing material without the knowledge or approval of Bob Dylan or ColumbiaRecords, the sellers of this record are crassly depriving a great artist of the op-portunity to perfect his performances to the point where he believes in their in-tegrity and validity. They are at one time defaming the artist and defrauding hisadmirers. For these reasons, Columbia Records, in cooperation with Bob Dylan'sattorneys, intends to take all legal steps to stop the sale and distribution of thisalbum.28

The label then sent a group of private investigators out to find the producers of the

38

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 10: DENISOFF Political Dylan

HEY, HEY WOODIE GUTHRIE, I WROTE YOU A SONG

album. The original producers had fled to Canada with the proceeds from 8,000 albums,but two record store owners, Norton Beckman and Ben Goldman, had begun makingthe i rown pirated recording of the bootleg. The detectives ultimately located Beckman andGoldman, and Columbia filed in federal court for a restraining order and asked forinjury to plaintiff Dylan."2" Beckman and Goldman ceased production of the record.Record stores that carried it began to remove Great White Wonder from their shelves,either in response to the court ruling or as a result of pressure from Columbia's fieldrepresentatives.

Dylan's exact role in the suppression of Great White Wonder and the other bootlegs issomewhat ambiguous. At first glance, it would appear that the action was primarilycarried out in the interests of his record company. However, spokesmen for the labelsaid that the bootlegging did not hurt the company. Since the albums did not duplicateany albums released by Columbia, the company did not stand to lose money. Thesespokesmen maintained that the appearance of these albums merely injured the artistwho lost royalites for his performances and songwriting, and the right to determinewhat he wanted to release to the public.3"

Thus, it would appear that the fight against the albums was carried out on Dylan'sbehalf. This view is supported by Columbia's statement that it was working with BobDylan's attorneys, and the assertion in the restraining order that the bootlegs werecausing injury to Dylan.

Dylan's tacit approval of the campaign against his bootleg albums could be viewed asfurther evidence that he was betraying the generation that had come to look on him as aleader. Here was an example of the people demanding his music. In effect, they weresaying that they wanted to hear anything he had to offer, no matter what the quality.Yet, he both refused to make the material available legitimately and sanctioned theefforts to keep it from reaching the people through other means.

This only fanned the flames of anger against the performer. Was he so greedy that hewanted to stop the loss of performing and composing royalties? Did he feel that he wasabove being responsive to the desires of his public? Dylan's reasons for not releasing thebasement tapes in the 60s, and for at least allowing his attorneys to seek the restrainingorder against Great White Wonder may never be entirely known-especially in light ofthe fact that he allowed the release of the tapes officially in the summer of 1975. Itseems, however, that the real key to his behavior in this situation can be traced to hisinsistance that he is a musical artist rather than a public servant.

As noted by Greil Marcus in his review of Great White Wonder, "Like any artist,Dylan chooses what to reveal and what to keep for his own. That such choice has, in thiscase, been taken out of his hands is something about which most must feel am-bivalent."31 This view was further substantiated by Columbia's insistance that therecord "defamed" Dylan because he simply did not want that material released.

His reasons for not wanting the tapes released can be understood. As he told RollingStone, the songs on the basement tapes were recorded merely to be circulated to otherartists as part of his publishing company's portfolio. "They weren't demos for myself.They were demos of the songs. I was being pushed again...into coming up with somesongs." He maintains additionally that they were merely "a kick to do," not per-formances meant for public consumption.32

That these were Dylan's primary thoughts in dealing with the bootlegs is the viewmaintained by biographer Anthony Scaduto. In his book, Scaduto states, "Dylan con-ceives an album the way a writer conceives a book of poetry, or a novel." Because of thislack of artistic control, Dylan, then, was understandably upset by the bootlegs. As proofof this, Scaduto recalls an incident that occured while he was finishing his book:

During one of his visits to my apartment I was playing one of the bootlegs...When

39

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 11: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

he walked in the door and heard the album, he said: "Oh, the basement tapes. Youshould hear the originals. They're fantastic. The crap they're putting out doesn'teven sound like me. And they're sure not in the order I'd put them on an album.33

It hardly seems surprising that an artist would object to a product bearing his or hername without having had any amount of control over its complete synthesis.

This, of course, has always been Dylan's major problem in relating to the label-makers and demagogues. As any artist, he was absorbed into the important events andfeelings in his environment, and brought them together in potent form in his art.Whether he has done this in a calculated effort to gain popularity, or simply in a naturalstep in the perfection of his art may be debated. What cannot be debated, however, isDylan's reluctance to do anything not in the interests of his music and-or career. Whilethose who viewed him as the leader of a generation of young Americans decried hismusical progression, and the bootleggers boasted their benevolence, calling themselvesmodern day Robin Hoods, Dylan merely concerned himself with his music. As a result ofthis overriding preoccupation, he was drawn into yet another ideological skirmish. Asbefore, the battle raged and died while Dylan moved calmly into a new decade.

