Did you read what Donovan said about Bob Dylan?
ba ba booie
I was listening to the radio (Sirius) this morning and the lady DJ was
talking about Donovan's new book. Then they ripped into *Season of the
Witch*. That was a good one @ 3:30am!
I think she said there was some kind of quote where as Donovan said in
the book that Bob Dylan was a better song writer but he (Donovan) was
musically better.
Do you think that is true?
Both are good. Truthfully I have heard more Bob Dylan than Donovan. But
do you think Donovan is musically better than Bob Dylan? Could Donovan
pack the stadiums like Bob Dylan? Does Donovan still have a following?
Was he superstar?
That was a pretty ballsy statement to make in his book. That's if I
heard the DJ right. Any one know any more info about his new
autobiographical book?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Official Donovan Website
http://www.donovan.ie/index2.php?detail=Home
The Hurdy Gurdy Man.
Donovan's Long awaited autobiography which tells the whole story of what
it was like to be a superstar in the Sixties.
Published separately in the USA on 1st December and UK 29th September
this is one not to miss.
Donovan tells it how it was
in his own words.
He documents his major role in the history of popular music and culture
during this most creative and formative period, together with the
lifestyle, philosophies and personalities that went with it.
booie..........
.
.
Have you checked these sites out today?
http://www.jambase.com
http://www.jambands.com
http://www.jambase.com/festivals
.
Find out where your favorite band is playing.
Pollstar (The concert hotwire) http://www.pollstar.com
mjd
Dylan created more and better music in any one album than Donovan ever
did in his whole career, which isn't saying much since his 'career'
consisted of what, 3 songs??? You could just take Blood on the Tracks,
and forget the phenomenal lyrics for a moment - take Tangled, Big Girl
Now, Simple Twist, Shelter, and Gonna Make me Lonesome - the melodies,
the dynamics, the pacing, the phrasing, etc.... Donovan, IMHO, never
came close to any of them musically with anything he ever did. That
statement makes him sound delusional. Someone feel free to correct me
- I'll admit I'm hardly the world's foremost expert on Donovan's body
of work - but really...
Art
Donovan? The guy with the brocade coat, who sang about Atlantis?
Shawn Lucas
IAWTP
John Doherty
"mjd" <mdeve...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dylan created more and better music in any one album than Donovan ever
> did in his whole career, which isn't saying much since his 'career'
> consisted of what, 3 songs???
A few more than that:
"Mellow Yellow"
"Hurdy Gurdy Man"
"Catch the Wind"
"Sunshine Superman"
"Jennifer Juniper"
"Wear Your Love Like Heaven"
"Season of the Witch"
"Atlantis"
"Barabajagal (Love Is Hot)"
and one other one you might have heard of:
"There Is a Mountain"
>You could just take Blood on the Tracks,
> and forget the phenomenal lyrics for a moment - take Tangled, Big Girl
> Now, Simple Twist, Shelter, and Gonna Make me Lonesome - the melodies,
> the dynamics, the pacing, the phrasing, etc.... Donovan, IMHO, never
> came close to any of them musically with anything he ever did. That
> statement makes him sound delusional. Someone feel free to correct me
> - I'll admit I'm hardly the world's foremost expert on Donovan's body
> of work - but really...
Dylan is the only real peer of Lennon & McCartney in my eyes, but I
understand what Donovan meant.
Donovan's music was better, or certainly more adventurous,"musically",
than Dylan's in one way. There's a richer diversity of sounds, for sure,
than most Bob. The other part is true in that the songs themselves of
Dylan's are better than donovan's in that they are covered by more
people in mor eways.
Bob is great, but does have a rough approach to much of his music-
that's part of the charm.
Of course, Bob paved the highway, and Dylan just did some wheelies on
it. ;-)
There's a great scene in Don't Look Back, when Dylan, donovan and a crew
of drunken hangers (including a poet friend of ramblin' jack) on are at
an after party in England while Bob is on tour there. The management
informs Bob that someone threw a glass from his hotel room, and he gets
a little over-alpha male for a few minutes. Donovan picks up his guitar
& lightens the mood for all the ale riven revelers.
shimmy
>
> I think she said there was some kind of quote where as Donovan said in
> the book that Bob Dylan was a better song writer but he (Donovan) was
> musically better.
>
> Do you think that is true?
