Two views of the NET
Chris
over the setlist, have prompted me to share my own two views of the
NET. Pardon me if the two views are either obvious or have been
discussed to death. Here goes:
View #1 - I'm thrilled and grateful that Dylan has chosen to spend a
huge portion of his life on the road. While most artists, of his
generation and later one's, tour infrequently and charge ridiculous
prices, Dylan, for the better part of 15 years, has been traveling the
globe, performing those wonderful songs, for a modest price. Looking
back over the tours, I can't think of a single year that Dylan hasn't
performed within a reasonable distance from where I was living, and I
think that's true for many Americans and alot of Europeans. The NET
has evolved into living art, and being alive at a time where Dylan is
vital and accessable is akin to seeing a Shakespeare play performed
while the writer was still working, or hearing Joyce read from Ullyses
while it was a work in progress. We are all lucky that Dylan is doing
what he's doing.
On the other hand...
The NET IS living art, and as such open to critique. Like many, I
would like to see him cut down, way down, on the guitar solos. After
years of listening, and trying to find something in them, I still
don't hear them as anything but bad. I have always felt his phrasing
was his soloing, and believe me, it's enough to keep my interest. (He
seems to be playing more harp recently. I'm all for that.) I agree
with those who are a bit disgruntled at the setlist. A large chunk of
it has become very tired, and should have been probably been retired
after the 2000 shows. I would like to see different acoustic numbers,
an even heavier dose of Love And Theft, and a completely new set of
encores. "Too much to ask"? Maybe, but I'm looking at his performances
as art, not as a casual fan.
In the end, though I'd welcome some changes, I'm damn glad he's out
there, and if he's anywhere near my town, I'll be the first in line
for tickets, and I recommend you do the same.