And somebody quotes something that I track down to this 1984 Rolling Stone interview:
Do you follow the political scene or have any sort of fix on what the politicians are talking about this election year?
I think politics is an instrument of the Devil. Just that clear. I think politics is what kills; it doesn’t bring anything alive. Politics is corrupt; I mean, anybody knows that.
So you don’t care who’s president? It doesn’t make any difference?
I don’t think so. I mean, how long is Reagan gonna be president? I’ve seen like four or five of ’em myself, you know? And I’ve seen two of ’em die in office. How can you deal with Reagan and get so serious about that, when the man isn’t even gonna be there when you get your thing together?
So you don’t think there’s any difference between, say, a Kennedy and a Nixon? It doesn’t matter at all?
I don’t know. It’s very popular nowadays to think of yourself as a “liberal humanist.” That’s such a bullshit term. It means less than nothing. Who was a better president? Well, you got me. I don’t know what people’s errors are; nobody’s perfect, for sure....
You don't see "liberal humanist" so much anymore. I looked for it in the NYT archive, and the most recent appearance was back in 2021, in "Kazuo Ishiguro Sees What the Future Is Doing to Us."
The Nobel-prize winning author — Ishiguro, I mean (not Dylan) — is quoted saying: "I woke up recently to the realization I’d been living for some years in a bubble. I realized that my world — a civilized, stimulating place filled with ironic, liberal-minded people — was in fact much smaller than I’d ever imagined.... The unstoppable advance of liberal-humanist values I’d taken for granted since childhood... may have been an illusion."
Posts
52 comments:
Good on Bob.
Reticence about politics is a good indication of what an artist's politics are.
I have said a few times in the comments that “liberalism is dead, progressives killed it”. I mean by that classical libarlism, but looking it up, it could apply to liberal humanism. It is interesting in reading about liberal humanism how DEI took the concept of it, hollowed it out, and used the carcass to hide what is in truth a notion that individuals are tied to their race, by race they mean skin color only, and nothing you can do can remove that binding of race. There is no individual, only a tribe that you don’t get to select.
As for Dylan’s take, openly I agree with him. I do think who is President matters at some level, but overtime, it doesn’t really seem to matter. With hindsight, I can’t really tell you the difference in governance from HW Bush through Biden, except for Trump. Heck the worse domestic policy of Biden, the open borders, is being funded by Clinton, Bush, and Obama.
Maybe it happened when liberals stopped being human.
The prior post about an alleged Biden strategy to seek Taylor Swift's endorsement had already reminded me of the following from Elvis Presley, and a notion that Taylor Swift would do well to avoid endorsing a candidate, especially during a time of war and more war impending.
Question: “Mr. Presley, What is your opinion of war protesters? And would you today refuse to be drafted?”
Elvis: “Honey, I’d just soon to keep my own personal views about that to myself. Cause I’m just an entertainer and I’d rather not say.”
Elvis Presley - I'm Just An Entertainer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT_O5fK1Zoo
As to Dylan's first response regarding the political scene, it's not exactly an inaccurate statement, but politics is better than pure brute force, which I'd suggest kills more (as a ruling paradigm in the absence of politics).
All in all, among the crooners, I prefer Elvis' response to being baited into political mire.
Art and politics, Dylan and Kazuo Ishiguro, liberalism and Satan
I'm not a big Dylan fan, but I really appreciate his perspective here. It likely doesn't make sense to a lot of people, who see politics as the primary mode of transformation. But that's a very myopic, even if entirely popular view. I think Dylan is nicely reflecting--without knowing it of course--the systems theory of Niklas Luhman, where each separate social system is really only about self-perpetuation--what he calls autopoietic. Each system--economic, politics, education, religion, entertainment, legal, etc.--runs according to its own rules and values, using people as part of the process but not actually caring about people as people. They are tools, cogs, and yet they convince people both of the absolute importance of the system, and its rules/values, as well as the vital need for people to find meaning in that system.
