Just Like A Woman
John A. James
listening to the RAH version, I suddenly started thinking about it in a
new light. A question came to my mind -- specifically, who is breaking
up with who? I have always assumed it was the singer who ended the
relationship, due to the "breaks just like a little girl" line, but
something about the RAH version made me rethink that after all these
years. His delivery makes it seem as though he were the injured party.
This of course is not unusual even if he were the one to end it, but I
suddenly started wondering if I have missed something all this time.
I'd appreciate any thoughts. (I can't believe I'm wondering about a
song I've been listening to for twenty-plus years).
John J.
Dino
well, i'm not going to address anything you brought up, but i want to
join in praising this version. Not only does it have one of the best
(and most coherent) harp solos of 1966, Bob also sings the right
lyrics. Apparently when it came time to relearn the song for 1974, Bob
pulled out Blonde On Blonde, heard "when we meet again, introduced as
friends," and that's what we've had ever since. it's a pity, since the
original "when we meet again...introduced by friends" makes much more
sense. the perpetuated error adds an unnecessary vaugeness to the song
that makes it seem less jewel-like than it is.
dino
Espen Aas
might be alone about just that). Put society in instead of woman, and
you'll find a Dylan who's got problems in identifying, feeling
represented etc.
Despite being both responsible and caring at times, this society he's
living in can easily break down, ref. Cold War and other efforts to
"keep America on top of the world" (as Nixon put it some years later).
This can easily be seen as the "childish" side of society, i.e. who's
right, who's wrong, who's got the strongest that and so on.
I just feel that Just Like A Woman doesn't fit in on Blonde On Blonde if
it is a lovesong.
Espen (who raised this point a few years ago too)
http://www.btinternet.com/~aas.longva/dylan.htm
"John A. James" wrote:
>
> Just Like a Woman has been one of my favorites for many years, but while
> listening to the RAH version, I suddenly started thinking about it in a
> new light. A question came to my mind -- specifically, who is breaking
> up with who? I have always assumed it was the singer who ended the
> relationship, due to the "breaks just like a little girl" line, but
> something about the RAH version made me rethink that after all these
> years. His delivery makes it seem as though he were the injured party.
> This of course is not unusual even if he were the one to end it, but I
> suddenly started wondering if I have missed something all this time.
> I'd appreciate any thoughts. (I can't believe I'm wondering about a
> song I've been listening to for twenty-plus years).
>
> John J.
truman peyote
wrote:
>Just Like a Woman has been one of my favorites for many years, but while
>listening to the RAH version, I suddenly started thinking about it in a
>new light. A question came to my mind -- specifically, who is breaking
>up with who?
who's breaking up with whom? i think perhaps the question is "who has
broken up with whom?" it's already happened. it always seemed to me
like the object of the song did dump the singer, but now the singer is
trying to get in a parting jab. a rather common reaction and
response, no?
X
(condamné à être libre)
sa...@duke.edu
-----------------------------------------------------
"stagger lee, stagger lee, please don't take my life
got three little children, an a weepin, lovin wife
you're a bad man, bad man stagger lee"
"god bless your children, an i'll take care of your wife
ya stole my john b., now i'm bound to take your life
all about that john b. stetson hat . . ."
-----------------------------------------------------
please remove the "nospam" before replying. wait ...
there is no "nospam!" i'll let you figure that one
out. . . .
Peter Stone Brown
>
>
> well, i'm not going to address anything you brought up, but i want to
> join in praising this version. Not only does it have one of the best
> (and most coherent) harp solos of 1966, Bob also sings the right
> lyrics. Apparently when it came time to relearn the song for 1974, Bob
> pulled out Blonde On Blonde, heard "when we meet again, introduced as
> friends," and that's what we've had ever since. it's a pity, since the
> original "when we meet again...introduced by friends" makes much more
> sense. the perpetuated error adds an unnecessary vaugeness to the song
> that makes it seem less jewel-like than it is.
>
Well you just made me pull out a bunch of versions to check this out. Now the earliest
one I have is supposedly from Hempstead in '66 where he sings "by friends" as opposed to
BOB which was March and is "as friends." So since I'm not positive that this Hempstead
tape is Hempstead, BOB is obviously before Manchester. But he sang it "as friends" at
Bangla Desh which was before '74. Also I actually heard Dylan tell someone this was his
favorite of his songs, so I really don't think he ever had to relearn it.
Anyway, "as friends" always made sense to me in the sense that they once were lovers,
and the as friends to me was always sarcastic in a gentle sort of way.
But then again, I don't necessarily think the song is about a woman either.
--
"I can't even remember what it was I came
here to get away from." --Bob Dylan
Peter Stone Brown
e-mail: pet...@erols.com
http://www.tangible-music.com/peterstonebrown/
Lloyd Fonvielle
> I have always assumed it was the singer who ended the relationship . . .