>
Donovan's a wannabe fool.
mjd
John Doherty wrote:
> In article <1160099978.6...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "mjd" <mdeve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Dylan created more and better music in any one album than Donovan ever
> > did in his whole career, which isn't saying much since his 'career'
> > consisted of what, 3 songs???
>
>
>
> A few more than that:
>
>
> "Mellow Yellow"
> "Hurdy Gurdy Man"
> "Catch the Wind"
got me there - forgot about this one - a great song.
> "Sunshine Superman"
> "Jennifer Juniper"
> "Wear Your Love Like Heaven"
> "Season of the Witch"
> "Atlantis"
> "Barabajagal (Love Is Hot)"
>
> and one other one you might have heard of:
>
> "There Is a Mountain"
agreed - a great song as well - that was one of my 3
> >You could just take Blood on the Tracks,
> > and forget the phenomenal lyrics for a moment - take Tangled, Big Girl
> > Now, Simple Twist, Shelter, and Gonna Make me Lonesome - the melodies,
> > the dynamics, the pacing, the phrasing, etc.... Donovan, IMHO, never
> > came close to any of them musically with anything he ever did. That
> > statement makes him sound delusional. Someone feel free to correct me
> > - I'll admit I'm hardly the world's foremost expert on Donovan's body
> > of work - but really...
>
> Dylan is the only real peer of Lennon & McCartney in my eyes, but I
> understand what Donovan meant.
>
> Donovan's music was better, or certainly more adventurous,"musically",
> than Dylan's in one way. There's a richer diversity of sounds, for sure,
> than most Bob.
point well take here - I wasn't thinking about that particular aspect
of the music.
> The other part is true in that the songs themselves of
> Dylan's are better than donovan's in that they are covered by more
> people in mor eways.
>
> Bob is great, but does have a rough approach to much of his music-
> that's part of the charm.
>
> Of course, Bob paved the highway, and Dylan just did some wheelies on
> it. ;-)
>
> There's a great scene in Don't Look Back, when Dylan, donovan and a crew
> of drunken hangers (including a poet friend of ramblin' jack) on are at
> an after party in England while Bob is on tour there. The management
> informs Bob that someone threw a glass from his hotel room, and he gets
> a little over-alpha male for a few minutes. Donovan picks up his guitar
> & lightens the mood for all the ale riven revelers.
I was a bit rough on Mr Donovan, although I still don't agree with his
Dylan comparison. Thanks for the good and thoughtful counterpoints.
Pocky Way
> There's a great scene in Don't Look Back, when Dylan, donovan and a crew
> of drunken hangers (including a poet friend of ramblin' jack) on are at
> an after party in England while Bob is on tour there. The management
> informs Bob that someone threw a glass from his hotel room, and he gets
> a little over-alpha male for a few minutes. Donovan picks up his guitar
> & lightens the mood for all the ale riven revelers.
When I saw Dylan and Donovan in the same header, that scene immediately came
to mind (though I hadn't remembered exactly what it was about, just that
Dylan was being an ass and Donovan so smoothly brought it off the boil --
that has to count for some kind of musical talent).
katrinka
On Oct 6, 12:03 am, "shimmy" <shimt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Donovan's a wannabe fool.
Silly boys; it's an autobiography.
Donovan has already been more successful than you can dream of - and
one must have a rather large ego in the first place to "make it" to the
heights that he reached.
He might have been a "wannabe" 40 years ago when the newspapers first
invented the Dylan vs Donovan comparisons. But that doesn't detract
from the fact that he wrote some very significant and long-lived songs
that are still loved and played by millions.
His tour 2 years ago was really excellent.
Although, I must admit, I'm quite thrilled to be seeing Bob Dylan ten
days from now.
katrinka
Joe
> When I saw Dylan and Donovan in the same header, that scene immediately came
> to mind (though I hadn't remembered exactly what it was about, just that
> Dylan was being an ass and Donovan so smoothly brought it off the boil --
> that has to count for some kind of musical talent).
Wait a second. Maybe you saw a different version of Don't Look Back than I
did.
In the version I saw, Donovan plays his little tune. And it's pleasant
enough. And then Dylan grabs the guitar, and plays the most incredible
version of Love Minus Zero/No Limit. And, a minute into it, you see the
look on Donovan's face, the look that says, "Career Over."