Every system exists in every era and context, but different eras seem to have a dominating system that attempts to give an overarching and pseudo-integrated authority. In the past that was religion, which fit to serve to help people navigate a sense of the ultimate but was never really good at the politics or the legal systems, so all three became corrupted and disordered.
Politics has a purpose and role, but so many people today treat it like an absolute and it has for a great many become a pseudo-religion, not just concerned with the issues politics can address but is posing as addressing the issues of ultimate concerns and values, establishing an identity. That's why political discussions these days are so impossible, people aren't debating issues or different methods for solving problems, they are literally trying to secure and express their identity. So any disagreement is deeply pyschosocial for them, as they are defending their pseudo-self from supposed onslaught.
But politics or any one system can't ever give an integrated sense of meaning. That's also the big error of Marxism, that saw economics as the only system but neglected all the rest of what makes us human. And in neglecting, also distorts and ruins.
There is hope, I think, and an integrative vision, but that's a different topic.
Just another reason to admire Bob Dylan.
Dylan has a better BS Meter than most.
Althouse said…
“You don't see "liberal humanist" so much anymore.”
Dylan said…
“I think politics is an instrument of the Devil.”
Satan said…
“I’m a humanist. Maybe the last humanist.”
https://getyarn.io/yarn-story/5e350dbb-096d-47ce-bd45-59bb07ce6d76
Dylanologically speaking and for the record, if Dylan had "seen" two presidents die in office, then that would have included FDR. And if he'd "seen" FDR, then by 1984 he'd seen nine presidents in office, not four or five (which, if true, would have meant he'd been born during the LBJ or Nixon years). Ironically, Dylan--"the Voice of a Generation" was not a Baby Boomer, but part of the "Silent Generation." And that might account for his saying, in December 1963, in a speech to the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee:
“There’s no black and white, Left and Right to me anymore, there’s only up and down, and down is very close to the ground, and I’m trying to go up without thinking about anything trivial such as politics.”
Liberal Humanists were our favorite people once. They were like good Christian atheists. Now a days nobody tolerates anybody anymore.
But a least boredom is a thing of the past.
But ya gotta serve somebody…
Why doesn't _________ (fill in name) talk more about _______ (fill in topic I care about)? It's a moral failing, dontcha know, for that person who has influence not to talk about what I want them to, and especially if they disagree with me, which will cause me outrage. It's not fair that _______ deprives me of knowing if I might be outraged at that thing I want the to talk about.
So, anyway, Althouse -- why aren't you blogging about . . .
"Why doesn't Dylan speak out more about politics?"
These people are always looking for authority figures to tell them what to do.
Sheeple gonna sheep.
If Dylan came out for Trump, these people would be the first to have him censored.
Why doesn't Dylan speak out more about politics?
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
Or something.
This goes back to the whole tribal problem with politics. It's not enough to be neutral or just keep your opinions to yourself. If you're not 100% with them, and vocal about it, you're the enemy.
Thank you, Bob Dylan, and thank you Althouse for posting. I agree with Dylan. Don't know if I will skip this election. I plan to and I will be out of the country for some temporary relief. Too old to go to the forest for 3 weeks. I think the results will be what the elites want it to be, and we know who that is.
There are no liberal humanists among Liberals.
Whelp, there it is. It really is all about fresh, tasty fruit and good bowel movements.
Ishiguro's quote isn't wholly honest. He had been seeing Hitler under every rock at least since Remains of the Day, a delicate and sad love story set against a thuddingly cartoonish backdrop of Nazi sympathizers.
The feeling he describes, though, hit a lot of people after the Hamas attack on October 7.
He's not wrong
I've experienced a bubble of conformist views due to insulaity of experiences more than once in my own life. Within a few short years, everyone does. Your English Lit class in college thinks differently when compared with the guys and gals on the mechanic's shop floor. Both have valid understandings of their own subject matters. I used to tell evangelizing Baptists that as a Roman Catholic I prayed for their heretical souls to find the One True Faith. Well, it shut them up quicker than anything else I ever tried, at least.