I don't think the singer is ending the relationship -- just the night,
the lovemaking. The last line comments on the surrealism of integrating
passion and intimacy into the mundane world. It's a young man's song,
for sure -- sweet and confused. She breaks just like a little girl . .
. but it's her world. He's in big trouble. (See "Blood On the Tracks"
for evidence that these things don't get any clearer with time.)
Wade Greiner
Dino wrote in message <3640DF...@geocities.com>...
>well, i'm not going to address anything you brought up, but i want to
>join in praising this version. Not only does it have one of the best
>(and most coherent) harp solos of 1966, Bob also sings the right
>lyrics. Apparently when it came time to relearn the song for 1974, Bob
>pulled out Blonde On Blonde, heard "when we meet again, introduced as
>friends," and that's what we've had ever since. it's a pity, since the
>original "when we meet again...introduced by friends" makes much more
>sense. the perpetuated error adds an unnecessary vaugeness to the song
>that makes it seem less jewel-like than it is.
>
>dino
I'm probably going to get shot for this.... But I always have thought that
this is one
of the sixties songs that was written with Joan Baez in mind. A lot of
things seem
to fit, especially the "break down like a little girl" thing. Read her "A
Voice to Sing
With" - she describes breaking down emotionally as a bit of a habit back
then.
Of course the media often had refered to Bob and Joan as the "King" and
"Queen" of folk ("Queen Mary, she's my friend") and there are other
interesting
possible references in the song. Taken in that light, "introduced as
friends" makes
a lot of sense. After all, he had broken a romantic relation (or she had)
with Joan,
gotten married to Sara but probably knew that the media would continue to
link
Joan and him together for a long time. The time would come when they would
perform together again (or just be in the same circle or group) and probably
would be "introduced as friends" in the sense that the people around would
be linking them together.
Just a thought...
Michael Justin Kahn
how they are no longer going out and they are just aquantinces. I picture
it
as a scene where two people who had this relationship and rough breakup
are randomly introduced to each other at a party by the host, who
assumes they don't know each other, and because they don't want to relieve
the past and/or open up a can of worms in front of the host, they simply
play along with the host's introduction.
Just my 2 cents...
Michael Justin Kahn
and the original line is AS freinds as I had suspected.
On Wed, 4 Nov 1998, Dino wrote:
> John A. James wrote:
> >
> > Just Like a Woman has been one of my favorites for many years, but while
> > listening to the RAH version, I suddenly started thinking about it in a
> > new light. A question came to my mind -- specifically, who is breaking
> > up with who? I have always assumed it was the singer who ended the
> > relationship, due to the "breaks just like a little girl" line, but
> > something about the RAH version made me rethink that after all these
> > years. His delivery makes it seem as though he were the injured party.
> > This of course is not unusual even if he were the one to end it, but I
> > suddenly started wondering if I have missed something all this time.
> > I'd appreciate any thoughts. (I can't believe I'm wondering about a
> > song I've been listening to for twenty-plus years).
>
Sweet Melinda
> well, i'm not going to address anything you brought up, but i want to
> join in praising this version. Not only does it have one of the best
> (and most coherent) harp solos of 1966, Bob also sings the right
> lyrics. Apparently when it came time to relearn the song for 1974, Bob
> pulled out Blonde On Blonde, heard "when we meet again, introduced as
> friends," and that's what we've had ever since. it's a pity, since the
> original "when we meet again...introduced by friends" makes much more
> sense. the perpetuated error adds an unnecessary vaugeness to the song
> that makes it seem less jewel-like than it is.
I like it better that way too. It has much more impact (As if it needed any
more!).
I have always loved the song, but after hearing the version you speak of I
have to say that it is the best I've ever heard. Just a truly stunning
performance!
The melody was flawlessly executed, and his voice was so full of pain and so
lovely!
--
Sweet Melinda
The peasants call her the goddess of gloom
spamfre...@sprynet.com
wrote in part:
>Well, is it really a lovesong in the end? I don't think so (although I
>might be alone about just that). Put society in instead of woman, and
>you'll find a Dylan who's got problems in identifying, feeling
>represented etc.
This is really embarassing: Way back in college, I tried analyzing
"Just Like a Woman". For reasons that made sense back then, I figured
the song couldn't be about a woman (or why would he sing, "LIKE a
woman"?) so that meant it must be about something else. Well, Dylan
was supposed to be a notorious druggie, so I figured it must be about
a marijuana joint. <groan> Of course, that explanation collapsed
insupportably.
Once I'd learned something about being a woman versus a girl, the song
seemed like an apt description of a female whose behavior is a little
of both. And that interpretation has worked for me since.
- Anita
Dino
> one I have is supposedly from Hempstead in '66 where he sings "by friends" as opposed to
> BOB which was March and is "as friends." So since I'm not positive that this Hempstead
> tape is Hempstead, BOB is obviously before Manchester.
