"I had just heard the song New Morning on the playback and thought it had come out pretty good. New Morning might make a good title, I thought and then said it to Johnston. "Man, you were reading my mind. That'll put 'em in the palm of your hand—they'll have to take one of them mind-training courses that you do while you sleep to get the meaning of that". Exactly. And I would have to take one of them mind-training courses to know what Johnston meant by what he just said."
I thought this an interesting 'recollection' .. of course as reading it, I wouldn't think it's even likely this scene happened, if Bob Johnston said this (and Bob would recall that), more what Bob is doing by saying this (maybe a version of the exchange did happen), either way I find it interesting that it is in the book. To me it seems like truths hidden within shadows, and then even just after this, he seems to refer to what he has just done with in the same paragraph. Just further down he says that he did have a book in relation to this type of thing, and
"I thought that the book might help me to continue freeze-framing my image, help me in learning how to suggest only shadows of my possible self."
I suppose part of my enjoyment of reading the book, is the glimpses of something I relate to who Bob Dylan is, lines here and there. Sometimes I sense that he is saying the opposite of how he is, sometimes not. Just opening the book now, the first chapter I turn to. Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood.
"This is a song of crossed wires and false ideas."
I suppose one thing about reading the book, I was barely considering the songs whilst reading the chapters. I'm not sure I even considered the chapters to be 'about' the songs. Each chapter is different though. I sense that some added in later. Some added after the idea of the 'Philosophy' title.
Jesse James. Outlaw.
Certain chapters seem to closer to the John Trudell chapter that I wrote about a few days ago. Truckin'. His words on The Grateful Dead. The words about Townes Van Zandt.
From the 'I've Always Been Crazy' chapter
"Sometimes songs show up in disguise. A love song can hide all sorts of other emotions, like anger and resentment. Songs can sound happy and contain a deep abyss of sadness, and some of the saddest sounding songs can have deep wells of joy at their heart"
Parts like this come here and there in the book. There is chapter where he speaks of people who 'study' music compared to listening to it and 'feeling' it. Which in a way is referring to the the idea of having a book about the 'philosophy' of songs. I think this links to something I wrote a recently about the 'audiobook' of the book, coming out at the same time, all the different people reading the chapters, Bob reading the more 'strange' parts. This is unusual. I think it says something about how Bob Dylan sees the book. The book, with all the photographs in, almost seems like an 'accompaniment' to the audio release of the work.
Sometimes a book shows up in disguise?
When you said, "..in one sense through juxtaposing past and present .."
This reminded me of the last lines of the book
"Though we seldom consider it, music is built in time as surely a sculptor or welder works in physical space. Music transcends time by living within it, just as reincarnation allows us to transcend life by living it again and again."
and at the start of that chapter,
"I feel like I've already written about this song before. But that's understandable because "Where or When" dances around the outskirts of our memory, drawing us with images of the familiar being repeated and beguiling us with lives not yet lived."
To me it seems like the book is referring to itself in ways within the book. The idea of there being a 'philosophy of modern song'. Related to this, I like what you said about, "So, perhaps the title of my essay is misleading, it’s not so much “the” philosophy of PoMS but “the philosophies” of PoMS. "
I found your essay really interesting to read. Many parts reflected some ideas that I would partly sense sometimes, without explaining — how I would read something, and how others might read something, but how you lay them down here, It definitely gives me a sense that I am glad that I read your words. Towards the end you mention the 'fugitive' way of of writing, rebellion, washing over (mentioned earlier) ~ watching the river flow — I also found interesting the links that you made to Mark Twain "Sought to produce a text that existed wholly in the present and thus as authentic." There is an interview with Bob where he is speaking about writing Chronicles Volume One, compared to writing a song. I found that interesting, and reading parts of your essay reminded me of this. He speaks of carrying a song with him, in full, or a sense of it, and then he would go into the studio. With a book like Chronicles, he would have to keep 'going back' to see what he had written previously, which was something that didn't like to do.
Recently I posted a few words on one of the chapters that I recorded my self reading last Autumn.
