ITT: artists that everyone says are geniuses by can't explain why

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=InIj9ykmqfM
pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/4442-happy-with-what-you-have-to-be-happy-with/
allmusic.com/album/the-construkction-of-light-mw0000066513
youtube.com/watch?v=UW1IqW6kNdU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Bob Dylan is a great lyricist. Everyone knows that.

Well, why is he a great lyricist?
"He just is" is not a valid argument.
His lyrics just sound like nonsensical babble with some literary references/jokes sprinkled in.

>His lyrics and the way his voice can articulate the emotion of them
>Combining the power of rick music with the literacy and social critique of folk music.

Any other questions?

It's because he's jewish

>His lyrics just sound like nonsensical babble with some literary references/jokes sprinkled in.
Compared to
>she loves you yeah yeah yeah yeah
It's a pretty big deal.

Doesn't make his music or lyrics any good though.

So you're saying that because Bob Dylan was the first to sing about random shit and use literary references in rock that he must be good?

>Doesn't make his music or lyrics any good though.
what makes lyrics good in the first place?
>So you're saying that because Bob Dylan was the first to sing about random shit and use literary references in rock that he must be good?
Shifting goalposts are we?

>more or less invented a completely new idiom for popular music

oh gee I wonder why...

there wasn't anythign remotely close to Highway 61 at that time

get some historic perspective

Most of Bob Dylan's lyrics are trash, desu.

Everyone keeps spamming the term "wordplay" in defense of Lil Wayne. Wordplay wordplay wordplay, his wordplay is top notch fambruh! But no one can link a good example of his supposed "wordplay". I've heard Da Drought 3, and it sucks.

>I don't understand it, so it must be trash
let me know when you take some lit classes

>Dylan's lyrics are good because symbolism and literary references
Using some (outdated) devices from literature to create an air of depth doesn't male his lyrics any better
It makes them psuedopoetic and pretentious

>Doesn't male his lyrics
>Male
>TRIGGERED

Doesn't matter if it's good or bad. It still makes him a genius for being the first one to do it, and causing a generation of other artists to follow suit after him.

Nice try though

Holy fuck everyone in this thread, especially OP, is a complete idiot. Why do I still browse this shit board

I have, he is simply not that good at writing lyrics.

People think that because he has written monstrous leviathans of songs, with a witty poetic line here or there, that it must make him some sort of genius.

10/10 post

Show me a song like A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall before it came out.
Show me a song like Chimes of Freedom before it came out.
Show me a song like anything on the B-Side of Bringing It All Back Home before it came out.
Show me a song like Desolation Row before it came out.
Show me a song like Visions of Johanna before it came out.
Show me a song like Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands before it came out.
>outdated
They weren't outdated, Dylan may as well have been a late member of the Beat generation.

You still have yet to give an actual example of a bad Dylan lyric.

He was being called a genius by the release of his second album.

>I have, he is simply not that good at writing lyrics.
What's bad about them?
>People think that because he has written monstrous leviathans of songs, with a witty poetic line here or there, that it must make him some sort of genius.
Since he was the first to do it, yes, it does make him a genius.

There are actually quite a few Dylan songs in the 80s and 90s with bad lines and one song off one of his earlier albums that's almost universally regarded as bad, especially among his hardcore fans, so this shouldn't that hard.

>There are actually quite a few Dylan songs in the 80s and 90s with bad lines
Oh 20 years after being hailed a genius?

Post an artist from the 60s didn't make bad albums in 80s and 90s. They all did

I'm the user who posted and , I'd bet significant money I've invested the most time in Dylan in this thread. I'm just saying that if OP really knew what he was talking about and wasn't a troll it wouldn't be that hard to name a bad Dylan song.

Why are you telling me?
>I'd bet significant money I've invested the most time in Dylan in this thread
Prove it

Because you responded to my post and your response made it seem like I was OP.

I don't care about proving it to you, that's not what this discussion was about.

You know what, fuck it. I'll do it easily.

What's the song Dylan cowrote with Gene Simmons? No google.

King Crimson

youtube.com/watch?v=InIj9ykmqfM

>I'd bet significant money I've invested the most time in Dylan in this thread
>I don't care about proving it to you
lol

I just did. Name the song.

How will that prove anything? I could come up with random trivia as well you couldn't answer but it wouldn't prove a anything

Such as
What was the only setlist deviation in the 1966 tour and where was it perfomed? NO GOOGLE

pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/4442-happy-with-what-you-have-to-be-happy-with/

>3.9

allmusic.com/album/the-construkction-of-light-mw0000066513

>two stars

Whenever EVERYONE says something is good regardless of their taste that's a pretty good red flag.

Agreed

A lot of his songs --particularly from the revered '64 to '66 period-- are kind of nonsense, but there are particular moments of novel poignancy when he's talking about relationships with women.

He also just had a raw, "honest" voice.

I highly recommend watching 'Dont Look Back'.

ever heard paint my master piece?
also he did a fantastic job of putting people's feelings about american oppressive foreign policy into art. there are tons of reasons this thread is either troll or you're a fucking retard

>ever heard paint my master piece?
That song is literally about him having trouble writing anything of value, at a time he couldn't write anything of value.

you're retarded

Nice argument

I think like 90% of the people who say they like Bob Dylan don't really like him all that much but his music has an air of artsiness and no one wants to look like they're philistines who don't get it
At a certain point once an artist becomes overrated enough they're treated as human gods above criticism
This type of canonization is cancerous to art and culture.

you're argument was the dumbest thing i ever read.
>that song is literally about him having trouble writing anything of value, at a time he couldn't write anything of value.
writing about personal faults is a strength. if you cant see why making art seem more human is impressive and beautiful than you're a fucking autistic kid because you cant relate to anything

based assberger skinnyman

artist. Uses a generic "bad voice" in such a way that he seems interesting and catchy none the less.