I'm not suggesting that he re-wrote it. I'm suggesting that "as
friends" is a mistake, like "tea preacher." All the 1966 tapes i've
heard are "by friends," with the lone exception of the album studio
take. Maybe if more takes turn up we'll know for sure. it's certainly
a strong enough performance that Bob could easily have decided to let
the vocal mistake slide and release the take instead of trying to recut
another version. Even with the nashville pros, i imagine it would be
hard to duplicate (or improve on) the playing that's on the BOB cut.
BTW, what makes you think "Hempstead" isn't Hempstead? Okay, i just
pulled out my "Hempstead" and there ain't no Just Like A Woman. Mine
has Love Minus Zero in that slot. But i'd be curious to know what your
tape could be from if it's a '66 show with JLAW that's not from some
well-known source (Melbourne, Dublin, Manchester) and in such quality
that you can discern the word in question. I assume it's another lousy
audience tape, so perhaps you have Bristol or Edinburg or Leicester
masquerading as Hempstead? Or maybe you have the real Hempstead and
I've got some god-awful recording from some forgotten venue. Who the
fuck knows...
> Anyway, "as friends" always made sense to me in the sense that they once were lovers,
> and the as friends to me was always sarcastic in a gentle sort of way.
Hmm. i'd never thought of it that way. i always saw it as a fairly
mean-spirited song, and always heard the "friends" bit as being cut from
the same cloth as the "friend" from Positively 4th Street.
> But then again, I don't necessarily think the song is about a woman either.
please expound. I'm intrigued by this direction. One of my friends
(who was very into Freud) once seriously interpreted the song as being
about sex with young girls (a la Lolita), so anything you suggest won't
be too unbelievable. :-)
dino
farg...@my-dejanews.com
e....@btinternet.com wrote:
> Well, is it really a lovesong in the end? I don't think so (although I
> might be alone about just that). Put society in instead of woman, and
> you'll find a Dylan who's got problems in identifying, feeling
> represented etc.
Can't help but be reminded of The Seeds' "Pushin' Too Hard," found on
the new Nuggets box set from Rhino. When it first came out in 1966, Sky
Saxon explained to everyone that it was about a former girlfriend who had
started to bug him. A year later, the "revolution" hit, and Sky was
now telling concert audiences that this song was about "society" and
how it was oppressing him.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Seth Kulick
<spamfre...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Nov 1998 23:21:36 +0000, Espen Aas <e....@btinternet.com>
>wrote in part:
>
>This is really embarassing: Way back in college, I tried analyzing
>"Just Like a Woman". For reasons that made sense back then, I figured
>the song couldn't be about a woman (or why would he sing, "LIKE a
>woman"?) so that meant it must be about something else. Well, Dylan
>was supposed to be a notorious druggie, so I figured it must be about
>a marijuana joint. <groan> Of course, that explanation collapsed
>insupportably.
It could be about a guy.
"Please don't let on that you knew me when I was hungry and it was
your world"
Ballad of a Thin Man, part two. Maybe he's a thin man because of
all the amphetamine.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Seth Kulick "The hypnotic splattered mist
University of Pennsylvania was slowly lifting" - Bob Dylan
sku...@linc.cis.upenn.edu http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~skulick/home.html
Alan Fraser
>Once I'd learned something about being a woman versus a girl, the song
>seemed like an apt description of a female whose behavior is a little
>of both. And that interpretation has worked for me since.
>
>- Anita
Maybe there's more than one woman/girl in the song:
But lately I see her ribbons and her bows
Have fallen from her curls.
Sara?
Till she sees finally that she's like all the rest
With her fog, her amphetamine and her pearls.
Edie?
Please don't let on that you knew me when
I was hungry and it was your world.
Joan?
Alan
Richard
his chair, and told me that his next project will be to publish an annotated
book and a series of pop up videos with full explanations of all the words
used in all his songs. I can't wait. You believe me, don't you?
Alan Fraser
wrote:
Didn't he say he was putting it on a DVD?
Mike Mooney
>
> > Anyway, "as friends" always made sense to me in the sense that they once were lovers,
> > and the as friends to me was always sarcastic in a gentle sort of way.
>
> Hmm. i'd never thought of it that way. i always saw it as a fairly
> mean-spirited song, and always heard the "friends" bit as being cut from
> the same cloth as the "friend" from Positively 4th Street.
>
I agree with the former interpretation. "By friends" makes no sense to
me. The only people who would introduce two former lovers to each other
would be new acquaintances of one or the other, unaware of their past.
If they were (mutual) friends they would not need to introduce the two
protagonists to each other (hope that makes sense).
OTOH, I can easily see the pair being introduced to strangers at a
party, *as* friends: "This is Bob and his friend Joan" (or whoever). The
narrator smiles at the thought and muses "...Friends? Oh, we were once
much more than that".
The theme to me is similar to "She's Your Lover Now", although much more
resigned and less bitter, probablby because sufficient time has passed
to allow a little mellowing.
