No Direction Home

[Kush]

STOCKHOLM, Sweden - The Swedish Academy said it would announce the 2005 Nobel Prize in Literature on Thursday as members of the prestigious institution traded blows over last year's winner, Austrian feminist writer Elfriede Jelinek.

Academy member Knut Ahnlund launched a rare and scathing attack on Jelinek's writing on Tuesday, saying giving her the prize caused irreparable damage to the award's reputation.

Ahnlund, 82, who has not actively participated in the academy's work since 1996, said he would now quit his lifetime appointment to the panel.

"Last year's Nobel prize has not only done irreparable damage to all progressive forces, it has also confused the general view of literature as an art," Ahnlund wrote in the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet. "After this, I cannot even formally remain in the Swedish Academy. As of now, I consider myself an outsider."

Calling Jelinek's writing "a mass of text that appears shoveled together without trace of artistic structure," Ahnlund questioned whether the academy members had read even a fraction of her work.

In last year's decision, the academy cited the "musical flow of voices and counter-voices," in Jelinek's writing. Most of her works are known for jolting readers with their frank descriptions of sexuality, pathos and conflict between men and women.

The 18-member Swedish Academy's permanent secretary, Horace Engdahl, dismissed suggestions that Ahnlund's defection would affect this year's award, pointing out that Ahnlund has not taken part in the academy's work since 1996.

"Since then his chair has been vacant, with the exception of three or four casual visits, mostly on holidays," Engdahl wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

He added that the academy does not explain its decisions beyond what is in the prize citation, and does not respond to criticism from people who dislike its picks.

Two other members of the Swedish Academy, Kerstin Ekman and Lars Gyllensten, left in 1989 in protest against the academy's failure to express support for Salman Rushdie following the fatwa, or religious edict, issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Their seats remain vacant, as a member can only be removed by death or a formal decision by the academy.

The controversy erupted as the Swedish Academy announced it would present this year's winner on Thursday in the Swedish capital, ending a weeklong wait.

The academy, which has awarded the literature prize since 1901, surprised many observers when it did not announce the prize last week. The rest of this year's Nobel Prizes have already been announced.

Thursday is Yom Kippur, a day observant Jews spend in fasting and prayer. Among the favorites for this year's $1.3 million prize is the Jewish-American author Philip Roth. Others include Joyce Carol Oates, Margaret Atwood of Canada and Nuruddin Farah of Somalia.

[Andrew McGeever]

Dear Kush,
Well , we all got short on that one, didn't we?
I've said what had to be said on another thread: Harold Pinter intends to spend more time on writing poetry and political activity (and, thank g*d, he's somewhere to the left of Dubya , Blair, Thatcher, and those other so-called defenders of freedom).
I reckon he will be arrested, or, worse still, read in the next year or two.
Just my opinion,
Andrew.

[Kush]

Dear Andrew,
I had never heard of Harold Pinter....my problem. This ia also a reason I dont think folks like Dylan and Cohen can be judged the same way as say Harold Pinter. Its a different ballgame and the amount of publicity/notoriety folks receive prior to winning the Nobel is so far apart that it becomes difficult to make an objective assessment. Its the reason they move trials to a different county sometimes than where the crime occurred.

p.s. You may find that most of world's population (Asia, Africa, Middle East etc etc) is to the right of aforementioned leaders in social and other values. For better or worse.

[Andrew (Darby)]

I've now just seen Part 2 of this brilliant documentary. Before reading this thread, I was thinking along the lines of Elizabeth and so will echo her sentiment about wishing someone would do a similar in-depth doco on Leonard.

A further observation: whilst Bob and Leonard have some parallels in interview responses (eg. a certain 'bemused or mystified artist' presentation at times), I was struck by the contrast in attitude to the questioning media in their early careers. Bob seemed - in those very early interviews - a touch arrogant, somewhat contemptuous and perhaps discourteous. (In Oz we would use the expression that he was being a "smart arse" when he did that 136 & 142 response mentioned earlier in this thread. ) I can't recall LC ever being anything but gentlemanly and polite with all interviewers (even if they asked ridiculous or impertinent questions).

Maybe I'm just reflecting my own values about interpersonal (but public) communications such as these. Anyway, the older Bob's attitude is far more palatable for me.

Cheers
Andrew (Darby)

[Andrew McGeever]

Dear Andrew,
"The older Bob's attitude is more palatable for me" (sic)
To be honest, I've never viewed Bob Dylan as "palatable", young or old; neither have I expected to be charmed by his talk.
It's his unparalleled catalogue of music that counts: he is the most significant singer/songwriter from the United States of America in the last 50 years.
The reviews of his concert in Glasgow last week were glowing.
I agree with your comment about "No Direction Home": yes, it's brilliant!
Dylan and Scorsesse never met: maybe that's part of the charm of the documentary
It's getting late: I'm listening to "Sara" as I type.
From,
one Andrew to another.

[lizzytysh]

So, they're not complaining about the lack of clarity and supposed mumbling in his singing voice, then?

He's certainly the most prolific sound writer, I'd say.