Then again, it is hard to understand anything in depth, but easy to throw out smugly self-confident opinions and analysis of subjects one is not competent to address. I exclude our blog hostess and most Althouse commenters from any guilt over this, of course. Those few of you who are guilty, well, you obviously do NOT know who you are. And who is that handsome fellow in the mirror, why does he smirk so smugly?
Asking for specialists in any field to opine on areas outside their own islands of competence is, well, iffy. Dylan's response was an even-handed denunciation of things he self-admittedly knew less about than his songwriting and his performing. Good for him.
Wow! Ishiguro & Dylan in the same post! Both are examples of creative genius. Thanks for your insight.
Someone should send this to Taylor Swift.
Dylan was raised on "da range".
you can just tell.
Bob Dylan in 1984. 40 years ago now and he’s still playin.
Swifties out there arise. And think how Biden supporters are going to accept a white singer who wants a traditional marriage to a white man so she can raise a family with children.
You can’t buy enough Carbon Credits to atone for that.
By 'speak out more' the redditor means he wants Dylan to denounce Trump.
I remember listening to a radio interview with U2 and somehow candidate or new President Bill Clinton had to butt in. Bono was childishly and underhandedly mocking Bill and the band was giggling like Beavis and Butthead. Boy, did that change...
So it turns out that Dylan can talk about migrant problems at the southern border which are not political in nature after all.
"The Federal Government has broad constitutional powers in determining what aliens shall be admitted to the United States, the period they may remain, regulation of their conduct before naturalization, and the terms and conditions of their naturalization… Under the Constitution, the states are granted no such powers." — Takahashi v. Fish & Game Comm'n (1948)
Taylor S. never said anything about her reported gayness, perhaps she will just be nice and ignore Beiden’s operators. But now the left worships the 1 percenters, more so the .01 percenters.
Thank you, Paddy O! Very interesting.
Dylan is genius and courageous in so many ways. I'm going to see Girl From the North Country here in Nashville tomorrow night, and Cat Power doing the Live At Royal Albert Hall concert on Feb. 25th in the Country Music Hall of Fame theater, also in Nashville. Nashville Skyline.
Redditards inject politics into just about every sub, no matter the topic. "Why isn't X obsessed with the thing I'm obsessed with?" Reddit is a cringe sweatshop.
Ironically, Dylan--"the Voice of a Generation" was not a Baby Boomer, but part of the "Silent Generation
They ALL were - Tom Hayden, Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman. Kate millet, Germaine Greer, and most your early pop stars.
Why is that I wonder.
"Politics is corrupt" is actually a pretty sophisticated view. Monarchy, Aristocracy and Democracy each have their own forms of corruption. A mixed republic, such as the USA attempts to ameliorate the corrupt tendencies of each, with some success (200 years is nothing to sneeze at.) But long-term, Dylan's view is the one to bet on.
Our social welfare programs--cutting monthly checks to over half the adult population-- coupled with political inability to tax current and future beneficiaries at a level close to payments, resulting in debt and currency debasement are a classic example of democratic corruption, as predicted by Aristotle. And the concentration of wealth, with its marriage to political power presents a classic example of oligarchic corruption. The administrative state, a fourth branch of government never envisaged by the Founders, by-passes the finely constructed scheme of separation of powers, making a mockery of the elected Legislative and Executive branches, as we see in every budget and foreign policy fiasco. In sheer magnitude it dwarfs even the theoretical scrutiny of the Judicial branch.
"I think politics is an instrument of the Devil."
So why let the Devil play the tunes?
"dylanologocally"
khematite, my friend, you should be horsewhipped as a matter principle.
Politics ( at least as practiced by democrats ) is always, always the assigning of power from one group over to another group. At least it is these days.
gadfly said...
So it turns out that Dylan can talk about migrant problems at the southern border which are not political in nature after all.
"The Federal Government has broad constitutional powers in determining what aliens shall be admitted to the United States, the period they may remain, regulation of their conduct before naturalization, and the terms and conditions of their naturalization… Under the Constitution, the states are granted no such powers." — Takahashi v. Fish & Game Comm'n (1948)
*********
OK, gadfly: now show us where the Constitution gives the Executive Branch the power to completely ignore immigration laws passed by the Congress, rather than execute those laws.