I also agree that it could well be about Baez - the "Queen Mary"
reference ceratinly seems to echo the "Queen of Folk" tag, and Baez
refers to herself in "Diamonds and Rust" as: "The Madonna was yours for
free".
In the same song she refers to Dylan with lines like "The unwashed
phenomenon, the original vagabond, you strayed into my arms", constantly
reiterating this theme of Bob as the scruffy newcomer, nurtured by the
maternal Queen Joan. Compare: "I was hungry, and it was your world".
Joan seemed imperious, but in private she was prone to childlike
vulnerablity - *not* what Bob expected, or wanted - when the roles
reversed and she became dependent on *him*, the new King of Protest, he
didn't want to know ("It Ain't Me Babe"?)
The song (JLAW) makes a good partner for "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue",
also probably about the end of the affair with JB. In fact it might be
an interesting project to collect all the 'Joan' songs and attempt to
compile a tape documenting the relationship (Al Stewart did something
similar with a suite of his own songs on "Orange").
Mike
Richard
where did I put that Highway 61 CD-ROM?
nate
>The song (JLAW) makes a good partner for "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue",
>Mike
you have hit something there, but not the way you think. there is
much opinion that Baby Blue is about Paul Clayton. the homosexual
interpretation of JLAW kicks in and indeed can be associated this way.
and She's Your Lover Now is the first half of a sentence that ends not
the way you would expect, "...instead of mine", but ends "instead of me."
ah well....i dont buy all that much into this line of thought. i think
the first "instead" is correct and probably could refer to Edie & Neuwirth
instead of Paul and Carla Rotolo. and it's so much easier to imagine
Neuwirth asking for ashtrays, for example.
Queen Mary _would_ most likely be a dragqueen, even if the "you" is, say
Edie or someone else. it is repeatedly told that our hero survived his
earliest days in NYC hustling with a bisexual history.
Queen Jane may be more like about Joan? she does have a sister, Mimi.
she was short on drastic conclusions. she was a peacenik (turning the
other cheek to the bandits). but even here, i dunno.
food for thought...
- nate, who just recently finally got to hear "She's Your Lover Now"
Colin Davies
<m.j.m...@bradford.ac.uk> writes
>Dino wrote:
>
>>
>> > Anyway, "as friends" always made sense to me in the sense that they once
>were lovers,
>> > and the as friends to me was always sarcastic in a gentle sort of way.
>>
>> Hmm. i'd never thought of it that way. i always saw it as a fairly
>> mean-spirited song, and always heard the "friends" bit as being cut from
>> the same cloth as the "friend" from Positively 4th Street.
>>
>
>I agree with the former interpretation. "By friends" makes no sense to
>me. The only people who would introduce two former lovers to each other
>would be new acquaintances of one or the other, unaware of their past.
>If they were (mutual) friends they would not need to introduce the two
>protagonists to each other (hope that makes sense).
>
The actual words used on RAH are, "when we meet again, and I'm
introduced by friends" NOT "when we meet again, introduced by friends".
In otherwords, the singer is inadvertantly introduced by his NEW
friends, to a former lover, who know nothing of the couples past
history.
I've always taken the song to be about one person, who is without
question an adult woman. How on earth can "SHE makes love just like a
woman" be thought to be possibly about a man? The song makes the point,
that although this woman is in most respects a mature adult (not a
child), she has certain faults that make her react like a child to
certain circumstances. I can't see whats unusual about this, since we
can all react in a childlike way to a particular set of circumstances.
Colin
--
Colin Davies
nate
>question an adult woman. How on earth can "SHE makes love just like a
>woman" be thought to be possibly about a man?
>Colin Davies
consider
Jet Pilot
/ Bob Dylan
[Biograph - 1985]
[Recorded 1965]
Well, she's got jet pilot eyes from her hips on down
All the bombadiers are tryin' to force her out of town
She's five feet nine and she carries a monkey wrench
She weighs more by the foot than she does by the inch
She's got all the downtown boys, all at her command
But you got to watch her closely
'Cause she ain't no woman, she's a man.
or you could go to your Lou Reed catalog and pull out
the song Take A Walk On The Wild Side:
"Holly came from Miami, FLA
hitch-hiked her way across the USA.
Plucked her eyebrows on the way
shaved her leg and then he was a she
She said, hey babe, take a walk on the wild side
Said, hey honey, take a walk on the wild side
- nate
Sweet Melinda
> It could be about a guy.
Oh please! Must you make a mockery of one of the most beautiful songs ever
written?
I can't believe anyone would distort "Ballad of a Thin Man" into some
statement of Dylan's sexuality either!
Just so everyone knows, I have nothing whatsoever against homosexuality.
But Dylan is not a homosexual.
Peter Stone Brown
>
> > It could be about a guy.
Sweet Melinda wrote:
> Oh please! Must you make a mockery of one of the most beautiful songs ever
> written?