I mentioned briefly why I think I had a sense of why that is what I wanted to do. I think part of that is related to how I saw the book, the way I would look at it, but I suppose many of this aspects would happen 'quickly' and just be 'natural' .. But I find it interesting to read something written by an academically-trained philosopher, and relating these to some of these half visions glanced here and there. The reference to a 'ladder', taking me in some way to a different place, to then from that place make something new myself, might link to how I would hear a song, and read this book, or even how I first read Chronicles.
Your last line, "In the end, what we take from PoMS is what we bring to it, which is what philosophy is all about." .. and also earlier when you mentioned discussions of what counts as 'philosophy' — I was glad to read this, as in the few words that I put up recently, after briefly explaining my recording of chapters, I typed a little more about how I see the book ~ the descriptions are a little odd, I suppose, but it's the best I could do. I typed out more initially, and then took it out, as I really wanted the piece to be more about how I saw the chapter 'standing alone', not the book as a whole. The parts I took out, included my brief mention of 'what is 'philosophy'?', without any background into the academic side of this, what has been said by others, the definitions. How others might 'expect' something with that in the title. How of course Bob knows this. I also linked this to his choice of album titles previously, 'Self Portrait' in particular, his Nobel Prize for Literature, his first book since then (I noticed reading back, that you referred to that), a sense of this being a wry nod to that possibly .. (this links to the way I would see the book.. when I first saw the title, the cover). I then found myself looking up if there is a 'Nobel Prize for Philosophy', and read about one philosopher receiving the one for literature, but turning it down. At this point I took that segment out, as the piece was really just about this particular chapter.
I will get to the little part I wrote about how I would 'see' the book, how it seems related some of the aspects of your essay here, but just up there I typed the word 'odd', and it reminded me of something else in your essay (Oh, by the way, it's really great that you went to that conference) —
"Consider love. Love is a paradigmatic private emotion - I am not under any obligation to defend or justify to others why I love who I love. It would be mistaken to ask someone “justify to me why you love this person” (though at the same time, not having any reasons for loving someone also seems mistaken, but that’s a different issue). "
Reminded me of the line from I'll Keep It With Mine,
"I can't help it, if you might think I am odd, if I say I'm loving you, not for what you are, but what you're not"
"If I received each of these chapters on notepaper, under the door, inside a strange envelope from who knows where — I opened them, read them, one by one … well this is how I read the book. I think. Something like that anyway. "
I recall I wrote this late at night, and to me this made sense. The next morning I read it back, I suppose reading it in a way with a sense of how others might read it, and it seemed like it would likely not be too clear to some people.
I also wrote,
"I suppose I read each chapter in a way similar to how I would listen to a song. Maybe that is linked to why I recorded these. A way find the music inside the lines. Inside the rain. I hold these lines in my hand, and ask you to defy it."
This reminded me of you saying that he once said, “I want to write from inside me.. "
"Nobody feels any pain / Tonight as I stand inside the rain"
.. and from the same song, which a line that I somehow haven't taken much note of, until now,
"It was raining from the first / And I was dying there of thirst / So I came in here"
Either way, my mention of receiving each chapter after sundown, under the door — I’ll hear your footsteps, you won’t have to knock ... Led me to the idea about this selection of chapters being written, and at a later point in time, being placed inside a book titled 'The Philosophy of Modern Song'
.. The idea I had of how 'others' might begin reading with the idea, the expectation of 'philosophy', a clear lay out of what he is doing here, conclusions drawn upon the wall (Does anyone with any sense of Bob Dylan really expect that? I haven't read any reviews of the book, and made sure I didn't read anything before the book was released, avoided any posts on Bob Dylan forums, and have tended to avoid what others were saying. I was enjoying the book, and that type of thing changes things, when you read all these other peoples ideas.. when you haven't read the book yourself, and read it at different times, when you are different yourself. I suppose I am similar with albums, prefer to listen without knowing what others have been saying. Either way, was it around 1976, The Rolling Thunder film, in a telephone interview, Bob says something like, 'Anyone who expects anything from me at this point must be insane'
Anyway, I mentioned I could imagine some people maybe quickly reading the shorter, note like parts, flicking through, looking for the 'philosophy', the 'meanings', ..and on writing this I considered that I had never strived to even consider what philosophy is, a defintion, other than it could mean a lot of different things.. (I didn't have a set idea what a book with that in the title would be.. even before I get onto the other factors, it being a book by Bob Dylan), so I was interested to see your mentions of this here in your essay, you said that certain philosophers,
"..take philosophy to be closer to poetry than scientific observation, which of course makes it harder to know how to assess or verify philosophical claims."
