If I had to make do with one musician, he's the one I'd make do with. Because whatever I might want from music, I know it'll be there somewhere.

but extrapolate, if you will; what has Dylan's music got that would have you forsake every other piece of music you've heard yet be content?

The quasi-religious fervour with which some fans articulate their support for him just doesn't add up.

1. He can barely sing a note in tune.
2. A large number of his songs are two or three verses too long.
3. He often appears reluctant to change tempo within a song.
4. His own fans argue bitterly over the quality of his live shows, but still won't allow negative comment.
5. Even the best music commentators agree he's spent the majority of his career in the wilderness (unless this is so they can herald his return every few years, like they have with his recent trio of releases).

None of those add up to 'major defining musical artist of 20th century' to me. Help!

...please don't ask me to apologise for the excesses of his fans or any other enthusiasts.
I stick by my first statement.
The fact that other people might not share my love for his music doesn't bother me in the slightest.
And if you want criticism of him I could write a book.
But I still love his music.

What have you started? Forgotten the almighty din that Beatles thread created already?.
Some of us come on here for a bit of peace and quiet, you know.

So what?

Your Houstons, Knowles, Careys &c (insert the name of your own favourite practioner of R'n'B b ll cks here) can all hold a tune. Often as not they choose to hold it by the nads whilst dangling it out of a 25th storey window, thus rendering the poor b ggar unlistenable.

Don't get me started on pitch correction...

After 30 years of sticking to my punkish principals and ignoring him completely. I finally had my Damascus moment with Blood on the Tracks two or three years ago.

Now I have 100 ish albums and a song for every occasion (births, deaths and marriages). I'm with David on this he's the one I'd keep.

Hearing him play London Calling at Brixton Academy brought it all full circle.

To start with I agree with many of your criticisms and may well have been in your camp a couple of years ago. BUT....

What I have come to appreciate is not necessarily the man, but the songs. Lets face it he must be one of the most covered artists around which suggests he has something going for him. In addition, you've got to say that he must have something special when one of the most revered guitarists around has in his own fan's top 3 (by my reckoning), a Dylan cover (Hendrix/Watchtower). He's no writing slouch.

His 'idiosyncratic' (to be charitable) style caused many of us to miss the fabulous writing for years (Decades in my case!)

There's no should about it. And, like David, if you sent me to a desert island and said I could have the entire recorded works of one artist, he's the one I'd choose.

They say that if you want to stop smoking, that's the most important thing if you're going to try. And, I'm guessing by the fact that you've started this thread, that you kind of want to like Bob Dylan, right? This already feels wrong, but this is how it worked for me:

Growing up, I couldn't see the fuss. The man couldn't sing, etc. then I heard It's All Over Now Baby Blue one day in Stoke-on-Trent when I was 13 and on a Geography trip. It was the first time I thought, ok, maybe he can sing; he just chooses to sing like he does. And, in fact, if you go way back to the first ever tapes of him singing (from about 1959-60), he sings like a bird. Like he does on Nashville Skyline, actually. And then he heard Woody Guthrie, and that was that for a few years. Then you've got the 1965-66 trilogy and the Live 1966 album, which may not be the best starting point, but sooner or later becomes essential. Personally, my way in was Nashville Skyline and Desire (then Blonde On Blonde and The Bootleg Series 1-3 - which is actually a really good introduction, in a perverse way). Those two are the albums that most non Dylan fans go for. It's got to the point now that I have so much of his stuff, it's got a bit silly. I mean, thousands of recordings. Even the bad stuff- and there's plenty - I find oddly fascinating, like a bad Shakespeare play: there's something in there of interest, always.

I'm a Dylan nut, it's fair to say. Like A Rolling Stone is the ringtone on my phone, and every conversation is a let down after that opening drumbeat. Yet I can't stand Blowin' In the Wind, or much of his first four albums; Live 1964 I can't actually sit through; I am unmoved by most of Love & Theft; I think Blood On The Tracks isn't half as good as it could be (see the 'album clunker' thread). But I never travel anywhere without Blonde On Blonde and/or Live 1966. If I need music that takes risks and cuts through everything mediocre, they do the trick. A summer's day isn't complete without Desire, nor a summer's evening without Oh Mercy. I think Time Out Of Mind and Modern Times are as good as his best stuff, but I wouldn't start there.