Direct transcript of Bob Dylan introduction to "Just Like A Woman" (Warfield Theater,
San Francisco, 11/16/80):
The other night I was standing out backstage and and this guy come up to me and he says,
"You remember that woman who came up to you about an hour ago with the long red hair?"
And I said, "Yeah I remember that woman."
He said, "She sure was beautiful, wasn't she?"
I said, "Yes she was alright."
He said, "That was me."
>
> I can't believe anyone would distort "Ballad of a Thin Man" into some
> statement of Dylan's sexuality either!
This theory about "Ballad of a Thin Man" was been around for over three decades.
The phallic imagery in the song is obvious whether intended or not, it is clearly there,
as are the other homosexual references.
>
> Just so everyone knows, I have nothing whatsoever against homosexuality.
> But Dylan is not a homosexual.
He does not have to be homosexual to write about homosexuality.
Braz50
>How on earth can "SHE makes love just like a
>woman" be thought to be possibly about a man?
Well... try, for instance, "Candy came from out on the island/ In the back room
she was everybody's darling" from Lou Reed, concerning Warhol "Superstar" Candy
Darling, a transvestite.
Myself, I lean to the gay version (of the song, not my life). It makes the
poignancy even sharper.
Amen to all comments about the Manchester version of this song. The definitive
cut, with so much of the Bob vulnerability missing in a lot of the other
performances from this date. So beautiful and sad and bitter.
Seth Kulick
>written?
>
>statement of Dylan's sexuality either!
>
Oh please! Try reading what I wrote. I didn't say that Dylan is a
homosexual, and I didn't say that Thin Man is a statement of his sexuality.
I said that JLaW "could be about a guy", which even if true doesn't mean
that Dylan was singing about his own personal experience. And the
references in Thin Man (which are quite clearly there) again don't
necessarily mean that Dylan is writing from personal experience, in terms
of his own sexual history. Why is this so hard to comprehend?
I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable to think of JLaW from that
view, and the same is true for Thin Man. Actually, I would say that for
Thin Man, the references are so obvious and so numerous, that one would
have to be severely closed-minded to completely write off this interpretation.
(Of course, he *could* be writing about some encounter he once had. I don't
know, and I don't care. )
>Just so everyone knows, I have nothing whatsoever against homosexuality.
>But Dylan is not a homosexual.
oh, bravo for you. Nobody here ever said he is.
Lloyd Fonvielle
> Seth Kulick wrote:
>
> > It could be about a guy.
>
> Oh please! Must you make a mockery of one of the most beautiful songs ever
> written?
There is some evidence that the song is about a sheep. As fans, it may
not be pleasant for us to face these things but it's all part of Dylan's
challenge to conventional thinking.
Wolfds
>There is some evidence that the song is about a sheep. As fans, it may
>not be pleasant for us to face these things but it's all part of Dylan's
>challenge to conventional thinking.
lol. Remember, though, he's not necessarily writing from personal experience
with farm animals.
Dave
N Leggatt
> > Seth Kulick wrote:
> >
> > > It could be about a guy.
but... the title....
> Sweet Melinda wrote:
> > Oh please! Must you make a mockery of one of the most beautiful songs ever
> > written?
zuh? how does this make a mockery of the song?
> This theory about "Ballad of a Thin Man" was been around for over three decades.
> The phallic imagery in the song is obvious whether intended or not, it is clearly there,
> as are the other homosexual references.
yeah! tell it peter! right on!
> > Just so everyone knows, I have nothing whatsoever against homosexuality.
> > But Dylan is not a homosexual.
how do you know? maybe he's repressed him homosexual desires. maybe he's
unhappy with all those female groupies. if only some young stud would
give him what he really wants. maybe he's just really secretive about
it.
> He does not have to be homosexual to write about homosexuality.
yeah! so there!
tell it peter! right on!
N
__
"don't you think that I see what it's all about
hard to look the other way
while the world passes me by
and everyone is trying to bum me out"
Lloyd Fonvielle
> I was just looking through Michael Gray's Song and Dance Man (the first
> edition, 1972), and came across this:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> . . . `fake', of course, makes the most sense for the homosexual interpretation,
> and the `little girl' very little sense (switch to the transvestite theory
> proper to handle that?) But in this connexion there is another point which
> favors such an interpretation: namely, that if it *was* a song about a
> *woman*, it would be a most uncharacteristically bad song from Dylan. Either
> way you take the song, its chorus and empty and ponderous enough, but if
> the song is not about homosexual relations, then that embarrassingly twee
> contrast between `woman' and 'little girl' is easily the most tired thing in
> the whole of Dylan's output.
This is the stupidest reaction I've ever heard to one of Dylan's
greatest love songs. "Empty"? "Ponderous"? Physician, heal thyself.
Colin Davies
writes
>or you could go to your Lou Reed catalog and pull out
>the song Take A Walk On The Wild Side:
>
> "Holly came from Miami, FLA
> hitch-hiked her way across the USA.