I did have a sense that in modern times many people might 'over use' the word 'philosophy'. "My philosophy for making toast" and so on. I have noticed this, and I would tend to not use the word. I would rarely, if ever say, 'my philosophy is ..' (I suppose I have an idea of something being philosophical in nature. To me Leonard the Blackbird oftentimes seems quite philosophical..), and yet I have got nothing against 'philosophy' or to read what 'philosophers' are writing, although I think you referred to it in your essay, more about philosophy being a tool, the ladder, whether a 'better' rung or not
".. May you build a ladder to the stars / And climb on every rung " (Or iron folk art monkey bars)
.. about doing something, using something. Going back to the 'use' of the word 'philosophy' .. I sense that Bob would have a similar sense of the word. Have you ever heard him speak of the philosophy of his songs? Can you imagine if an interviewer over the years asked him about to describe the philosophy of this or that. "Why do you right the songs?" . . "Because I want to" .. So to me, when I see the book is titled this way, I get a sense that this isn't of course like one of these modern day phrases .. the over use of the word philosophy. (This is possibly even partly a nod to that). This is Bob Dylan. Although of course maybe something changed. Who knows. I recall in Chronicles Volume One, there is a part where he is discussing and album title. Possibly New Morning. Either he, or the person suggests it, and either Bob or the other person says... (actually I will just get the exact quote, as I think it links quite lot to my theory about the title)
(part two of the reply..)
"I had just heard the song New Morning on the playback and thought it had come out pretty good. New Morning might make a good title, I thought and then said it to Johnston. "Man, you were reading my mind. That'll put 'em in the palm of your hand—they'll have to take one of them mind-training courses that you do while you sleep to get the meaning of that". Exactly. And I would have to take one of them mind-training courses to know what Johnston meant by what he just said."
I thought this an interesting 'recollection' .. of course as reading it, I wouldn't think it's even likely this scene happened, if Bob Johnston said this (and Bob would recall that), more what Bob is doing by saying this (maybe a version of the exchange did happen), either way I find it interesting that it is in the book. To me it seems like truths hidden within shadows, and then even just after this, he seems to refer to what he has just done with in the same paragraph. Just further down he says that he did have a book in relation to this type of thing, and
"I thought that the book might help me to continue freeze-framing my image, help me in learning how to suggest only shadows of my possible self."
I suppose part of my enjoyment of reading the book, is the glimpses of something I relate to who Bob Dylan is, lines here and there. Sometimes I sense that he is saying the opposite of how he is, sometimes not. Just opening the book now, the first chapter I turn to. Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood.
"This is a song of crossed wires and false ideas."
I suppose one thing about reading the book, I was barely considering the songs whilst reading the chapters. I'm not sure I even considered the chapters to be 'about' the songs. Each chapter is different though. I sense that some added in later. Some added after the idea of the 'Philosophy' title.
Jesse James. Outlaw.
Certain chapters seem to closer to the John Trudell chapter that I wrote about a few days ago. Truckin'. His words on The Grateful Dead. The words about Townes Van Zandt.
From the 'I've Always Been Crazy' chapter
"Sometimes songs show up in disguise. A love song can hide all sorts of other emotions, like anger and resentment. Songs can sound happy and contain a deep abyss of sadness, and some of the saddest sounding songs can have deep wells of joy at their heart"
Parts like this come here and there in the book. There is chapter where he speaks of people who 'study' music compared to listening to it and 'feeling' it. Which in a way is referring to the the idea of having a book about the 'philosophy' of songs. I think this links to something I wrote a recently about the 'audiobook' of the book, coming out at the same time, all the different people reading the chapters, Bob reading the more 'strange' parts. This is unusual. I think it says something about how Bob Dylan sees the book. The book, with all the photographs in, almost seems like an 'accompaniment' to the audio release of the work.