But if you really want to start at a good place, I'd recommend watching No Direction Home. If that doesn't kindle an interest, then I'd say forget it. If it does, then buy Live 1966 and work backwards, or forwards, or both.

Give these a shot. I love them all for different reasons, and each represents a completely different person, in my book:

I'm a huge Dylan fan, but by no means an uncritical Bobhead.
Dylan is one of those things that everyone in the world should have a go at liking because it will enhance your life greatly if you do - just like Shakespeare, The Simpsons and Christmas pudding.
Regarding his voice, at first I saw it as a hindrance, then I didn't mind it, now I see it as perfect for the material, and a wonderful thing.
In my opinion, a "Do You Like Dylan?" playlist would run as follows..
"Like A Rolling Stone" [Dylan fighting the good fight]
"The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll" [as above]
"A Simple Twist of Fate" [Dylan does heartbreaking poignancy]
"Mr Tambourine Man" [Dylan as dreamy poet; play it late at night]
"Blind Willie McTell" [Dylan as unarguably awesome lyricist]
Then listen to the whole of "Blood On The Tracks" and "Highway 61 Revisited".
If the answer is still "Nope, don't get it", file Dylan away in the drawer marked "To be revisited in 2018".

Nothing much to add except that I really love his radio show. Such a rich and broad knowledge and appreciation of popular music. Dylan's a star.

if there is a side to his music that doesn't do it for you there may well be another side to him that does.
For me the long songs with word-heavy verse after verse are a struggle - like Desolation Row, Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands.
But then there's the more snappy Don't Think Twice It's All Right and It Ain't Me Babe and the sharper, more acid songs Like A Rolling Stone, Tom Thumb's Blues, Ballad of a Thin Man.
His songs are covered widely and often well - showing their quality but ultimately I'd want to go back to the originals since they are his words.
Hard to convince the sceptic who says go on convince me.
Without him and his influence lyrics would not have gone much beyond Baby baby I want you (well he did a bit of that too)and all the usual cliches - at least for the bands that that were his contemporaries and after. Not sure The Beatles and The Stones would have developed so far and so fast without Bob. So if that's true there must be something there?
Then again the influence has not always been so positive - I mean among those who think they too can write such words. But then you ask about his music - I don't think you can get anything worth getting without a bit of work and open-mindedness on your own part. I am not a big fan but I lived with someone who played him a lot and it just gradually soaked in really.

Is this a wind-up and can it beat 103 comments?

For me, Bob Dylan has been the most consistently interesting performer I've heard. His songs move me deeply.

Perhaps what I like most about him is that his songs have such vast emotional range. He can write something as bilious and vengeful as 'Idiot Wind', and then an impossibly tender love song like 'Sara'.

The opening lines from 'Sara'...

I laid on the dunes
I looked at the sky
When the children were babies
And played on the beach

You came up behind me
I saw you go by
You were always so close
Still within reach

So beautiful, so simple. A memory of better times that is crystal clear.

Or take a song like 'Up To Me'...

We heard the Sermon on the Mount
And I knew it was too complex
It didn't amount to anything more
Than what the broken glass reflects

In this case, mysterious, erudite and unknowable...

He really is brilliant, you know!

But for me, the thing I love most about his records is his phrasing, which is why I get rather stroppy when people say he can't sing. I would say the two singers with the greatest ability to make a line in a song work for them with a subtle shift in nuance or emphasis are Frank Sinatra and... Bob Dylan. He can change the meaning of a song by varying the way he sings a single word.

The problem with so many singer songwriters these days is that they seem to think that sensitivity the be all and end all in terms of emotion. Sorry, James Blunt, but you're a perfect example of this. "You're Beautiful" is vapid, cloying and insipid. But Dylan has access to an infinitely wider emotional palette. His love songs resonate so deeply with me because he has shown me other sides to his personality as well... the jealous lover, the spiteful ex, the mysogonist, the loner. I believe in what he sings because his songs when taken as a body of work suggest someone with all the character flaws that I have myself. His songs are truthful, or at least I like to think they are.

Here ends Bob appreciation.

...post is ready to roll in a couple of weeks under the title, 'What's so special about Bruce Bloody Springsteen?'

For years now I've wished I could 'get' The Smiths. I once made time to go up to my room and listen to The Queen Is Dead on headphones, at my friends' recommendation. I came downstairs and said it didn't really do it for me. They said fine. I said fine.

I don't mind if a song comes on. Sometimes I enjoy it. But I'm not bothered that I'm not bothered, if you see what I mean.

Springsteen, on the other hand: I had an epiphany around the time I hit 30 and never looked back.

Back in the dark ages when punk was in terminal decline my mate suddenly got into Bob. I'd go round his house and have to listen to an unholy racket. In time though I realised that I knew a fair number of his songs, either his originals or covers. But I still didn't get the desire to go and buy any of his albums. A couple of years later I got to know another Dylan fanatic.

In the end ('87) Bob was playing at Wembley Arena with Tom Petty and Roger McGuinn and I thought I'd go and see for myself a real live '60s legend and see what the fuss was all about (I liked Tom Petty and the Byrds so I thought it wouldn't be all bad!).

Bob came on and kicked off the set with Like a Rolling Stone and I've been hooked from that moment on.

Not every album or song is a classic and there have been a few dodgy gigs along the way but I look at Bob's music as a growing body of work over a lifetime. It makes sense to see it as a journey through life than try to compare different eras. I'm not the same man now that I was at 21 - who is, life evolves you.

Even on a bad night there has always been something that makes you listen to a song anew and changes your perspective on it forever and makes the effort worthwhile.

Some time ago there was a discussion forum on Bob's website and there was much debate about the meaning of the songs. I did suggest that what mattered was what the song means to you i.e. free you mind to the flights of fancy that Dylan's songs can take you. Aahh the backlash I got - of course the songs have to have a definitive meaning...

I also said that I thought that I'm Not There was one of Dylan's finest vocal performances - I live to tell the tale but I still have the scars. Others couldn't divorce the performance from the unfinished song but I think it is quite haunting in its incompleteness.

You don't have to like Dylan but at least approach his work with an open mind. For the sheer breadth of his work I'd happily be stranded on a desert island with nothing more than Bob to listn to - something for every mood.

In a sense thnew movie is as close as we'll get to Dylan - he is so multi facetted. I wonder who Bob Dylan is when he's at home and off duty.

As for Idiot Wind you nedd to hear the evolution from the first (unreleased) version to the version on Bootleg Series Vol 1-3 and then the Blood on the Tracks version. To my mind the first version was reconcilatory in its tone but by the last version the level of bile and bitterness was something else!

P.S. My keyboard is knackered and I have to keep going back and putting in missing letters etc. I hope this post still makes sense!

..to find another musician or singer who says that Dylan sings out of tune.
He may have a certain character in his voice, but in all the years I've been listening, I've never heard him hit a bum note.
I've heard a million people say it, but they've always been non-musicians.
Doesn't mean that you're not entitled to your opinion, just that you're wrong.
All you you have to do to prove your point is load up an example of an out of tune vocal.
..anyway what you probably mean is that he doesn't have an acceptably beautiful voice like..oh say Tom Paxton (to use a contemporary of Dylans)

"In the end ('87) Bob was playing at Wembley Arena with Tom Petty and Roger McGuinn"

I enjoyed that gig. I think it was the last tour where he sang the melodies as he originally wrote them. Since then it's been "Can you tell what it is yet?".

If it makes you feel any better, I consider myself a pretty big fan. I probably listen to him every day without deciding to. And I still have objectivity enough to know when he's bad. I'm not one of those people who think every little thing he does is magic.

The first time I saw him in concert, in 1991, he was beyond awful. He barely moved for two hours, fixed his expression somewhere in the stalls of the Hammersmith Odeon, legs apart and hat preventing any view of his face, and proceeded to murder some of his best songs - Lay Lady Lay without melody or scansion, as if mumbling to himself in his sleep - interspersed with some of his worst songs, eg Wiggle Wiggle. Undoubtedly the worst gig I've ever been to. But, here's the thing: I went back. In 1993 he was slightly less awful, 1996 not bad, 1997 pretty good; and by the time of his London gigs in 2003 and 2007 he was just fabulous. To this day, I've been trying to work out why I kept going back. It's not just because he's Bob Dylan. It's because, like I said, there's always something there. Although, as an earlier poster said, and to paraphrase Dylan himself, you ain't gonna find it on Dylan and The Dead. Some of his albums are indefensible and I only own them because, somewhere along the line, Dylan turned me into a completist. I never listen to Knocked Out Loaded, Empire Burlesque, Saved, Self Portrait, Down In the Groove or Under The Red Sky.

Earlier on I equated him with Shakespeare. I don't believe that this is overstating things. We are very lucky to be alive at the same time as him. I took my daughter to see him last year because, even if she hated it, I wanted her to be able to tell her grandchildren that she saw him in concert. Funnily enough, she thought he rocked pretty hard.

I don't know why I keep responding to this thread. There's no answer and no natural conclusion to arrive at. But, like those awful Dylan gigs in the early 90s, something keeps me coming back.

...of getting through the day, dear.

He didn't seem to regard Like a Rolling Stone (for instance) as a work in progress for twenty-odd years after he wrote it. It stayed an instantly recognisable tune up until around about when the never-ending tour started.

At Brixton a couple of years ago, Dylan was playing it in a totally unrecognisable way, while the crowd determinedly sang along to the original melody. The whole thing was ridiculous.

I don't know why he massacres these songs now - boredom, contempt for audience, inability to hit notes?

One thing's for sure - anyone trying to convince Oeufman of Dylan's greatness would not take him along to a gig.

got to hope it's neither of the first two. I'd be amazed if anyone can be bored on stage, and if he holds his audience in contempt, that is, as you say, ridiculous. I might not like him, but even I can't believe that, though you're not the first person I've heard say it.

Quite a few people on this thread are critical of him live. Every artist has their off days, but it appears Dylan has more than his fair share. Sounds like he'd have been better off retiring from the stage a few years ago and sticking to the studio; his last three albums have had great reviews, haven't they?

I just wonder if it's something to do with how you feel about lyrics on a track. I mean for me lyrics are important, but I feel that on the long word-heavy Dylan tracks on his classic albums, that I find a struggle, it is almost as if I should be just reading the words, in which case they are better in a written form, not as songs.

Yet for those who feel the classic albums are without fault their approach to lyrics is maybe different to mine. I just don't want to have to focus so much on the words. I've never been too keen on listening to someone telling me a story - maybe it's my attention span. It's about what kind of person you are. I'd rather focus on the music and let the words kind of drift in and out, then after playing some music over time more and more comes through. Then again with The Smiths, for example, the lyrics are often really clear and immediate, so they feature more in my experience of their music than some others, but in their case there's not too many words to overwhelm me.

It's not that I think those Dylan songs are bad necessarily, just that they will appeal more to a certain kind of person perhaps. They may well be great but are not for me.
Looks like I've changed my mind a bit since my last post - or maybe not?!

In concert these days I prefer Bob when he sings the newer stuff. His voice struggles on some the earlier songs and to hear him sing some of the lines in Visions of Johanna now sounds faintly ridiculous. But I'll be there to see him again when the tour returns to Blighty.

I didn't intend to imply that you could disregard great chunks of his work but only to look at the music in the context of where his life was at at that point in time e.g. the songs on New Morning reflect marriage and raising a young family - something I could relate to when I'd arruved at a similar stage in life. Eventually it all makes sense. Am I alne in thinking Bob could have been a successful country singer if he hasn't found Woody?

Dylan's longevity comes from moving with HIS times.

I do understand where you're coming from. I'm 22 and it's taken me a fair damn while for me to really get into him. I still don't know much and his back catalogue is fairly daunting. I think the thing is that lyrically he is quite remarkable. Admittedly some of his stuff is not the best, but then no one's perfect. As a man ... I'm not sure, maybe it's because he's such an enigma and I gues no one really knows the real Dylan, which is perhaps why 'I'm Not There' works so well. I know he's a bit crazy, but his Theme Time Radio Hour never ceases to make me smile, he's a highly intelligent idividual. As for fancying Ms Blanchett, no shame there, she's a sexy lady whoever she's dressed as, I have a wee lady crush on her myself.

Ain't it just like the night to play tricks when you're tryin' to be so quiet?
We sit here stranded, though we're all doin' our best to deny it
And Louise holds a handful of rain, temptin' you to defy it
Lights flicker from the opposite loft
In this room the heat pipes just cough
The country music station plays soft
But there's nothing, really nothing to turn off
Just Louise and her lover so entwined
And these visions of Johanna that conquer my mind

In the empty lot where the ladies play blindman's bluff with the key chain
And the all-night girls they whisper of escapades out on the "D" train
We can hear the night watchman click his flashlight
Ask himself if it's him or them that's really insane
Louise, she's all right, she's just near
She's delicate and seems like the mirror
But she just makes it all too concise and too clear
That Johanna's not here
The ghost of 'lectricity howls in the bones of her face
Where these visions of Johanna have now taken my place

Now, little boy lost, he takes himself so seriously
He brags of his misery, he likes to live dangerously
And when bringing her name up
He speaks of a farewell kiss to me
He's sure got a lotta gall to be so useless and all
Muttering small talk at the wall while I'm in the hall
How can I explain?
Oh, it's so hard to get on
And these visions of Johanna, they kept me up past the dawn

Inside the museums, Infinity goes up on trial
Voices echo this is what salvation must be like after a while
But Mona Lisa musta had the highway blues
You can tell by the way she smiles
See the primitive wallflower freeze
When the jelly-faced women all sneeze
Hear the one with the mustache say, "Jeeze
I can't find my knees"
Oh, jewels and binoculars hang from the head of the mule
But these visions of Johanna, they make it all seem so cruel

The peddler now speaks to the countess who's pretending to care for him
Sayin', "Name me someone that's not a parasite and I'll go out and say a prayer for him"
But like Louise always says
"Ya can't look at much, can ya man?"
As she, herself, prepares for him
And Madonna, she still has not showed
We see this empty cage now corrode
Where her cape of the stage once had flowed
The fiddler, he now steps to the road
He writes ev'rything's been returned which was owed
On the back of the fish truck that loads
While my conscience explodes
The harmonicas play the skeleton keys and the rain
And these visions of Johanna are now all that remain

the only person here who happens to think that Bob is, actually, a very fine singer indeed?

Tricky cove that Dylan ....

Is he a singer ?Is he a poet ?Is he an icon? ,Is he a born again Christian? ,Is he a guardian of American musical tradition ?,Is he a sex God ?,Is he an author ?, Is he an actor ?,Is he a DJ ?,Is he a jobbing musician? ,Is he a hobo?, Was he a family Man ?,Is he a campaigner ?Is he a Rock Star ?,Is he a celebrity ?Is he a myth,Is he an entertainer ?

He is undefinable ,impossible to categorise ...a legend ....transcends fashion ....but for some reason not accessible to everyone ...but then it is possible to 'get dylan' late and see different things to his lyrics as you go through your life ...I only got Like A Rolling Stone recently when someone really pissed me off ...and yet I may lose it again soon ....

Even his shows from Blackbushe 78 to Sheffield 07 define explanation ...how is it he comes on ,no screens , no chat ,impossible to see from under the brim of his hat, sometimes side on to the audience now playing keyboard and yet the show blows you away again....

He defies description ...who else in popular culture never mind modern music cant be categorized ....!

That's what I like about ripping CDs - You get to laugh at the genres someone insists everything should fit into. In this case call it 'contrary bugger'.

I can fancy Cate Blanchett in (and out) of just about anything so I don't have a problem with this!

The bottom line is we've all seen some bad Bob gigs but we keep going back. I can't think of any other artist who I would keep the faith with. Even on a bad night here is aways some redeeming moment. Personally, I love playing name that tune - if I had a pound for every time I've got it wrong!

Now any takers on Bob as county singer?

it's just that he is 'bigger' than so many other artists. Dylan for me goes to places others don't, talks about things others shy away from, gets deeper into places when others only seem to skim the surface. And his mysteries are more mysterious.
There are other big ones too - you've got a list of your own.

Or should I say, "was"? I defy anyone to listen to Mr Tambourine Man with an open heart and mind and tell me Dylan can't sing. His singing is beautiful (albeit not conventionally, and certainly not "pretty"), tender, nuanced, yearning - and most certainly in tune! To these ears it's infinitely more affecting than the Byrds' portentous and prissy rendition. I think a lot of people who cover Dylan songs make the same mistake they make when covering songs by other artists with unconventional voices who write beautiful songs, like the aforementioned Richard Thompson, Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen and so on: they try to add "beauty" or "proper singing" and lose what made the originals so affecting. Rod Stewart could not have missed the point by a greater margin when he said of his ghastly Waits covers words to the effect of "he's a great songwriter, but he can't sing, bless him, so I thought I'd do him a favour and show him how it's done."

So too with Richard Thompson: Dimming of the Day, one of his finest, most exqusite songs, was sung on a tribute album by Eddi Reader, Boo Hewerdine and Clive Gregson, good singers all; they make it sound almost schmaltzy. One of the attributes that make Linda Thompson such a great singer is her utter lack of sentimentality, a virtue I imagine Richard may have picked up from her; their versions, singly and together, are definitive.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with having a beautiful voice! Jennifer Warnes's album of Leonard Cohen songs was impossible to fault, and offered a new setting for those for whom the great man's voice was just too dour. And yet, when I heard the original of Bird On A Wire on the radio the other day, I was surprise by quite how much I enjoyed it.

And so to work.

Firstly, let me just say I dont mind you nicking my ideas from me and mind even less if you exceed my 103 replies!!!Seriously it is a great subject matter and the level of replies is testament to that. The point with Dylan is that not only has he written some all time classic songs but even some of his lesser known stuff I would categorise as superlative. There is a song on Infidels called 'dont fall apart on me tonight'which is possibly one of my all time favourite songs. Dylan is not in my list of top 5 or even top 10 artists but I have to say that his albums that I have in my collection are pretty indespensable.He was doing it before the Beatles and is still doing it now - Modern Times is a great album.His voice is wriongly maligned and Azeem makes a very valid point that artists copying him make the mistake of trying to put something into their interpretations that is not needed. One notable exception is Warren Zevons 'knockin on heavens door' made even more poignant by him being at deaths door when he recorded it. And Azeem I agree with you too about Richard Thompson except that Bonnie Raitt possibly did as good a cover of Dimming of the day as is possible.Both Richard Thompson and Elvis Costello are the artists that I would class myself as a completist for and these two along with Dylan have pretty unique voices.All three are songwriters of the highest degree and all three are dedicated to their art beyond the level of mere mortals. Dylan doesnt need to do the touring he does - I would say he really cares and that is something else that sets him apart from the mainstream.

Bob fans ain't into easy listening. When I go to see Bob I expect the unexpected. I don't want cheesy renditions of his greatest hits, I can get that deal(if I choose) from lesser artists. Bob's more of your cryptic crossword, not the easier coffee break version.

Maybe the more people that say they don't understand the more I like it. I can be a contrary bugger too.

...and he was brilliant.
You just have to accept that he approaches performance like a jazz or blues musician, that his recorded versions are not definitive, but form a basis for improvisation.
..and his intonation was perfect from go to whoah.
(Sorry Oeufman, had to get that in!)

assume you're not just being provocative, and for the sake of ongoing discussion, I'm not buying it, I'm afraid.

Playing the songs for people who have paid money, and playing them in a state where they can be recognised, isn't the same as playing 'cheesy renditions'. Are you telling me that if you went to see the Stones, they pissed about for 90 minutes playing nursery versions of Wood's solo output, mumbled thanks at the end and trouped off, you'd be happy because Man, it's the Stones!?

You can't have it both ways; either he's bigger than the man, he is the man, or he's been fobbing you all off for the last 20 years because he doesn't actually give a f**k. If that were really the case (and I'm not sure it is, despite the wealth of seeming evidence on this thread), wouldn't you all feel a little let down?

Artists should care about their supporters as much as their music; it's hard to sustain one without the other, particularly in light of Dylan's longevity.

I'll ignore the claim that anyone who bothers to put on a show is a lesser artist because, well, it's just a disappointing assertion.

I think it's great so many of you think he's so far ahead of the pack he's a blur on the final straight, and maybe he is, but over the course of this thread, I'm not sure if some of the posts arguing for him haven't actually done the opposite.

I already knew he was a great artist (you don't have to like someone to agree with that), I already knew his impact on the social and political first world was nigh on unmeasurable, and I already knew his influence on several generations worth of post-60's musicians was undeniable; what I wanted to know was why.

Some of you have tipped me towards listening again, but a lot of you have said, and I think it's been very balanced and enlightening, 'Actually, he's had bad, unlistenable periods, you should avoid periods A, B and C and don't bother seeing him live.'

That's the resume of almost any artist who's been around 40 years.

..than to paraphrase the great Charles Shaar Murray.
Bob Dylan do not DO, he BE.
It's not that he gives a fuck or doesn't give a fuck. He just does what he does, and for better or for worse, he still draws multitudes to see him.
You can sell snake-oil on a reputation for only so long. Not for almost 50 years.

In 1993, I woke up in my flat on Camden High Street, North London, with a bas**rd of a hangover. I summoned the energy to go outside and squinted as the sun hit my eyes. I looked around me and saw a guy coming towards me with a shock of curly hair under a stovepipe hat. "He looks like Bob Dylan." I thought to myself. He was now within 10 feet of me. "Oh, it is Bob Dylan."

What to do? I was unsure in the state I was in whether I could form a single coherent word, let alone a sentence, so I decided that it would be a foolish idea to try to talk to him. What's more, I thought he probably didn't need another scruffy longhair going up to him and saying "Bob, your music is so important to me, man." So I discreetly followed on behind him and the people he was with (very big, silent) to see if anything interesting should happen.

Dylan crossed the road and was passing the Record and Tape Exhange when a young kid of about 15 ran out of the shop not looking where he was going and literally clattered into him. The kid said sorry, looked up, saw who he was talking to and stood there in complete astonishment. With mouth agape, he reached into his bag and drew out the copy of "Blonde On Blonde" that he had just bought. I was witness to the following:

Kid, struggling to speak: "Errr, I just bought... do you think... maybe... sign?"

Dylan: "Hey, that's so weird. You just bought my old record, then you bump into me. You must be feeling really weird right now."

Kid: "Errr, yeah."

Dylan: "I guess you'd like me to sign that for you."

Kid: "Yes please"

Dylan was handed a pen by one of the large gentlemen he was with, and signed "Isn't that weird? Bob Dylan" on the cover. I was so close by now I could read what he'd written.

With that, he walked off down Camden High Street and I pondered how strange life could be.

Shortly afterwards I was accosted in the street by a middle-aged hippy who I'd met before. "Dylan! Dylan! Have you seen him? He's here! Which way did he go?" he asked me in a state of excitement bordering on mania. This guy made A.J. Weberman seem like a well balanced individual. He once told me that Bob Dylan was an emissary from God sent to rescue us. There was no way I was going to help this loon find Bob, so I pointed up the road and sent him in completely the wrong direction. It was the least I could do.

I later found out that Dylan had been in Camden to shoot the front cover for his "World Gone Wrong" album in a restaurant / cafe up the road.