The Right Side of History

A collection of writings that attempt to connect the meaning of the major and minor events and distractions of today to a broader philosophy of life that tries to strip away the non-sense, spin and lies to reveal something that is closer to truth.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Bronx, New York, United States

We need to realize that we are all prisoners and the prison guards are ourselves. I am trying as hard as I can to divorce myself from my ego and this materialistic nightmare we have created and in the process awaken my spiritual self.

Watch My Videos!!

Click Picture PromoPaid WebPromoWhy PromoTeedo To View
Click Picture Kramer To View
Click Picture Arteries1941 URMyGirlWebPromo2 To View

Monday, October 31, 2005

Law and Order



10/31/05 – Washington DC

Disappointed by the tepid reaction to his bombshell announcement of the indictment of Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff three days ago, a dismayed Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald called a press conference today to announce a very unusual tactic that the prosecutor’s office will pursue in the upcoming trial.

Mr. Fitzgerald has hired actor Sam Waterson to “present” any new information in the future to grand juries, Senate Committees and the media as well as “act” at the upcoming trials.

When Mr. Fitzgerald was reminded that Sam Waterson was not a member of any Bar Association, he assured the skeptical press corps that Mr. Waterson would not be doing any of the “real” legal work. He would just be,

McCoy

He'll fix their ass.




“…the proper image the Special Prosecutor’s office wants to present to an ever growing apathetic public. With his unique combination of boyish charm and moral outrage, Sammy will be able to convince the jury, and the general public, of the obvious; that there is something terribly wrong going on around here.


“Let’s face facts,” Mr. Fitzgerald continued, “when it comes to personality and charisma, I bring absolutely nothing to the table.”

At that point, Mr. Fitzgerald waved his hand at the side entrance which seemed to be a pre-rehearsed cue for a large red curtain to be raised which exposed a waiting Sam Waterson clad in his traditional “Jack. McCoy” suit and tie. After a dramatic pause, he started walking toward the microphone.

Upon reaching the podium, Mr. Waterson immediately lashed out at the assembled press.

“When Mr. Fitzgerald asked me to fill in for him during this time, I immediately said ‘absolutely!’ because I, as an American, can not sit back and allow this kind of misconduct to continue,” he bellowed while slamming his fist down.

“I might not know much about the law in a very real sense,” he said as he gave a knowing glance and took a sip of an unidentified brown liquid from a translucent tumbler, “but I have played a prosecutor for over ten years on a highly rated television show so I think I can easily handle it.”

Giving a wink, Waterson continued, “Besides, I have been a Yankee fan my whole life and these unfolding events are outrageous. As an American citizen I have several questions that need to be answered. How could he betray us like this? Did he not think of the children? Heck, I did not even know The Scooter was still alive.”


When Mr. Waterson was informed that the prosecutor was talking about White House Staffer Lewis "Scooter" Libby and not the legendary Yankee shortstop Phil “The Scooter” Rizzuto, he paused and furrowed his eyebrows. Then he placed his hands in his pockets and looked down to the floor, sliding his foot back and forth and shaking his head.

Finally, after a seemingly long time which was, in reality a few seconds, he looked up with a jerk and said, matter of factly, “You know...I played Lincoln.”

Waterson

"I'll take the needle off the table."





As his face slowly changed from one of seriousness to a sly smile, an audible “aw” emanated from the usually jaded White House Press Corps. which was followed by a thunderous applause.

Perhaps the Union can be saved after all.

Larry


Friday, October 28, 2005

What Have You Seen?

10/28/2005


Oh, what did you see, my blue-eyed son?


Hugging


Oh, what did you see, my darling young one?



index-img-college


I saw a newborn baby with wild wolves all around it


young_recruit


I saw a highway of diamonds with nobody on it


1-2-US-Constitution-parchme


I saw a black branch with blood that kept drippin'


NeedHelp


I saw a room full of men with their hammers a-bleedin'


0327-unemployed


I saw a white ladder all covered with water



brown09_PH


I saw ten thousand talkers whose tongues were all broken



congress


I saw guns and sharp swords in the hands of young children


Young soldiers


And it's a hard


deadmarine


and it's a hard


deadmarines


And it's a hard


deadNOBody


And it's a hard


Iraq


And it's a hard rain's a-gonna fall.


arlington




I know...I Know.
It's only a song.

