Bob Dylan - No Direction Home

You don't have to be a Dylanologist or even a generational fellow traveler (though it doesn't hurt) to be completely captivated by Martin Scorcese's 200 min. documentary of the magnetic early career of the legendary artist. With a carefully textured combination of archival footage- some never seen before- and contemporary interviews, including a revealing and engaging running commentary by the notoriously elusive subject himself, Scorsese portrays in fascinating detail the unlikely and uncanny transformation of the small town Bobby Zimmerman into the daemonic lyrical genius whose clairvoyant creative fusion with the nascent Sixties' zeitgeist shaped and catalyzed a momentous cultural tipping point like no other artist of his time. It is a great story told by a master story teller.

For me, however, the ultimate achievement of this film goes beyond its vivid portrait of a mythic young artist. It is the nagging and even haunting question that the film eventually leaves us with; the indecipherable mystery- in plain sight- of Dylan himself.

The genius of Scorcese is what he is able to show us. That there is such a thing as an artistic charismatic; that there are larger than life phantoms who appear seemingly out of nowhere, whose mesmerizing, mercurial incandescence can manifest a preternatural subjectivity so intense and at the same time so permeable they are able, in the swirling ebb and flow of their creativity, to transfigure themselves over and over again at will. In doing so they are able to bring their art to a white hot heat that galvanizes and transfigures the imagination of almost everybody it touches, and, after the fire has subsided, leaves an indelible stamp that even they do not understand.

Classic Dylan quotes:
(1) Dense interviewer: "How many other folk singers have you influenced?"
Dylan: "136"
(2) Interviewer: "Do you think Donovan writes good folk songs?"
Dylan: "No... but he's a nice guy"
(3) Interviewer: "Do you consider yourself primarily a poet or a singer?"
Dylan: "I consider myself primarily a song and dance man"
(4) Interviewer: "Are you for or against the war?"
Dylan: "Yes"
(5) Joan Baez: "How come you don't want to sing on stage with me, Bobby?"
Dylan: "Don't take this the wrong way, but I hate your voice"
(6) Interviewer: "Does electric music hurt your ears?"
Dylan: "What?"
(7) Dylan: "People try to figure out the meaning of my songs. I don't even know what they mean"
(8) Don Rickles at a function, to Dylan: "You'll make it in this business if you'll just stop mumbling."
(9) Interviewer: "Why do you smoke cigarettes?"
Dylan: "What else are you going to do with cigarettes?"
(10) Interviewer: "What's it like being a Jew from Minnesota?"
Dylan: "Not sure, I've never been a Jew from anywhere else."
(11) Interviewer: "What were you trying to say in 'Blowin in the Wind'?"
Dylan: "I don't remember"

...Meaning you can't easily pin him down. Yet between Scorsese's excellent documentary & Dylan's own Chronciles (Vol.1) this is as close a revealing display of 'who'/'what' Dylan is, and how that means different things to everyone interested in him and his art. I think the film brilliantly explores the facts, myths, contrivances, and oh yeah, impact the man's music and the path it cut through American culture and beyond. His impact IS so immense that it's easy to forget that he's just a man with a guitar/piano, a pen/typewriter, scraps of paper and cigarettes who has somehow been able to filter the complexities of humanity - be it love, anger, fear, outrage, compassion, sarcasm, loneliness, hope and humor via deceptively simple music and incredible poetry. He is a mirror, but not always the reflection of that mirror. As he sang in 'The Man in Me' (New Morning) "The man in me will hide sometimes to keep from bein' seen/But that's just because he doesn't want to turn into some machine". Still, Dylan is always an open book to anyone - whether or not you are of his generation, ignored him at the time this film explores, were born after this era (I was born in early 1968 in Rochester - a day's drive from his base at the time) or you have only recently discovered him. That is a hallmark of great art and a great artist - there's always something different you find everytime you tap into it.

Scorsese's research into his subject is excellent - from interviews (starting with Dylan himself) to contemporaries both alive and gone (Ginsberg, Van Ronk), thoughtfully plucked film footage including from 'Eat The Document'(including some outtakes(?)) not surprising since Scorsese as a young man edited both Pennebaker's film of the Monterey Pop Festival of 1967 and the documentary of Woodstock. There are many revealing moments, too numerous to list here and many more questions raised about the relevence of the artist to late-twentieth century, cold-war era culture.

The pace is perfect, the threads many and artfully woven together. And stands up well to repeated viewing as a result. However, I take one star away because a discussion/exploration of the apex of his gradually frenzied pace and output - 'Blonde On Blonde' is *completely* omitted. I'm still scratching my head about that one. The record that best illustrates the genius and contradictions of the end of the era the film look at isn't even given a passing mention! Why? Not particularly interested? Had to cut any segment on it out to make the original TV broadcast time limit? Having said that, this is my sole disappointment with what otherwise is a fruitful and fascinating attempt to nail down the droplet of genius that was/is Robert Allen Zimmerman/Bob Dylan.

"Not as represented" is the phrase used when rating a seller on Amazon.

"No Direction Home" could be validly advertised as concentrating only on the earliest part of Dylan's long career. If it is to be part of a continuing series on the artist, it would be fantastic. But:

The first disk is fascinating. The controversy with the folk purists takes up quite a bit of time.

Unfortunately, the second disk deals with nothing but an old and unimportant controversy. Fewer whining fans and more of Dylan's recent career would have been welcome. Dylan's final impatience at the constant requests for his viewpoints on the whole silly business was very understandable. It ends up being an older fan's documentary about music politics.

The man has moved on. If this documentary was truly about a whole career, why, as my husband said, was there no "Blood on The Tracks"?

When Scorsese finishes the documentary he could just keep Dylan's performances on the second disk and flip the rest. Considering the length of Dylan's career, he's probably going to need the disk space.

The first disk is a treasure -- probably the reason the second disk was such a disappointment.

Scorcese hits a home run with this Dylan documentary. I can watch this over and over and over again. It's phenomenal.