~ Elizabeth

[linda_lakeside]

So, they're not complaining about the lack of clarity and supposed mumbling in his singing voice, then?

I may be right, I may be wrong, but I don't think his vocals have been an issue for quite a while now. I think critics and fans alike just take him as he is. He's been around so long, he's simply Bob Dylan, warts and all.

He's certainly the most prolific sound writer, I'd say.

Hmm. Still trying to work my way through this one.

[lizzytysh]

I can help you with the latter ~

Make that song writer [a conceptual leap here, I know ].

Prolific meaning "bringing forth much offspring; fruitful; fertile; marked by inventiveness or productivity." I don't recall the total number, but we've certainly discussed it here before . It appears to be as quick and easy for him, as it is for us to brush our pearly whites.

Does that help clear your path ?


On the former, the most recent reports that I had read here regarding people seeing him Live, not so long ago, that was the major complaint ~ his audibility because of the perception that he 'mumbles' ~ so this does mark a change in audience receptivity, with regard to that vocal factor; if, in fact, it wasn't commented upon. Unless this is a commentary on the unconditional appreciation of the Glasgow audience . I don't recall that the other audiences rejected Bob for being Bob, but they did register that complaint.

So, Andrew, was there any mention regarding this?


Have a good day, everyone ,
Lizzy

[Andrew (Darby)]

Andrew, I think you'e absolutely right - it was just an inconsequential little observation that really doesn't detract from the significance of his achievement - and after all, there is such a phenomenon as the excesses (in this case arrogant 'put-downs') of youth!

Cheers
Andrew (Darby)

[linda_lakeside]

Hi Lizzy,

Thanks for the low-down, now I don't have to go back and read the entire thread, although I have dropped in once or twice and read a few comments then.

I was quite clear on the prolific part, but paired with 'sound', I thought I'd ask for verification. I was quite sure that you meant songwriting, though. Maybe I should have added an emoticon. But then, if I had, we wouldn't have had the opportunity for this delightful little chat. Voila!

Linda.

[Andrew McGeever]

Dear Andrew,
If you've recorded both programmes, play them "back to back": it takes days for it to sink in (especially if you're working!).
When I was in N.Y. in October, I bought "No Direction Home, The Soundtrack" (Bootleg series, vol. 7) in Greenwich Village.
"All songs previously unreleased".
Any remote chance of something similar happening with L.C.?
It won't take a "world tour" to do it: the volume of archive material available, plus a good director/manager/production company could secure a much deserved ( money-spinning?) project for Leonard.
Well, maybe. I don't know about such matters: I'm only giving my opinion.
Andrew (the other one!)

[muddy]

[quote="linda_lakeside"][quote]So, they're not complaining about the lack of clarity and supposed mumbling in his singing voice, then?

[/quote]

I may be right, I may be wrong, but I don't think his vocals have been an issue for quite a while now. [quote]I think critics and fans alike just take him as he is. He's been around so long, he's simply Bob Dylan, warts and all.[/quote]

[quote]He's certainly the most prolific sound writer, I'd say.
[/quote]

Hmm. Still trying to work my way through this one.[/quote]

[muddy]

I can't quote.... the preview message proves that, but well

" I think critics and fans alike just take him as he is. He's been around so long, he's simply Bob Dylan (...)"


I agree with you. If you get into a Bob Dylan's forum you will realise how right you are.
I don't think that fanatism really helps to understand an artist.

[linda_lakeside]

Thanks for the reply, muddy. I tried, in my way, to find a forum, and I joined Dylan Talks, rec'd a newsletter, but haven't been involved in any forums, as yet.

I missed the airing of No Direction Home and am kicking myself as a result. A friend of mine belongs to a Dylan site, so I can look for guidance from that side, as there seem to be a lot of Dylan sites. I just need to find the 'right' one. Having now had some forum experience, it won't be too hard to know if I'm in the 'right' one quite soon after I arrive.

Thanks again.

Linda.

[Nightstalker]

I can help you with the latter ~

Make that song writer [a conceptual leap here, I know ].

the major complaint ~ his audibility because of the perception that he 'mumbles' ~
Have a good day, everyone ,
Lizzy

And thus has he been since even before 1962 (or 63) when I first saw him live in Greenville SC (or Atlanta, GA -- I can't remember which now). He admired Woodie Githrie and used his 'talking blues' style well, but of course, what else could he do? He was simply not blessed with 'a silver voice' as Leonard jokingly refers to his talent. ( Mr Cohen's voice change since he was young is truely remarkable to me, BTW. I prefer his older sound but still love to hear him do Bird or Suzanne or heck, damn near anything else from when he was young.) I must admit that when Bob Dylan spoke during his concerts it was almost impossible for me to understand him in the 60s. But then I was a son of the deep South who had not heard much mumbling with a NY accent. LOL However, I sure liked what he had to say. "Don't think twice..." I resorted to the sincerest form of flattery and picked up an axe, even learned to pick. I figuure that if LC is a 100 floors beneath Woody then Dylan must be 99 and I am about a million.