Make war no more
Larry

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

How Many Times?

10/19/05

How many times can a man turn his head
and pretend that he just doesn't see?


Very famously asked in 1964, this question is still relevant today.


Bush Conference



Yesterday, I sent an e-mail out which featured this link:

Bush draws fire over Iraq soldier video conference



It's the story, for all of those who didn't hear about it, about the latest Bush scandal involving a video conference between Bush and some soldiers stationed in Iraq that was suppose to be spontaneous but turned out to be completely staged, sort of like his "Mission Accomplished" cock piece moment.

In my e-mail, I made some comments to the effect that I found this story very disturbing. In this sorry episode, we find out that not only does the President of the United States have to have his “off the cuff” conferences scripted and rehearsed, (Think about the “Town Hall Meetings” and “Press Conferences” that he has participated in over the last five years) but he also looks so bad doing it. It is obvious that this man, the leader of the free world, does not possess the most rudimentary skills when speaking the English language. This is appalling.

Or, at the very least, embarrassing.

But let’s forget about all that trivial stuff for now because, quite frankly, Bush’s idiocy has been on display for so long there is really nothing left to say.

The thing that I found so disgusting was that this whole thing was an obviously staged dog and pony show, but it was being perpetrated to the American Public as a genuine exchange between the Commander in Chief and his loyal troops.

That is DECEPTION pure and simple.

Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton only lied about getting his cock sucked.

He was impeached.

The administration’s lies, this pathetic display being the latest in a very long line of them, have literally caused the deaths of thousands of people. THAT IS A FACT.

He is “re-elected.”

I ended yesterday’s e-mail with the declarative statement that “This is indefensible.”

Well…I was wrong.

(At this time I would like to apologize to anybody who felt they were, unwantingly, caught in a “C.C. Crossfire” yesterday. There was some e-mail traffic that you might not have wanted so I decided to respond to the last volley in this way so your in-boxes would not have to suffer anymore. Once again, forgive the inclusion if you were so offended. On the other hand, this is your country too!!! Get up off your ass and do something about what the heck is going on around here!!!)


I received several replies suggesting I was the one who was “overreacting” and “What was the big deal?”

But another young man sent me this link with the tag, “Defense is easy when you know where to look”

CounterColumn



I read this response, which is an entry from someone’s blog, and I found it quite intriguing. Well, maybe “intriguing” isn’t the right word.

More like “sad.”

What is presented is not a defense at all, but a rationalization and I am certainly not going to go “point for point” with it for two reasons:

1) The entry represents this gentleman’s personal opinion and we are all entitled to an opinion, except, of course, if people like the author allow the current political party to maintain political power. The author’s opinion is, if I am reading it correctly, that the most recent Bush fiasco was OK because “everybody else does it” and the example he uses is the preparations for some kind of corporate pitch and/or board meeting. Of course, the author fails to mention that the “board meeting” he is excusing as bussiness as usual, is a propaganda event whose sole purpose is to convince everyday hard working Americans to keep supporting an Imperialistic War. And I also doubt that CEO’s, before going into board meetings, rehearse “ad-libs” WITH THE PARTICIPANTS. I saw the tape so, the question is “Who do I trust…You or my lying eyes.”

2) It is a complete waste of time.



But I do have to comment on one segment of this “Emperor Has No Clothes” rebuttal. The author writes, after several accusations of “lefties not supporting the troops” and other such comically arcane bullshit:

Does that mean that the soldiers' comments were insincere? No. There is no reason to believe anyone was up there lying. But that is what the AP would like to imply.


The AP (Associated Press) is slanting the story!!!!!

Let’s see:

There is a videotape of some Whitehouse Flunky running through the “impromptu” questions and answers about a war that IS losing support from all walks of life with a multi-racial group of handpicked soldiers who all give glowing endorsements of the current Administration with ridiculously phony smiles on their faces.



“There is no reason to think that anyone up there is lying.”

Needless to say, the gentleman who wrote this blog never saw Triumph of the Will.

I’m sorry…I just can not stop laughing thinking about this.

But I can’t stop…

Because I know if I do…

I’ll probably cry.


So I left work yesterday thinking of all these things and, I must say, it was not very comforting. My whole commute was consumed with thoughts of an apocalypse. Not the traditional religious “Armageddon” or “Rapture” sought of thing, but a much more subtle one.

