I Don't Believe You

When I first heard Bob Dylan's music as a child, I remember having no problem appreciating the genius of his sentiment and lyrics, but there is no question I was confused by his delivery. Blowin' in the Wind and The Times They Are A-Changin' are unquestionable American masterpieces, but his nasal, stoccato vocals are not an easy approach to understand, particularly for a child. I accepted his talent and importance because it seemed universal, but I was more interested in Paul Simon and Billy Joel, two tastes somewhat easier to acquire.

In college, I became exposed to the music Dylan made shortly before his notorious motorcycle accident in 1966, a run of creativity that included the landmark albums, Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde On Blonde, three spectacular collections known primarily for Dylan's transition to a more impressionistic style of songwriting and his first use of electric instruments. He was booed visciously through out this period, primarily during a 1966 tour of England. His performances on that tour are universally brilliant and it occurs to me that invention and genius are so often greeted with similar contempt because we mock what we cannot understand.

D.A. Pennebaker's documentary of the 1965 tour, Don't Look Back, and, more recently, Martin Scorcese's informative No Direction Home, document this phenomenon in vivid detail. It is nothing short of startling to see the vitriol hurled at Dylan by his supposed fans after presenting masterworks, such as Like a Rolling Stone, Ballad Of A Thin Man, Leopard-Skin Pill-Box Hat and Subterranean Homesick Blues. What is most ironic about these performances is Dylan's complete and total destruction and deconstruction of these critics with the very words at which they were hissing. Dylan's voice and delivery are central to that accomplishment.

To hear so many people talk about how they can't appreciate Dylan because of his voice is disturbing. His voice is essential to his genius. The words are timeless and the melodies memorable, but the delivery is what makes them special. Hearing someone else play a Dylan song is like hearing a cover of a Thelonious Monk tune; a certain central authenticity is lacking. The power is diminished greatly.

I encourage anyone who has yet to discover Dylan to watch these two documentaries and listen to the albums he made during this time. Be patient with them. This is some of the highest art created during the last century and to miss out on it is to miss out on a fundamental pleasure and one of the minor amazements of this life. Embrace his voice and hear his words as he intended you to hear them, with an accusatory, ironic and nasal twist.

Just when you thought...

celebrities couldn't get any more self-obsessed, irresponsible, and infantile, Hollywood has given us Harry Belafonte. His apologizers will portray him as a well-spoken, well-meaning intellectual. He's one of the three. I'll let you guess which one.

In a climate that has not only fostered but rewarded beyond comprehension the absurdity that is Tom Cruise, the pompous, sanctimonious Alec Baldwin, the self-righteous Oprah Winfrey, and borderline psychotics like Barbara Streisand, Larry King, and Bill O'Reilly, we've become so used to insanity that Belafonte's recent comments slid smoothly under the radar. More often than I'd like to admit these days, I find myself muttering, "Is this really happening?" but in this case, I was rendered speechless.

While visiting with and vigorously offering the support of millions of Americans to Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, Belafonte called President Bush, "The greatest terrorist in the world." Earlier, he'd compared the Bush Administration to Nazi Germany. He should be ashamed of himself, but he certainly isn't.

Chavez has been one of our most quotable world leaders of late, but he topped even himself when on Christmas Eve he told a television audience that "'minorities, descendants of those who crucified Christ... have grabbed all the wealth of the world for themselves." This was before old Harry dropped by to provide evidence of his own psychiatric disorders (apologies to Tom Cruise for referencing his particular area of expertise without consulting him).

Dissent is one of the foundations upon which this country was built, but our founding fathers imagined informed, intelligent dissent, not angry, paranoid, reactionary vitriol. What Belafonte and his supporters fail to grasp is the self-destructive nature of his own attacks. To compare this administration to the Nazis, to call Bush the world's greatest terrorist, is to diminish the weight of his own agenda. If you agree with his comments, try repeating them to a Holocaust survivor; if you don't feel ashamed, you should have your head audited by a Scientologist. Free citizens of Europe were subjected to open discrimination and abuse followed by a premeditated and systematic genocide over the course of more than a decade. Educate yourself about it if you're interested in the unbelievable details. Maybe you think George Bush is misguided, dangerous, or even criminal. If you do, make an intelligent case and we'll all be better off for it. No one benefits from the hate-inspired, ignorant diatribes unleashed by the guy who brought us the Banana Boat Song.

