In The New Ledger today, there’s a fascinating piece by Paul Cella: “The Patriotic Bob Dylan”. He uses H.L. Mencken’s book “The American Language” as a launching point for reflecting on the very American language of Bob Dylan’s work, and the kinds of American themes that run through it, as well as a particular kind of love of America that Cella hears in Dylan’s work. A bit:

Dylan would go on to hurl many scornful polemics at the generation which was as ridiculous as a mattress on a bottle of wine, the 1960s — as he would at many targets. Then, the bitterest cut: he would consummate his defiance of the 60s by releasing in the year 1968 an album of simple country songs, of sincerity and regret, which uttered hardly a word about war when the Vietnam War was all his peers seemed to care about.

I fancy what really turned him against the 60s generation was its anti-patriotism. So many of these people found America in a basic sense hateful. He could never accept that. Even as a Leftist Bob Dylan was a particularist, which is the first and most vital step in patriotism. He could never hate his particular native land. And when the system or philosophy of the 60s got done with its platitudes and abstractions, when it finished with street theater and clownish posturing, it was going to destroy America. It may yet accomplish our ruin. But the man who is sometimes foolishly said to have put this 1960s philosophy to song, the proclaimed Voice of a Generation, very certainly repudiated it. He repudiated it using the same sneers by which it was made. Now that, I venture, is experimentation, hospitality to novelty, and carelessness of precedent which Mencken could appreciate.

I might not put it that Dylan hurled “scornful polemics” at the 1960s’ generation, but I do think that he has (intentionally or not) consistently insinuated the kinds of big questions that expose the too-easy answers of what we used to know as the 1960s counterculture — and what is now more like the establishment, of-course. Another thing I wouldn’t say is that Dylan was ever a Leftist as such. I think that putting any political label on him is hopeless, because neither he nor his work exhibit any loyalties to those notions. But perhaps more and more people are realizing that the loyalties that are apparent in his work are to things way beyond the ideological caricatures that have long been presumed.

…

Addendum: A reader who wishes to be anonymous says this:

I’ve never thought of Bob Dylan as anything other than an America-loving guy. You only have to read/hear one of many interviews done with him over the years to see this. You can pick any interview out of a hat and you’ll find the American spirit in some of his answers, whether they’re straightforward or politically incorrect.

I’ve always seen him as a libertarian. Not the hard-core “no government whatsoever” type, but the simple “live and let live” type. From previous comments on drugs (passive about them and probably couldn’t care less about their legalization), to singing and or talking about total equality for blacks (the left tried then and try now to claim this as a liberal thing, but this is an outright lie as you have discussed previously), to driving and promoting whatever kind of “gashog” he chooses, and while there are many times in his songs that he revels in the beauty of nature, and I’m sure cares a lot about the environment, he is not a global warming -er- excuse me – “climate change” freak.

I believe Dylan is still a Christian, b/c God says once you come to Him, he will never cast you out. And he [was] most definitely saved in the late 70’s. Someone who isn’t couldn’t possibly come across with that much passion and understanding of God’s Word. And true Christians know instinctually that anything other than America as we have known it (liberty and a republic) is in itself oppressive.

There was the REAL interview (audio – you’ve heard it I’m sure – it was supposed to go in the playboy mag, but they ended up making it all crazy) Dylan did with Hentoff in ‘65, and he was asking him about Baez not paying her taxes, etc… And – I’m paraphrasing here – Dylan said he wouldn’t do that b/c it wouldn’t make a difference and besides, he couldn’t have had all the success he’s had without living here. I didn’t take that to mean he liked paying taxes or anything, but he felt that that was part of the system of living here and he would do it – not revolt for a pointless purpose. You can hear the gratitude in his voice for being able to live here.

Bob Dylan would be one of the first people to make fun of the “Blame America First” crowd. I’m sure of it.

He never protested against Vietnam, he wanted a bunch of kids (apparently), he liked the setup of your typical husband-wife-in-their-home (this is referenced in Chronicles), he either mocked or was disgusted by the crazy hippies, etc… If Dylan hadn’t been famous, and couldn’t write very well, he would have just been another one of those guys who couldn’t get invited to the “in-crowd” parties of the ’60’s. He would have been that uncool. But he was famous and he could write, so he was “it.”

There are also several instances where he shows a disdain for that period of time. From saying he apparently ‘owns’ the 60’s, but “you can have ‘em”, to saying people go on about it too much, it wasn’t all that great. What leftists who lived through that time say that now? They continue to go on and on about it to the point you just have to roll your eyes. In Chronicles he seems to have a love for the early 60’s when he was just coming to NYC and getting a fresh look around and getting contracts, but that’s about it. The guy loves the United States.

Well, there ain’t too much you could add to that.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• Bob’s Philharmonic Orchestra
• William F. Buckley, Jr., R.I.P.
• Screen Gotta Serve Somebody: The Gospel Songs of Bob Dylan