That's in the movie, isn't it, or just on the 2 DVD out-takes of
Don't Look Back?
Any way, it's really clear that Donovan has more than met his match, and
that look on his face as the realization hits is just incredible.
That said, I liked Donovan back in the 60s. Loved his music. But, he's
just a m2nd rate usician, whereas Dylan is The Bard, The Master, God.
Joe
Dave Kelly
They STILL sound great.
He aint Dylan...but NObody is Dylan
shimmy
katrinka wrote:
> On Oct 6, 12:03?am, "shimmy" <shimt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>...But that doesn't detract
> from the fact that he wrote some very significant and long-lived songs
> that are still loved and played by millions.
>
Can you name any? I don't know anyone still listening to Donovan.
John Doherty
> Pocky Way <Pocky_Way_DIE_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > When I saw Dylan and Donovan in the same header, that scene immediately
> > came
> > to mind (though I hadn't remembered exactly what it was about, just that
> > Dylan was being an ass and Donovan so smoothly brought it off the boil --
> > that has to count for some kind of musical talent).
In article <4onimgF...@individual.net>, Joe <jo...@nospam.com>
wrote:
> Wait a second. Maybe you saw a different version of Don't Look Back than I
> did.
>
> In the version I saw, Donovan plays his little tune. And it's pleasant
> enough. And then Dylan grabs the guitar, and plays the most incredible
> version of Love Minus Zero/No Limit. And, a minute into it, you see the
> look on Donovan's face, the look that says, "Career Over."
>
> That's in the movie, isn't it, or just on the 2 DVD out-takes of
> Don't Look Back?
I just rewatched this, and as Monty Python once said, "I'm afraid you're
very very much mistaken";-)
Donovan sings his "Song for You" (not sure if that's title) and all
applaud. Bob grabs the guitar and bangs out a pleasant, boozy version of
Baby Blue. Donovan looks on enigmatically -- he's got a fierce
underbite, and that might make him look a bit plaintive when he's just
watching Bob.
I think there is a LMZ/NL elsewhere on the disk, at least in the audio
extras.
Pocky Way
>> Pocky Way <Pocky_Way_DIE_...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> > When I saw Dylan and Donovan in the same header, that scene immediately
>> > came
>> > to mind (though I hadn't remembered exactly what it was about, just
>> > that
>> > Dylan was being an ass and Donovan so smoothly brought it off the
>> > boil --
>> > that has to count for some kind of musical talent).
>> Wait a second. Maybe you saw a different version of Don't Look Back than
>> I
>> did.
>> In the version I saw, Donovan plays his little tune. And it's pleasant
>> enough. And then Dylan grabs the guitar, and plays the most incredible
>> version of Love Minus Zero/No Limit. And, a minute into it, you see the
>> look on Donovan's face, the look that says, "Career Over."
> I just rewatched this, and as Monty Python once said, "I'm afraid you're
> very very much mistaken";-)
> Donovan sings his "Song for You" (not sure if that's title) and all
> applaud. Bob grabs the guitar and bangs out a pleasant, boozy version of
> Baby Blue. Donovan looks on enigmatically -- he's got a fierce
> underbite, and that might make him look a bit plaintive when he's just
> watching Bob.
Not having seen in in decades, I'm sure you're both much righter than I, but
John's version is closer to the "feel" of what I remember. I'll have to go
rent it, I guess.
shimmy
John Doherty wrote:
> > Pocky Way <Pocky_Way_DIE_...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
>
> I just rewatched this, and as Monty Python once said, "I'm afraid you're
> very very much mistaken";-)
>
> Donovan sings his "Song for You" (not sure if that's title) and all
> applaud. Bob grabs the guitar and bangs out a pleasant, boozy version of
> Baby Blue. Donovan looks on enigmatically -- he's got a fierce
> underbite, and that might make him look a bit plaintive when he's just
> watching Bob.
>
> I think there is a LMZ/NL elsewhere on the disk, at least in the audio
> extras.
That's no underbite. Dylan's mocking the guy to his face. He's playing
and smiling like a fool and doing his best to imitate Donovan and show
what a jackass he is. Donovan probably wanted to underbite Dylan's
head off.
frndthdevl
i know in 1966 as an 11 year old I would have rankedDcloser to the
Beatles than Dylan. And at that time that was the measure. 5 years
later of course that changed. But back then Donovan was, well Donovan.