Harry Belafonte has made little music of consequence in his career. His acting has been largely ignored and for good reason. Instead of holing up in the Hollywood Hills and reaping the fruits of his incredible luck, he's decided to politically activate, much to our detriment. He is his own worst enemy and one of ours. The rise of neo-conservativism in America is directly linked to the absence of ideas in the liberal think tank and the volume at which that vacuum is broadcast. What we desperately need in this country is an intelligent, bipartisan dialogue with the courage to denounce the most obvious opponents of democracy and intellectual progress.

I'm not asking Harry Belafonte to stop talking. The onus is upon us to deny him an audience and a reason to speak.

Justice For All

Joseph J. Ellis, who won a Pulitzer Prize for Founding Brothers and a National Book Award for American Sphinx, intended His Excellency George Washington as a broad brush stroke and so it is. Having read not a lick about our first president, I considered it a good place to start and I was right.

At the time I was reading it, I was also engaged in Ken Burns' documentary Thomas Jefferson, which provides the same sweeping depiction of one of the most widely misunderstood personalities of the last millennium.

Both men played an incalculable role in the formation of this country, Washington the deliberate visionary of a strong, unified nation and Jefferson the father of the two-party system, and both would be revolted by what we have become. They understood, Washington more than his eventual rival, that liberty and equality were essentially exclusive (we were not, under any circumstances, all created equal, as Jefferson famously wrote), but they envisioned an America where all men (important distinction there) could live freely in peace, equal, if not in assets, then certainly under the law.

The two-party system (and Washington, as our only nonpartisan president, knew this instinctively, I think) was doomed to failure and has failed, spectacularly. It has failed because we have become a nation of partisans, interested only in ourselves and not in the good of the collective whole. Washington and Hamilton grasped what Jefferson and Madison could not: the best interests of the United States trumped all else.

For example, Democrats want a Pro-Choice Supreme Court, Republicans want a Pro-Life Supreme Court. We choose a side of the fence and throw stones at anyone who chooses to stand in opposition. In reality, we don't choose sides any more than we choose which god (or gods) to worship. Most of us are mediocrities who, as Einstein once said, submit blindly to hereditary prejudices. Understanding this is the first step toward appreciating the importance of respecting those who disagree with us. And when we fall short, it is imperative that we work with our adversaries to forge a better life for us all. My foe is not by nature, as so many of us arrogantly believe, my inferior.

When a Democrat is in office, Republicans welcome and encourage his failures. The same holds true for Democrats when a Republican is in office. Think about that for a second. We root against our own country. Washington would call that treason. I'm inclined to agree.

Washington, who was morally opposed to slavery, nevertheless maintained 300 slaves at Mount Vernon and famously omitted the question of slavery from his timeless farewell address, opting instead to espouse his conviction that isolationism was the only means of survival for a democratic nation. "There can be no greater error," he warned, "than to expect or calculate upon real favors from Nation to Nation." He knew that slavery could not, under any circumstances, survive in this country, but he was also correct in assuming the country, and with it the democratic experiment, would falter if the issue were raised too soon. In other words, he sacrificed his own moral beliefs for the good of the whole. Nearly a century later, Lincoln would do the same, only emancipating the slaves when it became clear that it was the only way to save the Union.

America was not the first experiment in democracy, but it has been the most successful one (so far). It is time to stop taking for granted that it will endure indefinitely as such. Napoleon and Caesar, among others, were seduced by power and personal perspective to the ruin of their people. Washington ably resisted the temptations of despotism, even as his own countrymen accused him of monarchical ambitions. He was a man of fierce convictions. The America of today would induce projectile vomiting in its founder.

The age of noble and benevolent politicians is sadly long over, replaced by the machinery of empty rhetoric. The responsibility is on our own shoulders now. We, the people, must welcome anew the ideas upon which this country was founded. We must accept that what is best for us may not be what is best for all of us. We must embrace our sworn enemies, abandon our substantial individual egos, and move forward. Otherwise, we are all lost.