Sometimes a book shows up in disguise?
When you said, "..in one sense through juxtaposing past and present .."
This reminded me of the last lines of the book
"Though we seldom consider it, music is built in time as surely a sculptor or welder works in physical space. Music transcends time by living within it, just as reincarnation allows us to transcend life by living it again and again."
and at the start of that chapter,
"I feel like I've already written about this song before. But that's understandable because "Where or When" dances around the outskirts of our memory, drawing us with images of the familiar being repeated and beguiling us with lives not yet lived."
To me it seems like the book is referring to itself in ways within the book. The idea of there being a 'philosophy of modern song'. Related to this, I like what you said about, "So, perhaps the title of my essay is misleading, it’s not so much “the” philosophy of PoMS but “the philosophies” of PoMS. "
I also liked the last line of your essay.
nm.
(part one of the reply..)
I found your essay really interesting to read. Many parts reflected some ideas that I would partly sense sometimes, without explaining — how I would read something, and how others might read something, but how you lay them down here, It definitely gives me a sense that I am glad that I read your words. Towards the end you mention the 'fugitive' way of of writing, rebellion, washing over (mentioned earlier) ~ watching the river flow — I also found interesting the links that you made to Mark Twain "Sought to produce a text that existed wholly in the present and thus as authentic." There is an interview with Bob where he is speaking about writing Chronicles Volume One, compared to writing a song. I found that interesting, and reading parts of your essay reminded me of this. He speaks of carrying a song with him, in full, or a sense of it, and then he would go into the studio. With a book like Chronicles, he would have to keep 'going back' to see what he had written previously, which was something that didn't like to do.
Recently I posted a few words on one of the chapters that I recorded my self reading last Autumn.
(https://nightlymoth.substack.com/p/doesnt-hurt-anymore-john-trudell)
I mentioned briefly why I think I had a sense of why that is what I wanted to do. I think part of that is related to how I saw the book, the way I would look at it, but I suppose many of this aspects would happen 'quickly' and just be 'natural' .. But I find it interesting to read something written by an academically-trained philosopher, and relating these to some of these half visions glanced here and there. The reference to a 'ladder', taking me in some way to a different place, to then from that place make something new myself, might link to how I would hear a song, and read this book, or even how I first read Chronicles.
Your last line, "In the end, what we take from PoMS is what we bring to it, which is what philosophy is all about." .. and also earlier when you mentioned discussions of what counts as 'philosophy' — I was glad to read this, as in the few words that I put up recently, after briefly explaining my recording of chapters, I typed a little more about how I see the book ~ the descriptions are a little odd, I suppose, but it's the best I could do. I typed out more initially, and then took it out, as I really wanted the piece to be more about how I saw the chapter 'standing alone', not the book as a whole. The parts I took out, included my brief mention of 'what is 'philosophy'?', without any background into the academic side of this, what has been said by others, the definitions. How others might 'expect' something with that in the title. How of course Bob knows this. I also linked this to his choice of album titles previously, 'Self Portrait' in particular, his Nobel Prize for Literature, his first book since then (I noticed reading back, that you referred to that), a sense of this being a wry nod to that possibly .. (this links to the way I would see the book.. when I first saw the title, the cover). I then found myself looking up if there is a 'Nobel Prize for Philosophy', and read about one philosopher receiving the one for literature, but turning it down. At this point I took that segment out, as the piece was really just about this particular chapter.
