A Commentary on C.P. Lee's
    like the night
    Bob Dylan and the road to the
    Manchester Free Trade Hall
 
In light of the "official" release of this incredible show, I thought it a great time to raise a few questions, and praise this worthwhile work by C. P. Lee.

I personally thought the book a journey and want to say, it did put me there!  Mr. Lee's historical account of the "Traditionalists" gave one, not familiar with their views, a better understanding of where they were coming from (regardless of how misguided)!

Here then are a few points to raise, questions to ask, and ideas to debate:
(One assumes that folks have read the book.  Space is limited here.)

To begin with, one must define the "Traditionalist" viewpoint, to understand fully what they were accusing Dylan of when they claimed he was selling out.  According to Mr. Lee, the roots lie in the 1951 pamphlet published by the National Cultural Committee of the CPGB entitled, The American Threat To British Culture.  It claimed 'American Big Business' was a "shadowy institution that lay behind the dynamics of American Mass/Popular Culture.  A culture, they asserted, that was designed to brainwash the ordinary mass of people into 'dollar worship', racism, brutality, and 'gangsterism'."  It goes on to claim this, "nothing less than cultural imperialism".  If we accept the above as a basic belief held by "traditionalists", we certainly understand the hostility shown Dylan during this tour.

After reading Mr. Lee's work, one understands that there is a political agenda at work here.  This in addition to the "traditionalist" concern for musical purity and sanctity.  Practically the entire Traditionalist establishment and their followers considered Dylan a traitor to this ideology!

One might wonder:
How could one artist (Dylan) be considered larger than the entire Folk Tradition above, that it's establishment would hold him responsible for it's upkeep?

How could Dylan even qualify as part of an establishment that considered his nationality a prerequisite?
It is hard to imagine Dylan being defined as a "traditionalist" as by the attitudes exhibited, or as per Ewan MacColl's ideology.

Was it the high profile they achieved through his publicity?

One realizes that the views above are extreme and were not held by all Folk enthusiasts.  However, the biggest gust of wind came from those "traditionalists" as defined by the above.

Addressing the intense crowd reactions at the shows up to and beyond the 17 May 1966 show.
One can attribute documented behavior to the following:

- Those "traditionalists" who stubbornly believed they could somehow:
 

One can ask the question: If these folks disliked Dylan so much, disagreed with his new approach, and considered him a sell-out, why did they attend shows, sell out his concerts,
and by doing so put money in the very pocket of the person they considered a sell-out?

- I also believe that it became fashionable among those so inclined, to try to disrupt the show after the intermissions.  There were honest reactions no doubt, but it is safe to assume both played a role.  Word of mouth being responsible for the former.

- Finally, I believe for certain members of the audience, the electric set with all it's power and amplified sound (high volume is mentioned a number of times, even by those who liked the electric music) could not be accepted on the same level as the acoustic set with all it's beauty
(as per Mr. Lee's description of Desolation Row) and freshness.  The unfamiliarity of
"Thin Wild Mercury Music" was a shock!

I would like to thank C.P. Lee for his wonderful book.  It gives perspective to the period in which this show took place and allows us to compare the times we live in now, to those of the mid-sixties.  One gains better understanding as a result of Mr. Lee's efforts!
 
 

Note: I do not pretend to be an expert and welcome all views to be discussed through
rec.music.dylan
or send comments to me privately.

Be Well,
BW
 
 

Email Blind Willie