An apocalypse that involves erosion, not explosion.

A society of crass materialism, spiritual bankruptcy and hopelessness.

A society totally devoid of dignity, maturity and growth created on the fertile ground of:

Short attention spans due to the well over fifty years of television and the advent of even more powerful media whose primary purpose is TO SELL. Be it Ivory Soap or some corporate/government agenda.

Fear of an unseen enemy that could be ANYONE or anything. A few weeks ago, here in New York City, we were supposed to be…I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP…on the look out for “Mothers with baby carriages who are going to blow up the trains because, they hate us for our freedom.” After this warning, coincidentally issued on the same day as the Mayoral Debate at the Apollo Theatre which the Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg was receiving criticism for for not planning on attending, a slight panic ensued including the managing partner at my firm sending out an “All Employee” e-mail announcing that, “We should not take the subway home.” Of course, it was later revealed that the whole thing was a false alarm. I am sure someone out there reading this feels that this kind of COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP is also justifiable, but I don’t.

The vilification and abandonment of Reason, which has been the guiding philosophy of western culture since the first Italian Renaissance of the early 1500s, in favor of “faith” which, as even true believers well know, is accountable to nobody but God. This is a beautiful way to run one’s personal life, especially when it comes to morality, but it has NO PLACE in representative democracy which, by definition, means accountability.

The vilification of the Intellect, due to well over twenty-five years of right wing propaganda that taught us not to think about anything and, most importantly, do not trust anyone who sounds like they do.



With all of these thoughts swimming in my head, I gazed out the window of the Number One Train as we crossed the Broadway Bridge into the Bronx. I was mesmerized by the unforgiving dilapidated images of urban squalor which hug both banks of the Harlem River. I was transfixed in thought, over powered by the very real by-product of un-tethered Capitalism, “Rugged Individualism” and “Progress.”

In that context, I sat there wondering how I should answer the petty retorts I received earlier. I started to develop in my mind a long winded argument but finally dropped it. Why should I “reinvent the wheel” for people when it is obvious they have no interest in saving our country? What is the point?

I, instead, focussed on what was coming out of my I-Pod Shuffle, which, for anyone who has been in ear shot of me for the last three weeks knows, were Bob Dylan songs. I allowed the music to wash over me like a hot bath after a long day. The cryptic lyrics coupled with the imagery out the window, made for a powerful one-two punch, painting a portrait of betrayal and failure that is as tangible as it is abstract. The experience was actually quite poignant.

How could I put into words the powerful emotions I was feeling at that moment? And, even if I could describe these emotions, how could I possibly link them to this totally disgraceful episode known as “President Bush’s Video Conference.” I know it is all inter-connected, but how can I convince someone who doesn’t know, or doesn’t want to know, that there is such a thing as “cause and effect”?

How do I make a land surveyor see, “The forest for the trees”?

At that exact moment of contemplation which was bordering on despair, I heard some lyrics that made it all so clear.

Now the roving gambler he was very bored
He was trying to create a next world war
He found a promoter who nearly fell off the floor
He said I never engaged in this kind of thing before, but
yes I think it can be very easily done

We'll just put some bleachers out in the sun
And have it on Highway 61.



It was as if the Lord Himself was talking to me, guiding me, giving me the perfect words through my ten dollar Walgreen’s headphones, to answer the doubting Thomas’ of the world.

Amen.

So, today, I sit here, mouth agape, blankly staring at my beige colored, felt covered, cubical partition.

Some may call my behavior apathetic detachment.

Some may call it surrender.

I call it camouflage.

The answer my friend
Is blowing in the wind
The answer is blowing in the wind
Lawrence Blanchard


Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Baseball Is The Constant




10/11/2005

As many of you already know, the New York Yankees and their 200+ Million payroll, were knocked out of the Baseball post-season yesterday by the considerably less rich Anaheim Angels in the fifth game of a five game series by the score of 5 to 3.

Although many teams in the league would be satisfied with JUST making the playoffs, with the kind of money the owner George Steinbrenner spent, needless to say, this first round elimination fell far short of the expectations the organization had at the beggining of the year.

After the game, the hordes of sports writers invaded the Yankees' clubhouse to get the reactions of the disappointed players.