I will get to the little part I wrote about how I would 'see' the book, how it seems related some of the aspects of your essay here, but just up there I typed the word 'odd', and it reminded me of something else in your essay (Oh, by the way, it's really great that you went to that conference) —
"Consider love. Love is a paradigmatic private emotion - I am not under any obligation to defend or justify to others why I love who I love. It would be mistaken to ask someone “justify to me why you love this person” (though at the same time, not having any reasons for loving someone also seems mistaken, but that’s a different issue). "
Reminded me of the line from I'll Keep It With Mine,
"I can't help it, if you might think I am odd, if I say I'm loving you, not for what you are, but what you're not"
https://youtu.be/R40kA5uIVNM
I typed this,
"If I received each of these chapters on notepaper, under the door, inside a strange envelope from who knows where — I opened them, read them, one by one … well this is how I read the book. I think. Something like that anyway. "
I recall I wrote this late at night, and to me this made sense. The next morning I read it back, I suppose reading it in a way with a sense of how others might read it, and it seemed like it would likely not be too clear to some people.
I also wrote,
"I suppose I read each chapter in a way similar to how I would listen to a song. Maybe that is linked to why I recorded these. A way find the music inside the lines. Inside the rain. I hold these lines in my hand, and ask you to defy it."
This reminded me of you saying that he once said, “I want to write from inside me.. "
"Nobody feels any pain / Tonight as I stand inside the rain"
.. and from the same song, which a line that I somehow haven't taken much note of, until now,
"It was raining from the first / And I was dying there of thirst / So I came in here"
Either way, my mention of receiving each chapter after sundown, under the door — I’ll hear your footsteps, you won’t have to knock ... Led me to the idea about this selection of chapters being written, and at a later point in time, being placed inside a book titled 'The Philosophy of Modern Song'
.. The idea I had of how 'others' might begin reading with the idea, the expectation of 'philosophy', a clear lay out of what he is doing here, conclusions drawn upon the wall (Does anyone with any sense of Bob Dylan really expect that? I haven't read any reviews of the book, and made sure I didn't read anything before the book was released, avoided any posts on Bob Dylan forums, and have tended to avoid what others were saying. I was enjoying the book, and that type of thing changes things, when you read all these other peoples ideas.. when you haven't read the book yourself, and read it at different times, when you are different yourself. I suppose I am similar with albums, prefer to listen without knowing what others have been saying. Either way, was it around 1976, The Rolling Thunder film, in a telephone interview, Bob says something like, 'Anyone who expects anything from me at this point must be insane'
Anyway, I mentioned I could imagine some people maybe quickly reading the shorter, note like parts, flicking through, looking for the 'philosophy', the 'meanings', ..and on writing this I considered that I had never strived to even consider what philosophy is, a defintion, other than it could mean a lot of different things.. (I didn't have a set idea what a book with that in the title would be.. even before I get onto the other factors, it being a book by Bob Dylan), so I was interested to see your mentions of this here in your essay, you said that certain philosophers,
"..take philosophy to be closer to poetry than scientific observation, which of course makes it harder to know how to assess or verify philosophical claims."
I did have a sense that in modern times many people might 'over use' the word 'philosophy'. "My philosophy for making toast" and so on. I have noticed this, and I would tend to not use the word. I would rarely, if ever say, 'my philosophy is ..' (I suppose I have an idea of something being philosophical in nature. To me Leonard the Blackbird oftentimes seems quite philosophical..), and yet I have got nothing against 'philosophy' or to read what 'philosophers' are writing, although I think you referred to it in your essay, more about philosophy being a tool, the ladder, whether a 'better' rung or not
".. May you build a ladder to the stars / And climb on every rung " (Or iron folk art monkey bars)
.. about doing something, using something. Going back to the 'use' of the word 'philosophy' .. I sense that Bob would have a similar sense of the word. Have you ever heard him speak of the philosophy of his songs? Can you imagine if an interviewer over the years asked him about to describe the philosophy of this or that. "Why do you right the songs?" . . "Because I want to" .. So to me, when I see the book is titled this way, I get a sense that this isn't of course like one of these modern day phrases .. the over use of the word philosophy. (This is possibly even partly a nod to that). This is Bob Dylan. Although of course maybe something changed. Who knows. I recall in Chronicles Volume One, there is a part where he is discussing and album title. Possibly New Morning. Either he, or the person suggests it, and either Bob or the other person says... (actually I will just get the exact quote, as I think it links quite lot to my theory about the title)