>
> Plucked her eyebrows on the way
> shaved her leg and then he was a she
> She said, hey babe, take a walk on the wild side
> Said, hey honey, take a walk on the wild side
>
>
Ok, anything is possible, but why go for the most obscure, unlikely
possiblity? Why not come to the obvious conclusion that the song is
about a woman? The words are "She makes love just like a woman". Even if
we accept that when he said "she" he actually meant "he", it still does
not make sense. A man can pluck his eyebrows, shave his legs and even
act and look like a woman, but he cannot "make love just like a woman",
or at least not like any woman I've ever known. He also cannot give
birth.
Colin
--
Colin Davies
Colin Davies
<pet...@erols.com> writes
>The other night I was standing out backstage and and this guy come up to me and
>he says,
>"You remember that woman who came up to you about an hour ago with the long red
>hair?"
>And I said, "Yeah I remember that woman."
>He said, "She sure was beautiful, wasn't she?"
>I said, "Yes she was alright."
>He said, "That was me."
>
>
year it was won by a beautiful, sexy female singer from Israel, who
turned out to be a transvestite. I know plenty of hetrosexual men who
admitted to me that they found her very appealing before they knew the
truth. Anyone can be deceived, it proves nothing.
Colin
--
Colin Davies
A1pump
In article <71vpsb$7s7$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, sku...@muzungu.cis.upenn.edu
(Seth Kulick) writes:
>Actually, I would say that for
>Thin Man, the references are so obvious and so numerous, that one would
>have to be severely closed-minded to completely write off this
>interpretation.
Do you like your camel with one hump or two?
Sweet Melinda
> Oh please! Try reading what I wrote. I didn't say that Dylan is a
> homosexual, and I didn't say that Thin Man is a statement of his sexuality.
No, you're right. But that was the inference I made. Sorry if that wasn't what
you were getting at.
> I said that JLaW "could be about a guy", which even if true doesn't mean
> that Dylan was singing about his own personal experience. And the
> references in Thin Man (which are quite clearly there) again don't
> necessarily mean that Dylan is writing from personal experience, in terms
> of his own sexual history. Why is this so hard to comprehend?
I just think you're making a ridiculous leap of illogic. Your words are not hard
to comprehend at all. Don't turn this into an contest of intelligence.
> I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable to think of JLaW from that
> view, and the same is true for Thin Man.
The reasonability of the statement is subject to opinion. And so is Lola.
> Actually, I would say that for
> Thin Man, the references are so obvious and so numerous, that one would
> have to be severely closed-minded to completely write off this interpretation.
Did I write off anything? I just don't agree with Freud.
Seth Kulick
Sweet Melinda <sweetm...@door13.com> wrote:
>Seth Kulick wrote:
>
>> Oh please! Try reading what I wrote. I didn't say that Dylan is a
>> homosexual, and I didn't say that Thin Man is a statement of his sexuality.
>
>No, you're right. But that was the inference I made. Sorry if that wasn't what
>you were getting at.
okay.
>
>> I said that JLaW "could be about a guy", which even if true doesn't mean
>> that Dylan was singing about his own personal experience. And the
>> references in Thin Man (which are quite clearly there) again don't
>> necessarily mean that Dylan is writing from personal experience, in terms
>> of his own sexual history. Why is this so hard to comprehend?
>
>I just think you're making a ridiculous leap of illogic. Your words are not hard
>to comprehend at all. Don't turn this into an contest of intelligence.
Fair enough. I was following the inference you made. I apologize for
any implication about intelligence.
But I do not think it was a ridiculous leap of illogic, because I wasn't
actually claiming that that is how the song *should* be interpreted. I
only said that it's a possibility that might be considered. I certainly
don't think that any of the songs from this period have any single
interpretation - they work on a number of levels.
>
>> I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable to think of JLaW from that
>> view, and the same is true for Thin Man.
>
>The reasonability of the statement is subject to opinion.
Of course.
Seth Kulick
"Love and sex are things that really hang everybody up. When things aren't
going right and you're really nobody, if you don't get laid in one way or
another, you get mean, you know. You get cruel. Now, why in the world sex
should force this is beyond me. I truthfully can tell you that male and
female are not here to have sex, you know, that's not the purpose. I don't
believe that that's God's will, that females have been created so that they
can be a counterpart of man's urge. There are too many other things that
people just won't let themselves be involved in. Sex and love have nothing
to do with female and male. It is just whatever two souls happen to be. It
could be male and female, and it might not be male and female. It might
be female and female or it might be male and male. You can try to pretend
that it doesn't happen, and you can make fun of it and be snide, but that's
not really the rightful thing. I know, I know."
Bob Dylan, 1966 (No Direction Home, pp. 353-4)
Seth Kulick
A1pump <a1p...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>In article <71vpsb$7s7$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, sku...@muzungu.cis.upenn.edu
>(Seth Kulick) writes:
>
>>Thin Man, the references are so obvious and so numerous, that one would
>>have to be severely closed-minded to completely write off this
>>interpretation.
hmm, well, that's probably a bit strong. But I was really pissd.