ConclusionDuring the turbulant 1960s Bob Dylan began as a prophet who quickly was tran-

sformed into a false one. He was never the pamphleteer or the revolutionary that theLeft and indeed Right demanded. He was condemned by both, but for different reasons.What political radicals failed to realize was that Dylan was just Bob Dylan not theSavior or Devil of the 1960s.

FOOTNOTES

1. Craig McGregor, ed., Bob Dylan: A Retrospective. New York: William Morrowand Co., 1972, page 13.

2. See Sy Ribakove and Barbara Ribakove, Folkrock: The Bob Dylan Story NewYork: Dell Publishers, 1966' Anthony Scaduto, Bob Dylan: An Intimate Biography, NewYork: Grossett and Dunlap, 1972; and Toby Thompson, Positively Main Street: AnUnorthodox View of Bob Dylan, New york: Coward-McCann, 1971.

3. Dave Van Ronk and Richard Ellington, eds., The Bosses' Songbook, 2nd edition,New York: Richard Ellington, 1959.

4. Scaduto op. cit., page 112.

5. For a discussion see R. Serge Denisoff, Great Day Coming: Folk Music and theAmerican Left Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1971 and Richard A. Reuss,American Folklore and Left-Wing Politics 1927-1957. (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis)Bloomington: Indiana University, 1971.

6. Stacey Williams liner notes to Bob Dylan Columbia CS 8579.

7. Gil Turner, "Bob Dylan-A New Voice Singing New Songs," Sing Out! 12 (1961,pages 5-7.

8. Nat Hentoff, "The Crackin', Shakin', Breakin' Sounds," in McGregor, op. cit page163.

40

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 12: DENISOFF Political Dylan

HEY, HEY WOODIE GUTHRIE, I WROTE YOU A SONG

9. Despite Dylan's artistic impact his early albums upon immediate release rarelysold more than 200,000 copies. This was a far cry from his sales in the pop market.

10. Irwin Silber,"An Open Letter to Bob Dylan," Sing Out! 14 (1964), page 23.

11. Paul Wolfe, "The 'New' Dylan,'' Broadside 53 (1964), page 2.

12. See Phil Ochs "An Open Letter From Phil Ochs To Irwin Silber, Paul Wolfe andJoseph E. Levine" Broadside 54 (1964), n.p.n.

13. Ribakove, op. cit., page 60.

14. For a discussion of the Right's relationship to popular music see R. Serge Denisoff,Solid Gold: The Popular Record Industry. New Brunswick: Transaction Books, 1975.

15. Jere Real "Folk Music and Red Tubthumpers," American Opinion 7 (1964), pp. 23-24.

16. See David A. Noebel, Rhythm, Riots and Revolution. Tulsa: Christian CrusadePublications, 1966.

17. David A. Noebel, "Columbia Records: Home of the Marxist Minstrels," ChristianCrusade March 1967, p. 20.

18. Gary Allen, "That Music: There's More To It Than Meets The Ear," AmericanOpinionl2(1969), pp. 49-62.

19. Scaduto, op. cit., pp. 298-99.

20. Harvey Phillips, "Pssst! I Have a Bootlegged 'Norma' For Only...," New YorkTimes (September 12, 1971), pp. 14-1 to 14-10.

21. Ed Ward, "The Bootleg Blues," Harpers, January, 1974, pp. 35-8.

22. John Morthland, Jerry Hopkins, "Bootleg: The Rock and Roll Liberation Front?"Rolling Stone 51 (February 7, 1970), p. 1.

23. John Carpenter, "Bootleggers Hustle New Dylan Album," The Los Angeles FreePress (December 19, 1969), p. 52.

24. Morthland and Hopkins, op. cit., p. 1.

25. Carpenter, op. cit., p. 52.

26. Greil Marcus, "The Bootleg LP's" in "Records," Rolling Stone 51 (February 7,1970), p. 36.

27. Morthland and Hopkins, op. cit., p. 7.

28. Jerry Hopkins, "New' Dylan Album Bootlegged In LA," Rolling Stone 42 (Sep-tember 20, 1969), p. 6.

41

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008

Page 13: DENISOFF Political Dylan

POPULAR MUSIC IN SOCIETY

29. Morthland and Hopkins, op. cit., p. 6.

30. Ibid., p. 7.

31. Greil Marcus, "Records," Rolling Stone 47 (November 29, 1969), p. 37.

32. Jann Wenner, "The Rolling Stone Interview: Bob Dylan," Rolling Stone 47(November 29, 1969), p.29.

33. Scaduto, op. cit., p. 324.

42

Downloaded By: [University of Sussex] At: 10:02 25 September 2008


Top Related