I want to thank Steve Sommers who was doing the "overnight" show last night after the game on 660 WFAN-NY Sports Talk Radio, for playing these two very illuminating audio clips (Which I reprint here verbatim. ) of two of the team's biggest stars, responding to a very typical inane question, from a clueless beat writer, which went something like:

How do you feel about the loss tonight and the year?


Jeter

It's hard, the season's over. It's tough to swallow, but they played better than us. They beat us. We didn't succeed. That's the bottom line. We don't go into the season saying 'hopefully we make the playoffs this year' we go into the season trying to win a Championship and it didn't happen this year so, this is not a successful season, by no stretch of the imagination.

DEREK JETER




A-Rod





I had a great year, something I'm very proud of. I left my guts on the field, I left my heart out there. I'm not going to hang my head. I'm going to learn from it and become a better Yankee.

ALEX RODRIGUEZ




And THAT, my friends, is the difference between a WINNER and a LOSER.

And before you get your Long-Johns all stuck up in the crack of your ass, I know how great A-Hole's numbers are. When you compare them to Derek Jeter's it's no-contest, right?

In fact, I looked their lifetime statistics on Baseball-Reference.com:

Alex Rodriguez

12 Seasons
1901 Hits
429 Home Runs
1226 RBIs
226 Stolen Bases
.307 Batting Average


Derek Jeter

11 Seasons
1936 Hits
169 Home Runs
763 RBIs
215 Stolen Bases
.314 Batting Average



Nice numbers.

Hall of fame numbers for sure.

Hell, Fuck-Rod might even be the Home Run Champ when it's all said and done.

I guess I had my head up my rectum again.

Oh wait a minute...

Silly me, I forgot the most important stat of them all:

Derek Jeter - 4 Championship Rings
Alex Rodriguez - Nil


Don't tell me what's right and wrong.

Fantasy Players LOVE Alex Rodriguez...
Baseball Fans pick Jeter.
Lawrence Blanchard


Tuesday, October 04, 2005

An American Master: No Direction Home




10/4/05

Imagine yourself a young adult in 1964. You are a little bit bored and you are a little bit restless, so you go down to the local record store to pick up an album. You browse the bins that contain all the vinyl records looking for nothing in particular.

This is what you find:

Dylan




The mean, brash young face and the accusatory title, this album cover tells you all you need to know about Bob Dylan.

But if you want a more in depth look into the huge transitional period in American cultural history known as the 1960s, all you have to do is watch the brand new Martin Scorsese documentary "No Direction Home," which aired on the American Masters series on PBS Monday and Tuesday and is also available on DVD.

Scorsese attempts to tell the story of the journey of this one man, Bob Dylan, from Minnesota to New York City, from folk hero to rock star and how, in the process, he truly changed the course of American culture.

In a complete moment of clarity, Martin Scorsese wisely chooses not to make a linear biography of Dylan’s whole career focusing just on the years between 1961 – 1966. Personal relationships, drug use and other such components of his life, the things that would fill a typical and inferior documentary, are rarely mentioned if at all. Instead, the breath and quality of his work as well as the deep impact made on the general culture are highlighted, brought to life by an unbelievable wealth of candid films of the performer and the performances themselves.

There is no official "narrator," making definitive statements of objective truth. The story is told with a series of talking heads, all of who were contemporaries of Dylan, and an extensive interview with Dylan himself commenting on the different events being shown.

The Dylan interview is extremely revealing in the fact that it does not reveal anything except what you, the audience, want it to reveal. His brilliance is in the fact that it is the interviewer who is being exposed.

The documentary features many clips that illustrate this main point. For example, here is an exchange from a press conference between Dylan and one pretty intense "hippy":

Hippy: What is the meaning of the photograph and significance of the "Triumph motorcycle" T-shirt you are wearing on your album cover?

Dylan: What would you like to know about it?

Hippy: It’s an equivalent photograph. It means something. It has a philosophy in it. I like to know visually what does it represent to you because you are a part of it.

Dylan: I don’t know. I haven’t really looked at it that much.

Hippy: Well I have thought about it a great deal.

Dylan: We just took the picture one day. I don’t remember.

Hippy: What about the imagery of the motorcycle in your songs?

Dylan: We all like motorcycles to some degree.