"How"
Aesthetics. Deal with it.

the beats, harmonies, polyphony, and general form of some of their songs is pretty astounding. The Great Curve has 3 vocals going on at once for a lot of the song.

youtube.com/watch?v=UW1IqW6kNdU

the ash on the cig looks like a smirking face

good shit f a m

>writing about personal faults is a strength.
Not i 1) he's already done that using strong lyrics and melody and 2) the song itself is poor
>if you cant see why making art seem more human is impressive and beautiful than you're a fucking autistic kid because you cant relate to anything
if that's your rubric, then millions of other artists are better than Dyan.

I feel like there's been a stigma attached to Dylan as soon as he became famous or a 'genius'. His title didn't come from writing all this poetic stuff like Blonde on Blonde or Highway 61. He was a big deal and labeled as a great song writer for being one of the first people to write about the times and really capture movements in the early 60's. I think people just assume that his folk rock trilogy is supposed to be really deep or something just because hes labeled as a good song writer. Its well written, sure. They're some of my favorites. But they aren't genius works of art. His folk stuff is his 'genius' work because it was attached to something important. All the writing on Highway 61 or Blonde on Blonde is tied to personal events or fantastical fictitious nothings.

Blonde on Blonde is still his best though.

>you're argument

>All the writing on Highway 61 or Blonde on Blonde is tied to personal events or fantastical fictitious nothings.
why is that not important? Wouldn't it be more authentic artistically?

ITT: People who have never listened to a dylan song
ill start
OP

This

what is not good about his lyrics?

It is important. Like I said, its still really well written. I honestly prefer it. But I see people on here going on about his lyrics like theyre either the greatest thing ever written, or 2deep4u bullshit just because hes heralded as some genius songwriter.

>It is important
That's not what you just said. You just said
>But they aren't genius works of art. His folk stuff is his 'genius' work because it was attached to something important.

Which is it?

Bob Dylan songs tend to contain very ridiculous, psuedopoetic lyrics, often they make explicit reference to literary or historical figures as if to say "hey look at me I'm so literary". He seems to be in love with bringing in some random character and have them say a random line and never be mentioned again, and really overall his lyrics have this obfuscated quality that make them sound like something that a bookish 13 year old would write for his English class.
He has some good lines. The songs where he is focused on one specific thing are good (Ballad of a Thin Man, Like a Rolling Stone), but overall he's lackluster as a songwriter. He used symbolism, well, so what? The metaphors always sound dated and anachronistic.

It seems to me that Bob Dylan was better at projecting the image of a poet than actually writing poetry.

Bob Dylan was important, I'll give you that. But he wasn't a genius. He's more of a relic of the growing pains of rock music into the idea that rock can be on the level of "high art", and in the 60s the idea of mixing pop art and high art was a radical idea. But he really does what the Beatles and King Crimson did, he uses the surface-level elements of out-of-date avant-garde art, so his music ends up feeling kitschy. Just like how the Beatles' use of tape collage and classical instrumentation really just affords the perception of """artistic value"""

I think you're looking too much into this. Blood on the Tracks stands up as poetry phenomenally (and in my opinion stands up as music much better than anything Dylan put out in the 60s, and not just because it's a decade younger) and has almost none of the traits you just mentioned. Yes, there's a direct name drop of Verlaine and Rimbaud but in that instance it makes sense.

And again, you have yet to actually name a song or line in particular you don't think is good.

I was trying to say that the stuff on Highway 61 and such aren't "genius works of art" like people make it out to be.

I actually agree. I should have specified that I was talking about electric Dylan in

Hm.

I actually have to agree to a certain extent then. In fact, Dylan's my favorite artist but out of H61R, the only songs I'd say I really love are the ones you mentioned, s/t (because it's fun to listen to more than anything, though it does have some meaning in that the highway is a place of freedom) and, while I don't love it nearly as much as every other Dylan fan on Sup Forums, I can respect what Desolation Row was trying to do.

On a somewhat related note...

I love Neil Young's music, he does whatever the fuck he wants and can make shit look beautiful, and I mean that honestly.

But there's not a single biography, interview or album even that gives me the sense that he's a particularly intelligent guy. Which mind you, I don't think makes him a bad person or even makes his art bad.

>Real Gs move in silence like lasagna

>psuedopoetic
How is it not really poetic? it either is or is not.
>often they make explicit reference to literary or historical figures as if to say "hey look at me I'm so literary".
Oh like James Joyce and TS Eliot? They were psuedopoetic too?
>if I don't understand the metaphor, it means it's random
Yikes
>just affords the perception of """artistic value"""
How do you know it has artistic value or not?
Of course they are. why wouldn't they be?

Not much other than dude weed lmao or lol it's so chill

>Get up, stand up, fight for your rights
>dude weed lmao
>lol it's so chill
You've probably only heard a few singles off Legend on the radio.

I was thinking more for his white middle classed colleged aged american fans

most of Sup Forums hasn't gotten into dylan desuu

The song I mentioned is pretty damn famous dude.

[spoiler]I'd know because I'm one of the Legendfags I just mentioned.[/spoiler]

>what is not good about his lyrics?
He doesn't write lyrics which are pleasant to hear, and they are not attached to each other, and his songs are mostly filler.

His symbolism is also sparse, and his songs are overwrought. This is poor songwriting, because while it is impressive to hear a song with many words, the opposite is true for the quality of the song as a whole, and it then becomes a chore for Dylan to memorize and perform, this is also why his better songs are his simpler songs, because the individual lines matter more and they are more memorable.

This little tool

That's untrue for a song like Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands.