Cultural Capital

Reflections on books and the arts from the New Statesman culture desk

Syndicate contentRSS

Bob Dylan looks back

The songwriter’s latest exhibition of paintings has been plagued with accusations of plagiarism, but

When Bob Dylan's first major US exhibition of original artwork opened at the Gagosian Gallery in New York on 20 September, critics were united in their relief that the assembled paintings were, if not groundbreaking, not as awful as the science-based lithographs of the former Monkees front man Micky Dolenz. Or as dull as the Rolling Stones guitarist Ronnie Wood's portraits of . . . er, the Rolling Stones. Some rock musicians are true renaissance men, with creditable work across several mediums, but those who fit such a description can probably be counted on one hand (Don Van Vliet, better known as Captain Beefheart, has claim to a finger).

Dylan has long been a graphic artist. In the first (and as yet only) volume of Chronicles, his semi-fictionalised memoirs, he describes how he "picked up the habit" of drawing from the late Suze Rotolo, his girlfriend in the early 1960s: "I would start with whatever was at hand. I sat at the table, took out a pencil and paper and drew the typewriter, a crucifix, a rose, pencils and knives and pins, empty cigarette boxes." This interest would manifest itself sporadically throughout his career, with his visual work adorning the album covers of the Band's Music from Big Pink (1968) and his own early 1970s releases Self Portrait and Planet Waves.

In 2008, the Statens Museum in Copenhagen exhibited a large collection of his paintings called "The Brazil Series", supposedly based on Dylan's personal observations of the country on his travels. The Gagosian's show, "The Asia Series", is a sister project that takes south-east Asia as its subject. (The gallery's somewhat po-faced blurb claims that it is a "visual journal" that "comprises first-hand depictions of people, street scenes, architecture and landscape".) Despite its foreign themes, the exhibition represents an artistic homecoming for Dylan, whose compulsive image-making began in the nearby bohemian quarters of Greenwich Village, under the wing of Rotolo.

"The Asia Series", however, has been controversial for Dylan's unapologetic use of appropriated compositions: fans on the forum pages of the Expecting Rain website have identified the source images of several of the paintings, including a photograph of an elderly Chinese man and a friend by Henri Cartier-Bresson, taken in 1948. Perhaps even Johann Hari would blush at the scale of Dylan's direct referencing of other people's work -- from the central figures to the incidental background details, the artist seems to have faithfully reproduced every detail.

Michael Gray, author of the Song and Dance Man series of books on Dylan, was withering in his analysis: "[It] may be a (very self-enriching) game he's playing with his followers but it's not a very imaginative approach to painting," he wrote on his blog. Yet is Dylan's approach to painting so surprising? His work throughout his career -- in song, poetry and film, as well as visual art -- has been characterised by an exhilarating omnivorousness. The restless, mercurial energy of his music is partly derived from how each of his songs contains multitudes of other voices.

Folk music is an adaptive vernacular: it survives by evolving. Much of this process takes the form of one musician borrowing a line or verse from another and adding something new along the way. In the song "Trouble in Mind", Big Bill Broonzy sings: "I won't be blue always/Yes, the sun gonna shine/In my back door someday." In "Big Road Blues", the ever mysterious Tommy Johnson sings: "Lord, sun gon' shine in my backdoor, someday/A wind gon' change all blow my blues away." Such "floating lyrics" belong to no one and pass from one songwriter to another; their expressive power draws from their mutability, the sense that their meaning is at once unfixed and specific, that their significance is simultaneously personal and communal.

Dylan has applied the methodology of the maverick phrase to all of his output, from lifting a Bascom Lamar Lunsford line ("A railroad man, they'll kill you when he can and drink up your blood like wine") for his song "Stuck Inside of Mobile with the Memphis Blues Again" ("They say that all the railroad men drink up your blood like wine") to piecing together fragments of Jack London novels and articles from Time magazine to colour his memoirs. His 2001 album Love and Theft was a manifesto in practice that celebrated pastiche as a liberating strategy: the final song, "Sugar Baby", took the melody and parts of the chorus from the 1927 show tune "Lonesome Road" by Gene Austin and Nathaniel Shilkret, for instance, and even the name of the collection was a nod to the historian Eric Lott's excellent book about minstrelsy of the same name.

Is pastiche, this loving theft, something that detracts from the quality of an artwork? Jacques Derrida's notion of iterability posits that a set of signs carries meaning because it is repeated, and that it cannot be saturated by any one context. Dylan's work, be it his painting, his music or writing, enacts this freedom from single interpretation, and that's why, for me, the best of it is endlessly rewarding. By repeating and assembling pieces of our shared cultural heritage, Dylan offers us a reflection not only of these new dark ages, these modern times, but also of the creative journey that has brought us here.

The Gagosian show may well be patchy -- Dylan's craftsmanship as a painter is unremarkable -- but to dismiss him for, in effect, applying the folk method to the canvas is unfair. Besides, has he been disingenuous? In the interview included in the exhibition catalogue, he says: "I paint mostly from real life. It has to start with that. Real people, real street scenes, behind the curtain scenes, live models, paintings, photographs, staged setups, architecture, grids, graphic design. Whatever it takes to make it work." The implication is that, to Dylan, photographs and paintings are as "real" as people and street scenes. In a hyper-mediated world, the media artifact is surely valid as a source of inspiration.

Hat-tip to Neil Rennie, from whom I borrowed (appropriated? referenced? stole? pastiched?) the Tommy Johnson/floating line example.

Yo Zushi works for the New Statesman. His work as a musician is released by Pointy Records

14 comments

Robert's picture

You write, "Much of [the folk] process takes the form of one musician borrowing a line or verse from another and adding something new along the way." But two paragraphs earlier you point out that Dylan "seems to have faithfully reproduced every detail" from his source material. Do you not see the difference between stealing a line--or even stealing a verse or two--and making an exact copy of an entire artwork?

restless's picture

Enjoyed your post greatly, especially:
His work throughout his career -- in song, poetry and film, as well as visual art -- has been characterised by an exhilarating omnivorousness. The restless, mercurial energy of his music is partly derived from how each of his songs contains multitudes of other voices.
Thanks for explaining it so well.

Freeman2's picture

jean coughlin writes, 'I'm psyched that Bob's art is finally being exhibited in the states.'

I'm sorry, I'm English and don't understand what that means. Will you explain?

jean coughlin's picture

It's never a suprise that the idea of who you are in the eyes of the art world is what causes your art to be recognized. As far as Mr. Dylan's work is concerned, the guy has an impressionist/expressionist style.
A bit like Cezanne I'd have to say.
It is probably a very relaxing exercise to paint. Why is it that his message has to be inexcusably profound in all cases? As if this is the criteria for contemporary art in the first place. Even now, we can't just take him at face value.

jean coughlin's picture

I have lived with a visual artist of great accomplishment however unknown, coincidentally someone heavily influenced by the music of Mr. Dylan.
Suprisingly great artists do use other 2-D images as their inspiration.
It's the act of the process that is the art, much less than the result.
The finished product is about the actions of the artist and what he/she bring to it with their own interpretation of their medium.
Infact the viewers interpretation is always amusement to the artist who never intended any of it.
I'm psyched that Bob's art is finally being exhibited in the states.
I'll be making my way to Madison Ave, to stand with it in person.
This is what the purpose of 2-d art is all about. To be in the room with it. Commentaries are negotiable.

rayppoklop's picture

Robert writes:
"Do you not see the difference between stealing a line--or even stealing a verse or two--and making an exact copy of an entire artwork?"

But Dylan has made paintings out of this source material and put them in a gallery as a set - that's enough recontextualisation to justify it, don't you think? Besides, making "copies" of other people's work has a strong precedent -- think of Richard Prince's photos of found photos, or Gus Van Sant's shot-by-shot remake of Psycho. Speaking of Psycho, there was also that 24-hour version of the film, presented as an installation by Douglas Gordon in 1993 - he didn't re-shoot anything; he used the film itself and slowed it down. A change in context, in medium, in the way things are set out for our consumption, can alter our response to an artwork, often in pretty interesting ways (if done well).

Yuya Joe College's picture

Dylan has created a stir and now some great photos from a previous era are becoming known, and an increase in works by those photographers is underway, the "Dylan" bump.

Imagine Dylan creating controversy, using samples, getting people to talk about art and music and history and travel and media... who wouldda thunk it?

ed cig's picture

If you have to quote Derrida, you've already lost the argument.

rayppoklop's picture

Ed Cig...
I thought that everyone likes a bit of Derrida? Didn't you ever hear that Scritti Politti song?

jean coughlin's picture

I simply meant I am excited to be able to visit the gallery in the USA to see
this work. I am under the impression that the work has only been exhibited
in the Netherlands and in London.
But I guess my 80's slang is a bit of a throwback. Some people never grow up. It is a gift to have the chance to grow old. Dylan seems to be holding his own.

rayppoklop's picture

Robert says:
"I do not think Dylan has done enough recontextualization, but that is not the issue. I merely meant to point out that a defender of the paintings cannot use the "folk process" argument, since what Dylan has done here is in no way comparable to the allusive style of much of his musical output."

It's pretty hard to quantify the act of recontextualising -- besides, the fact that it's Bob Dylan who has appropriated these images in itself gives the work a unique significance. Our expectations of what Dylan will do, or who we think he is, all feed into our interpretation; the "text" of that media creation "Bob Dylan" is, I think, inseperable from the texts of the paintings themselves. Some people in the press are complaining that, were these images created by Joe Bloggs, they certainly wouldn't have been put up at the Gagosian. That's probably true, but that it comes from Dylan's hand is part of the work...

david desmond's picture

I enjoyed your essay. This whole new thing post blabber mouth from the NY Times re Dylan's China gigs is great fun. It reminds me of a line from his song Tombstone Blues: "the tears on HIS [sic] cheeks are from laughter." Journalists don't create much, do they? Besides trashing people. By now Dylan has been painting and drawing most of his life. And if he appreciates someone's photo so much to paint it, well, that's nice. people are talking about plagiarism but he does paintings and not photos. he is using photos, maybe, as models. Ideas and inspiration. Sue him if you want. Let the blabber mouth from the NY Times sue him. this is just more crap from journalists or at least some of them. Bob just does what he does and probably always will. If he's commited a crime, serve him the papers or go home.

Robert's picture

As a matter of fact, I do not think Dylan has done enough recontextualization, but that is not the issue. I merely meant to point out that a defender of the paintings cannot use the "folk process" argument, since what Dylan has done here is in no way comparable to the allusive style of much of his musical output.

Ander's picture

The simple fact is that Bob Dylan has made childish tracings of other works and claimed they are his own, and a record of his travels in Asia. Apart from the ludicrous theft of another artist's work, the gallery audience is presented with images from the 1940s as if they were contemporary. I suspect the selling price and the gallery commission will be unaffected by the cheap and embarrassing theft involved.

Latest tweets