Hippy: I do.


Here is another one between Dylan and a reporter in Sweden:

Reporter: They said that you must be the ultimate beatnik?

Dylan: What do you think? I mean c’mon, between you and me, don’t worry I won’t tell anybody.

Reporter: Well, I have no opinion on that.

Dylan: Why not?

Reporter: Because I have not heard you sing yet.

Dylan: You have not even heard me sing and here you are asking me all these questions.

Reporter: It’s my job.


And with an inexperienced reporter in San Fransisco:

Reporter: Do you prefer songs with an obvious or subtle message?

Dylan: A message? Like what song with a message?

Reporter: Like "Eve of Destruction" and songs like that.

Dylan: Do I prefer that to what?

Reporter: I don’t know. Your songs are supposed to have a subtle message.

Dylan: Where did you hear that?

Reporter: I read it in a movie magazine.



The ridiculousness of these press conferences comes in loud and clear. The fact that there were press conferences at all strikes the modern viewer as silly. Dylan knew this even then and treated these journalists accordingly. In one of the more telling exchanges, I believe he blows the lid off of the whole game:

Reporter: You seem to be embarrassed or reluctant to acknowledge you are a very popular singer?

Dylan: I am not embarrassed. It wasn’t a goal I strived for. It just happened like anything else that happened.

Reporter: But you have no personal thoughts on this?

Dylan: What would you like me to do, jump up in the air and yell Hallelujah and do something freaky for the camera? Just what exactly do you want me to do? Tell me exactly what you want me to do and I’ll go along with you and if I can’t, I’m sure you’ll find someone else to go along with you.



And his present day explanation as to why he acted the way he did was as simple and practical as you can get:

I didn't answer these questions any more or less than any other performer really. For some reason, the press thought that performers had the answers to all of society’s problems… which struck me as absurd.



Think about that simple statement the next time you see a swarm of reporters with microphones surrounding U2’s Bono.

In his interview, Dylan comes off as a lawyer who does not have an agenda. He concedes nothing, no matter how obvious it sounds, which at times seems disingenuous. But, if you truly listen, the end result is understanding yourself a little better.

For example, in the present day interview, he is asked about the 1965 Newport Folk Festival when he infamously "plugged in" and ripped three loud blues driven numbers (Including a seriously cool version of "Maggie’s Farm") causing the overwhelmingly acoustic folk audience to boo unmercifully.

Dylan’s response is:

There was no negativity to the songs really. The booing had nothing to do with what they were hearing.



At first I thought this was a typical line from Dylan, "pretending" not to know or recognize the obvious. But then I thought about what he said and realized that he actually said something that was incredibly deep and cut more to the bone then any other "proper" analysis could.

His answers are cryptic and seem to ignore or deny the obvious for the sake of being a ball-breaker but, if you think about them, also contain a deeper truth and meaning.

Brilliant.

And that sound you heard in the distance was Dylan himself laughing at me writing this.

1961

"To be on your own..."
NYC - 1962


One of the techniques Scorsese uses to really enhance the already riveting material is his use of chronology. The various talking heads (Old Time Folkies and Dylan himself) speak of events that are arranged pretty much in order: Dylan arrives in New York; Dylan gets discovered by John Hammond; Dylan gets signed with Columbia; Dylan goes electric; etc.

Simple enough, but interspersed between the declarative statements of the interviewees are clips from a concert in England filmed in 1966 where the audience is verbally assaulting Dylan.

For example, in one scene you could have the modern day Pete Seeger or Peter Yarrow saying something like, "the power of the songs were their inspiration," and then cut to Dylan in 1966 sitting down at a piano as someone from the audience yells "You should be sent to Vietnam."

In fact the opening of the film has Dylan and Robbie Robertson, his lead guitarist, counting off as the prelude to "Like a Rolling Stone" and someone yells out "Traitor."

These are dramatic juxtapositions and the intensity of the audience’s dislike in the clips from 1966 is palatable. But watch Dylan’s face during these sequences. Whoever filmed these scenes knew what he was doing. He kept the camera tight on Dylan’s face expressing complete resolve. His eyes usually gravitating to the sky, accenting every line.

It is as if he is so immersed in the song he can not hear the "slings and arrows" of his enemies. He doesn’t seem like he is even in the same room.