Libertarian economist Bryan Caplan explains, in The Myth of the Rational Voter (2007) at 18-19,119-123, why the price of ideological loyalty, to the individual, is close to zero. He distinguishes between private cost (near zero) and social costs of the aggregate (very much nonzero, often a vast collective misfortune). His point is that because a deluded vote costs that voter nothing, in that it doesn't flip the outcome, we should expect individuals to satiate their demand for political delusion, and to believe whatever makes them feel best.
The consequence of zero private cost political delusion, insofar as we are trying to influence the decisions of the aggregate, is that those with good ideas need to put forward policies and candidates the support of which provide psychic and social status income to individual voters. Bob D apparently derives psychic and social status benefits from taking positions that place him away from, and intellectuallly and morally superior to, the common herd. However sincerely felt, Bob's cruel neutrality would have large negative externalities if adopted by the herd.
Another implication of these principles is that politicians who have political rallies that appeal to the human instincts for play and hedonism will have a big advantage over those who tell boring hard truths.
NY Post reports today that Dylan added 12 concerts in Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina to his "Rough and Rowdy" tour over the 18 days of March 1-18. Not bad for an 82 year old! Wife and I caught three shows across Alberta and BC a few years back. Lots of fun.
https://nypost.com/2024/01/25/entertainment/bob-dylan-tour-2024-where-to-buy-tickets-schedule-dates/?dicbo=v4-q0y3Yfe-1076515215
Dylan will not easily morph into any of your pre-constructed pigeon holes. Dylan’s magic and genius is that he’s able to encompass so much of the human experience in timeless ways. And laughter and humor are an important dimension of that experience. Here’s another example of Dylan’s wit: When asked at a press conference by a “Ballad of a Thin Man” type reporter to say what his songs are about, he answered (paraphrasing): Some are about 3 minutes, some are about 5 minutes, another is about 11 minutes. His sarcastic wit is brilliant.
"Maybe it happened when liberals stopped being human."
Yes, they decided it would be to their advantage to become more like the Republicans.
(See how easy that is? I can do it, too!)
Liberal-humanists taught me that character matters more than color, but progressives today say this belief is racist. I'd be happy to have the liberal-humanists back in charge.
A few years ago, my wife and I were at an Iris Demint concert at the playhouse in Stoughton. In between songs, someone yelled out "can we get a statement from you on foreign policy." She stood their perplexed and said, "I don't believe anyone's ever asked me a question like that." And then went right into some Christian tune. Can't recall what one. All her music than was spiritual in a gritty personal way. Try "He Reached Down" ("got right there on the ground"). But now, I understand she's woke, suddenly, singing lines like “I get up every morning / knowing I’m privileged.” It is sad, if you ask me. Bob Dylan, I am reasonably sure, will never fall that way, even though we are all fallen. "My guard stood hard as abstract threats, too noble to neglect, deceived me into thinking I had something to protect."
"Ain’t no use jiving, ain’t no use joking
Everything is broken"
The expectation is you must be on the left.
You must be a NBC-watching obedient clone
Some people push back and stay neutral.... or hide their real feelings out of fear.
“We live in a political world
Where courage is a thing of the past
Houses are haunted, children are unwanted
The next day could be your last”
Anyone in the entertainment business with a lick of sense knows that going political cheapens your brand and risks destroying good will with large swaths of your audience. Just ask the Dixie Chicks or Roseanne Barr, for instance, who will never occupy the same showbiz pantheon as Dolly, Dylan or Elvis. (Although I must say that Hanoi Jane has managed to outlive most of her critics and her youthful indiscretions seem to have been mostly forgiven or forgotten.)
Years later Jann Wenner tried to corner him the same way (but failed).
"Come on, Bob" ... "No, you come on, Jann."
Because the PscyOps folks have moved on to other useful idiots.
Post a Comment