Comments on: Bob Dylan – A Winner

By: THOMAS GRASTY

THOMAS GRASTY — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:01:00 +0000

I was totally taken aback by this announcement regarding Dylan and Pulitzer. But certainly well deserved.

I don’t know if you were reporting on the news (and good news it is) or are actually a fan, but if you are then I thought I’d introduce you to my new novel, BLOOD ON THE TRACKS, which I think you’d enjoy.

It’s a murder-mystery. But not just any rock superstar is knocking on heaven’s door. The murdered rock legend is none other than Bob Dorian, an enigmatic, obtuse, inscrutable, well, you get the picture…

Suspects? Tons of them. The only problem is they’re all characters in Bob’s songs.

You can get a copy on Amazon.com or go “behind the tracks” at http://www.bloodonthetracksnovel.com to learn more about the book.

By: Bent

Bent — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:36:00 +0000

I agree with Stuart on Dylan’s merits. Note that Art Spiegelman, whose work doesn’t fit the Pulitzer categories either, also got the special citation award for Maus (1992). It’s a bit harder to explain why they gave one to Herb Caen in 1996 (unless it was for coining the word ‘beatnik’!)

By: Stuart Noble

Stuart Noble — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:17:00 +0000

“Whatever the musical merits of Dylan’s post-1980s output…”

I always liked the Traveling Wilburys. But I agree, the Pulitzer process is interesting here. Whether or not Pulitzer needs Dylan (which I’m inclined to accept to a degree), Dylan’s art is worthy on its own merits. Though these categories were not part of the original will, as Bent points out, I feel Dylan certainly fits within the original spirit of what Pulitzer was to award.

By: Bent

Bent — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:52:00 +0000

While it’s true that celebrity culture is heavily embroiled in a capitalist economy and that awards participate eagerly in this circulation, the Pulitzers have actually been pretty anti-glamorous and nerdy if one looks at them historically. Lately they have also taken a stab at political correctness…

For one thing the Pulitzer special citations have often been awarded posthumously, unlike the Nobels, so there is no sell-by date to worry about on these. Rather the motivations often list special anniversaries as the cause, or at least contributions over three decades or half a century. This is probably also why Dylan’s number came up…

Secondly, the Pulitzers are more about unsexy fields such as journalism (Mr. P. himself coming from the field) and American history, whereas literature, and belatedly music, seem almost to be afterthoughts – certainly the committee has added categories that were not named in the original Pulitzer will.

Third, the recipients of special citations awards have not been all that mainstream: John Coltrane (posthumously 2007), Thelonious Monk (posthumously 2006). George Gershwin and Duke Ellington (who were more mainstream) also got posthumous citations, both in the centennial year of their birth. It seems to me the Pulitzers are using these special citations to redress some ethnic imbalances in the awards patterns of earlier years – all of the guys mentioned above are either African-Americn or Jewish… Too bad they couldn’t come up with some women too!