Some great Donovan on Ed if I remember,hm sounds like a Youtube moment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikWr6I-e4l8
Donovan of course morphed into Cat Stevens, I did not really think of
Donovan until 1984 at the Dead Ventura shows. he was headlining in the
Holiday Inn down the boardwalk. One fo the first of the 60's stars
doing the small circuits, ahead of his time even then. There was also
a Southern Baptist Bridal convention going on. now that was a
trip,deadheads,Southern baptist chaperones in elevators with their
charges ws interesting.
Joe
> That's no underbite. Dylan's mocking the guy to his face. He's playing
> and smiling like a fool and doing his best to imitate Donovan and show
> what a jackass he is. Donovan probably wanted to underbite Dylan's
> head off.
There's a definite smirk on Dylan's face.
And, for good reason, I might add.
Joe
John Doherty
"shimmy" <shim...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> That's no underbite. Dylan's mocking the guy to his face. He's playing
> and smiling like a fool and doing his best to imitate Donovan and show
> what a jackass he is.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And that underbite is a permanent
feature of Donovan's face (at least it was in the 60s- he may have had
it corrected since then).
Bob was clearly in his cups, and his version of Baby Blue is OK (in a
sloppy drunk feel good way) , but hardly the put down you guys think it
is.
> Donovan probably wanted to underbite Dylan's
> head off.
Donovan looks a lot less drunk than Bob in this scene, that may be part
of it.
In article <4oskp1F...@individual.net>, Joe <jo...@nospam.com>
wrote:
> There's a definite smirk on Dylan's face.
>
> And, for good reason, I might add.
9 ales? ;-)
There's plenty of the angry young Dylan in this movie, but this scene is
hardly the putdown of Donovan you seem to think it is.
Joe, you might want to watch it again, and see if your recollection of
the mood is any more accurate than the set list. ;-)
throughout the film, Dylan's manner is pretty obnoxious.
Roger Ebert in a latter day review said:
"What a jerk Bob Dylan was in 1965. What an immature, self-important,
inflated, cruel, shallow little creature, lacking in empathy and
contemptuous of anyone who was not himself or his lackey. Did we
actually once take this twirp as our folk god?"
I love Dylan, but watching this film, I understood why Bob was against
its release for years afterward. He's repeatedly a self absorbed prick ,
even to people who he supposedly cares for.
The chilly casting off of Baez once she had served as stepping stone
shows that his venom is not just directed at the outside.
He even gets the viewer to sympathize with some of the clueless media
asking him inane questions.
Olompali4
The cat's underrated
shimmy
John Doherty wrote:
>
> Roger Ebert in a latter day review said:
>
> "What a jerk Bob Dylan was in 1965. What an immature, self-important,
> inflated, cruel, shallow little creature, lacking in empathy and
> contemptuous of anyone who was not himself or his lackey. Did we
> actually once take this twirp as our folk god?"
>
Well, there you go. 'Folk god'? I sure as hell never thought of Dylan
as a god. Just an extremely talented poet and musician who will be
remembered long after Ebert has turned to dust.
John Doherty
> John Doherty wrote:
> >
> > Roger Ebert in a latter day review said:
> >
> > "What a jerk Bob Dylan was in 1965. What an immature, self-important,
> > inflated, cruel, shallow little creature, lacking in empathy and
> > contemptuous of anyone who was not himself or his lackey. Did we
> > actually once take this twirp as our folk god?"
In article <1160371223.2...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
"shimmy" <shim...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, there you go. 'Folk god'? I sure as hell never thought of Dylan
> as a god. Just an extremely talented poet and musician who will be
> remembered long after Ebert has turned to dust.
Well, he was the Jesus of Cool for a while there in the 60s;-)
I can see both these things are true: that Dylan seemed amazing ly
prescient and three steps ahead of the interviewers most of the time,
and also could come across as a real self absorbed, arrogant asshole.
In Scorcese's film, there is more judicious editing than in DLB, which
serves Bob up raw. there's a scene with the girl who asks some trite
question referencing movie magazines and Bob is mocking but gentle in
his response. You don't get that side in DLB.
Joe
> In Scorcese's film, there is more judicious editing than in DLB, which
> serves Bob up raw. there's a scene with the girl who asks some trite
> question referencing movie magazines and Bob is mocking but gentle in
> his response. You don't get that side in DLB.
