 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||
| DYLAN Dylan a God ? He's not a God. He's a man who made commitments to his talent and his art that he has never broken. He's not a God. His music and writing have touched God-like spaces, and exposed us to them, but he is a man. He's a man who, experiencing and witnessing pain and love, has distilled them into his work, his art, his trade. He has done this often magnificently, always uniquely. But he's not a God. He's a man. He's a man who has achieved mastery in his craft. The mastery reminds us of God. But he's not a God. Gods are for worshippers. Gods are for image-swallowers. Dylan is too good for that. Dylan is too real. His music doesn't suck our energy; it gives us energy. It doesn't matter whether or not Dylan loves us. Because of his commitment to his music, it loves us. He's not a God. He's a man with a man's flaws, a man's gifts, a man's dilemnas, a man's shadows and passions. He has owned these, inhabited them, lived them, passed through their fire. Without them he could not have written what he has. Or sung how he has. Or told his own story and in doing so, told ours. He's not a God. He's a man. Thank God. Mike Scott, Findhorn 2002 |