>
>Do you like your camel with one hump or two?
ah, yet another connection. The evidence is mounting.
Seth Kulick
Peter Stone Brown <pet...@erols.com> wrote:
[...]
>
>This theory about "Ballad of a Thin Man" was been around for over three decades.
>The phallic imagery in the song is obvious whether intended or not, it is clearly there,
>as are the other homosexual references.
>
I was just looking through Michael Gray's Song and Dance Man (the first
edition, 1972), and came across this:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Then there are a lot of more or less explicit transvestite/homosexual
references scattered througout his work. The title Temporary Like Achilles
could deal with Dylan's temporary refuge in a homsexual relationship. Part
of the lyric goes: "He's pointing to the sky and he's hungry like a man
in drag"...
...The Ballad of a Thin Man has Mr. Jones propositioned, or mock-propositioned,
by a sword-swallower (meaning cocksucker?) who kneels (confirming the idea?)
and `clicks his high-heels'...
...The most sustained homosexual statement, however, is in another Blonde
on Blonde song, Just Like a Woman. It isn't just the fact of the title,
but that none of the description of the `woman' in the song is about real
femininity. Everything mentioned is external, as much disguise or
theatre-prop as real:
Everybody knows, That Baby's got new clothes, but lately I see her ribbons
and her bows have fallen from her curls...with her fog, her amphetamine
and her pearls...
And yes, the song does refer to `Queen Mary', and does carry the passage
Please don't let on that you knew me when I was hungry...
the last line of which can be cross-referenced to its more explicit
twin in Temporary Like Achilles. And it is in the context of all this
that the title does begin to seem ambiguous, especially with its
enclosing chorus, which, last time around, runs:
Ah you fake just like a woman, yes you do
you make love just like a woman, yes you do
then you ache just like a woman
but you brak just like a little girl
That `fake', of course, makes the most sense for the homosexual interpretation,
and the `little girl' very little sense (switch to the transvestite theory
proper to handle that?) But in this connexion there is another point which
favors such an interpretation: namely, that if it *was* a song about a
*woman*, it would be a most uncharacteristically bad song from Dylan. Either
way you take the song, its chorus and empty and ponderous enough, but if
the song is not about homosexual relations, then that embarrassingly twee
contrast between `woman' and 'little girl' is easily the most tired thing in
the whole of Dylan's output.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
N Leggatt
could deal with Dylan's temporary refuge in a homsexual relationship.
Part of the lyric goes: "He's pointing to the sky and he's hungry like a
man in drag"... <
anybody know the myth where achilles dresses as a girl - temporarily - to
avoid being inducted into the army during the trojan war? his mother
makes him do it, because she knows he'll be killed if he does. mama's
boy. anyhoo, that's why i think the name of the song is called that title
odysseus, by the way, finds him out by getting all the girls lined up and
putting a bunch of dolls and jewels and stuff in front of them, and then
adds a sword. natch, achilles in his dress rushes forward to admire the
nifty blade. jackass.
Sweet Melinda
> That `fake', of course, makes the most sense for the homosexual interpretation,
> and the `little girl' very little sense (switch to the transvestite theory
> proper to handle that?) But in this connexion there is another point which
> favors such an interpretation: namely, that if it *was* a song about a
> *woman*, it would be a most uncharacteristically bad song from Dylan. Either
> way you take the song, its chorus and empty and ponderous enough, but if
> the song is not about homosexual relations, then that embarrassingly twee
> contrast between `woman' and 'little girl' is easily the most tired thing in
> the whole of Dylan's output.
I didn't want to get into an argument with you, but I couldn't help responding to this.
If you think Just Like A Woman is "bad" (if it's about a woman) I don't know if there's any
hope for you. Considering the other interpretation is fine. You know I don't agree with it,
but to each his own.
Calling the song "tired" in the context that it was most certainly written in is absurd! The
song is both beautiful and touching--one of me favorites. It is VERY well written and is
VERY unique. Nothing tired about it. I speak as a songwriter.
Seth Kulick
**quoting from Michael Gray's book**
[...]
>
>I didn't want to get into an argument with you, but I couldn't help responding to this.
I don't want to get into an argument either. Elsewhere I responded to
Glynne Walley, emphasizing that I was quoting an excerpt from Michael Gray's
book, and that I don't agree with him on some things, although I do think
he has some interesting points.
>
>If you think Just Like A Woman is "bad" (if it's about a woman) I don't know if there's any
>hope for you. Considering the other interpretation is fine. You know I don't agree with it,
>but to each his own.
>
>Calling the song "tired" in the context that it was most certainly written in is absurd! The
>song is both beautiful and touching--one of me favorites. It is VERY well written and is
>VERY unique. Nothing tired about it. I speak as a songwriter.