LOL
"The girl who asks some trite question referencing movie magazines" isn't
just any girl. That's Michelle McFee, aka Mizshelly on rmgd.
But, shhhh, let's not embarrass her ;-)
Joe
wyekn...@yahoo.com
That John references that particular scene is serendipitous hilarity,
aka LOL.
Trite question indeed.
Matt
John Doherty
wyekn...@yahoo.com wrote:
How is my citing it trite, exactly? Briefly not remembering Michelle's
connection doesn't deflate the point that Bob was pretty prickly back in
the day.
Now that you mention it, I recall the ID of Michelle (here) when the
Scorcese doc first came out.
My observation stands, though. She asked a goofy question, realized in
mid question, and Bob kind of gave her a pass on it, in which he shows a
rare benign humor in interacting with the press in that period (probably
because he could see she was not a "seasoned pro").
He asks here where she heard some (incorrect) info about him, and she
says "I read it in a movie magazine" to general laughter. Bob lets that
response speak for itself (or says something relatively benign).
I don't think she has anything to be embarrassed about - she holds her
own considering how long ago it was and the general cluelessness of the
press. And she displays some good humor herself.
Dylan seems to be in a genial mood for the period, in contrast to his
funk in DLB.
He is pretty insufferable in DLB, (I found myself sympathizing with the
clueless journalists) but Marty managed to find a far more sufferable
bit from Michelle in No Direction Home.
JC Martin
Wow. I found myself saying "right on". Stupid journalistic questions
should be treated for what they are...unless of course they come from
cute, inexperienced young girls :-) But certainly not ego-driven
blowhards who haven't a clue. Bob's responses were perfect in DLB and
very humorous. YMMV of course.
-JC
John Doherty
> John Doherty wrote:
press. And she displays some good humor herself.
> >
> > Dylan seems to be in a genial mood for the period, in contrast to his
> > funk in DLB.
> >
> > He is pretty insufferable in DLB, (I found myself sympathizing with the
> > clueless journalists)
In article <452be9be$0$34577$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
JC Martin <jcma...@sonic.net> wrote:
> Wow. I found myself saying "right on". Stupid journalistic questions
> should be treated for what they are...unless of course they come from
> cute, inexperienced young girls :-) But certainly not ego-driven
> blowhards who haven't a clue. Bob's responses were perfect in DLB and
> very humorous. YMMV of course.
Bob at the time was only 23 years old, and a lot of what I don't care
for sounds like the cocksure attitude of a 23 year old.
Of course, he was helping define the zeitgeist then, and looking back
now, I'm making judgments out of time. In the interview with the black
BBC reporter for BBC Africa, he shows real respect & deference-- it
seems like he does care about his message to Africa, anyway.
but here he is in a moment of insuffferability with the TIME journalist:
"I know more about what you do....just by looking, than you'll ever know
about me- ever. I could tell you...'I'm not a folk singer' and explain
to you why, but you wouldn't understand. You could nod your head, you'd
nod your head... "
In context, Bob had already recorded his first electric music , though
it wasn't out yet. He was doing his last solo acoustic tour, and trying
to slip his folkie skin. But you can make an argument now that he's
still a folk singer, no matter what his 23 year old self said.
He later suggests TIME should show the truth by showing a bum vomitting
next to a picture of Rockefeller, of CW Jones going into the subway for
work.
when I first saw the film, I thought it was complete genius. But I was
so much older then, I'm younger than that now.;-)
katrinka
On Oct 10, 7:11 pm, John Doherty <jgnospamdohe...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Bob at the time was only 23 years old, and a lot of what I don't care
> for sounds like the cocksure attitude of a 23 year old.
>
> Of course, he was helping define the zeitgeist then, and looking back
> now, I'm making judgments out of time. In the interview with the black
> BBC reporter for BBC Africa, he shows real respect & deference-- it
> seems like he does care about his message to Africa, anyway.
>
> but here he is in a moment of insuffferability with the TIME journalist:
>
> "I know more about what you do....just by looking, than you'll ever know
> about me- ever. I could tell you...'I'm not a folk singer' and explain
> to you why, but you wouldn't understand. You could nod your head, you'd
> nod your head... "
>
> In context, Bob had already recorded his first electric music , though
> it wasn't out yet. He was doing his last solo acoustic tour, and trying
> to slip his folkie skin. But you can make an argument now that he's
> still a folk singer, no matter what his 23 year old self said.
>
> He later suggests TIME should show the truth by showing a bum vomitting
> next to a picture of Rockefeller, of CW Jones going into the subway for
> work.
>
> when I first saw the film, I thought it was complete genius. But I was
> so much older then, I'm younger than that now.;-)
I have to agree with J.C. (the observations on Dylan being 23 at the
time, the insufferability of youth, etc.)
I think in that quote about not being a folksinger, he might have been
referring to a definitional difference between those who were singers
of traditional songs (folksingers) vs himself - a writer of
contemporary songs.
What he fails to acknowledge is that he was writing and performing in a
folk style - - not pop or "art songs," not blues, gospel, swing,
Broadway Musical or even (at that point) Rock'n'Roll.
And, of course, he was being intentionally abrasive to members of the
mainstream press.
katrinka
katrinka
This new version of rmgd (I'm reading via Google Groups) confuses me -
it automatically quotes the entire preceding message. I didn't scroll
back far enough when I was re-reading the quote.
Sorry about that.
katrinka
John Doherty
> On Oct 10, 7:11 pm, John Doherty <jgnospamdohe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Bob at the time was only 23 years old, and a lot of what I don't care
> > for sounds like the cocksure attitude of a 23 year old.
> >
> > Of course, he was helping define the zeitgeist then, and looking back
> > now, I'm making judgments out of time. In the interview with the black
> > BBC reporter for BBC Africa, he shows real respect & deference-- it
> > seems like he does care about his message to Africa, anyway.
> >
> > but here he is in a moment of insuffferability with the TIME journalist:
> >
> > "I know more about what you do....just by looking, than you'll ever know
> > about me- ever. I could tell you...'I'm not a folk singer' and explain
> > to you why, but you wouldn't understand. You could nod your head, you'd
> > nod your head... "
> >
> > In context, Bob had already recorded his first electric music , though
> > it wasn't out yet. He was doing his last solo acoustic tour, and trying
> > to slip his folkie skin. But you can make an argument now that he's
> > still a folk singer, no matter what his 23 year old self said.
> >
> > He later suggests TIME should show the truth by showing a bum vomitting
> > next to a picture of Rockefeller, of CW Jones going into the subway for
> > work.
> >
> > when I first saw the film, I thought it was complete genius. But I was
> > so much older then, I'm younger than that now.;-)
In article <1160533499.6...@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"katrinka" <ktr...@aol.com> wrote:
> I have to agree with J.D*. (the observations on Dylan being 23 at the
> time, the insufferability of youth, etc.)
>
> I think in that quote about not being a folksinger, he might have been
> referring to a definitional difference between those who were singers
> of traditional songs (folksingers) vs himself - a writer of
> contemporary songs.
Dylan has been all over the map about his self definition for as long as
he's been playing:
I'm willing to invoke religious imagery, but am skeptical/I'm a born
again Christian/ maybe not so much
I'm the heir to Woody Guthrie/ no more thanks
I'm fiercely political/ that was then, now I'm apolitical (except later
on occasion when he wants to sing about Hurricane Carter or Israel)
He's arguably the last authority I'd consult about his oeuvre. ;-)
>
> What he fails to acknowledge is that he was writing and performing in a
> folk style - - not pop or "art songs," not blues, gospel, swing,
> Broadway Musical or even (at that point) Rock'n'Roll.
On the current record, a lot of the songs cop a line directly out of the
folk or blues genre:
"Lost John sittin' on a railroad track..."
"Rollin' and tumblin'"
"When the Deal goes down"
"the levee's gonna break"
these days, he's consciously leaning to blues as much as folk, I'd say.
>
> And, of course, he was being intentionally abrasive to members of the
> mainstream press.
Unless they're black;-)
* I corrected this consonant to reflect your correction posted below
original post.
katrinka
On Oct 11, 9:20 am, John Doherty <jgnospamdohe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> these days, he's consciously leaning to blues as much as folk, I'd say.
>
I think you're onto something there.
My husband's been collecting old blues records (really old blues
records) re-released on CD. Mostly on European labels, not easy to find
in mainstream stores, but possible to track down online.
Maybe Bob's been doing the same thing.
katrinka