Well, Gray's reference to "tired" I think referred only to the chorus.
I think it's a great song, no matter what the interpretation. We agree
on that. I just don't think that interpreting it as a being about a guy
is so absurd, and doing so doesn't make a mockery of the song. I sort of
like the idea that Dylan wrote it to be so ambiguous. After all, this is
the guy who sang "even on the morning after", which seems to me a
somewhat strange phrase for a song that might otherwise be taken to be
about Jesus (I have a feeling that I'm going to regret mentioning that).
Shiphour
>From: Sweet Melinda <sweetm...@door13.com>
>Date: Sun, Nov 8, 1998 16:09 EST
>Message-id: <3646086A...@door13.com>
>
>Seth Kulick wrote:
>
>> That `fake', of course, makes the most sense for the homosexual
>interpretation,
>> and the `little girl' very little sense (switch to the transvestite theory
>> proper to handle that?) But in this connexion there is another point which
>> favors such an interpretation: namely, that if it *was* a song about a
>> *woman*, it would be a most uncharacteristically bad song from Dylan.
>Either
>> way you take the song, its chorus and empty and ponderous enough, but if
>> the song is not about homosexual relations, then that embarrassingly twee
>> contrast between `woman' and 'little girl' is easily the most tired thing
>in
>> the whole of Dylan's output.
>
>responding to this.
>
>if there's any
>hope for you. Considering the other interpretation is fine. You know I don't
>agree with it,
>but to each his own.
>
>Calling the song "tired" in the context that it was most certainly written in
>is absurd! The
>song is both beautiful and touching--one of me favorites. It is VERY well
>written and is
>VERY unique. Nothing tired about it. I speak as a songwriter.
I think Seth has already said that he was reporting Michael Gray's views in
_Song and Dance Man_, not expressing his own sentiments.
However, at the risk of bringing the House of RMD crashing down around my head,
I'll admit that I had pretty much Gray's reaction back in 1966 when, as a mere
lad of twenty, I heard "Just Like a Woman" for the first time. I didn't know
the word "twee" back then, but I distinctly recall cringing internally at the
banality of the "just like a woman. . .just like a little girl" ploy.
I'm not a songwriter (and I don't even play one on tv), but I know what I like,
and I sure didn't like those particular lyrics. To my mind, just too damn easy
and sentimental, even naff. Which is not to say that I don't like the song as a
whole (I do), but that the "just like a little girl" phrase still seems to me a
couple of notches below Dylan's normal standards..
Lloyd Fonvielle
> However, at the risk of bringing the House of RMD crashing down around my head,
> I'll admit that I had pretty much Gray's reaction back in 1966 when, as a mere
> lad of twenty, I heard "Just Like a Woman" for the first time. I didn't know
> the word "twee" back then, but I distinctly recall cringing internally at the
> banality of the "just like a woman. . .just like a little girl" ploy.
>
> I'm not a songwriter (and I don't even play one on tv), but I know what I like,
> and I sure didn't like those particular lyrics. To my mind, just too damn easy
> and sentimental, even naff. Which is not to say that I don't like the song as a
> whole (I do), but that the "just like a little girl" phrase still seems to me a
> couple of notches below Dylan's normal standards.
Some of Dylan's best and most moving stuff is simple, sentimental, even
obvious.
May God bless and keep you always . . .
Lloyd Fonvielle
> I want transcendence.
May your wishes all come true.
John A. James
> and I sure didn't like those particular lyrics. To my mind, just too damn easy
> and sentimental, even naff.
Which is why he is one of the greatest songwriters of this century, and
we are not. As an appreciater of great music, I happen to love this
song, including the lyrics you find naff (naff??)
Perhaps this song has been over-analyzed, and receives some flak as a
result. I see absolutely nothing wrong with the lyrics (just my opinion
of course), but what I really love in this song is one of the greatest,
and prettiest, melodies Dylan has ever written.
John J.
Shiphour
>Date: Sun, Nov 8, 1998 19:57 EST
>Message-id: <36463D...@compuserve.com>
>Some of Dylan's best and most moving stuff is simple, sentimental, even
>obvious.
>
>May God bless and keep you always . . .
Kind of a pointless argument, since you like what you like and I like what I
like. I don't happen to care for "simple, sentimental, even obvious." When I
listen to Dylan, I want to get taken off the planet; I want to be asking myself
"Is it possible that a mere human being wrote this?" I want transcendence.
"May God bless and keep you always" is a nice sentiment, but I can't seriously
rank it as among his "best and most moving stuff." And as I said "She breaks
just like a little girl" makes me cringe a little everytime I hear it. But I
understand that others feel otherwise and obviously I don't claim to be the
ultimate arbiter of what constitutes great and not-so-great Dylan.
Mark Charles
soundboard tapes of the 66 Melbourne concerts which is of excellent
quality & he says 'introduced as friends'.