If that was all "part of the act" it sure as hell convinced me.

I thought of similar concert footage I saw of that same period. The Beatles at Candlestick Park, The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Animals and they were all the same. Four or five guys in matching suits playing a three minute song and then bowing in unison. And then it hit me.

I possibly was seeing scenes from the first "modern" rock concert.

1965

"Your sons and your daughters
are beyond your command..."
London - 1965


What Scorsese achieves using this method is to try to visually demonstrate just how deep Dylan's betrayal was, or how great was his triumph. Because the two scenes he is usually inter cutting are not that far apart in real-time. In one scene he is being cheered by thousands of people after singing "Mr. Tambourine Man" in 1964 and in the next one, only two years later, someone is shouting "Judas" at him.

Did Dylan betray the folk audiences of the early 1960s or was the audience revealing just how shallow they really were?

The movie falls on the side of Dylan and, quite frankly, so does history.

The "folk community" comes off looking rather badly in this film. Here they are acting as the keepers of the flame of "real music" when in reality they were badly out of touch. When Dylan "plugs in" in 1965, Pete Seeger says, "the distortion was terrible. You could not make out the words." That sounds like a cliché. The old man can’t make it out so it must be bad.

And that film of the 1965 Newport Folk Festival...What a historical cultural document!

When Dylan walks off the stage, after playing only three songs to cat calls and hostile booing, a visibly shaken Peter (from Peter, Paul and Mary) comes to the microphone and begs "Bobby" to come back on the stage and play another song with his acoustic guitar. He looks frightened and he is wiping the sweat off his forehead.

What Peter did next, as we are told by Peter himself, through a contemporary interview, is:

...I ran backstage and found Bob in the corner. I went up to him and he said, "What have you done to me?"



Think about that statement for awhile.

Dylan returns to the stage by himself and plays a beautiful acoustic number. By the end of the song, the crowd is roaring with applause, because now he is playing "real music" again.

Fittingly, the song he plays is "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue."

The highway is for gamblers, better use your sense.
Take what you have gathered from coincidence.
The empty-handed painter from your streets
Is drawing crazy patterns on your sheets.
This sky, too, is folding under you
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.


WOW.

What comes in loud and clear is the narrow mindedness of these "folkies" when it came to music and yet they were supposed to stand for "the people." I particularly like the way one of them described the mood in Greenwich Village when the news went around that Bob received a recording contract with Columbia:

We all wanted it, so we made it a moral issue. We had to. What that signing did was make us take a long hard look at ourselves…and we didn’t much like what we saw.



Again, Dylan exposes, just by being.

The unjustified moral indignation heaved at Dylan was beautifully answered musically in the songs "Positively 4th Street" and "Like a Rolling Stone," which, I believe, both talk extensively and relentlessly about phoniness, hypocrisy and betrayal of the so-called liberal left.

Dylan's disgust is pretty obvious with lines like:

You never turned around
to see the frowns
on the jugglers and the clowns
When they all come down and did
tricks for you

You never understood
that it ain't no good
You shouldn't let other people
get your kicks for you

"Like a Rolling Stone" - 1965


and

You see me on the street
You always act surprised
You say, "How are you?" "Good luck"
But you don't mean it

When you know as well as me
You'd rather see me paralyzed
Why don't you just come out once
And scream it

"Positively Fourth street" - 1965


But although those two particular songs seem very specific in nature, I believe the genius of the songs is in their grandeur.

Let us say, for the sake of argument, the subject of Dylan's rant is someone in particular whom we do not know. Couldn't his lyrics also be applied to society in general? Is his comment that this whole place is filled with non-sense and double-talk and the closer we come to recognizing our true feelings and thoughts is the closer we get to actually living? Certainly the press conferences and interviews he participated back that position up.

Of course, that’s what I think.

Dylan himself would probably say, "I don’t know anything about that."

In the end, Scorsese skillfully gives us a portrait of a man who, depending on who you asked, was a poet, sage, shaman, musician, celebrity, traiter, sell-out, singer, beatnik, hippy, goof-off, wise-ass or innovator.

But, most importantly of all, he was himself...and still is.

As Joan Baez, former girlfriend of Dylan, put it perfectly:

For those who are not interested, they can just ignore it and who cares. But for the believers...his stuff cuts deep...real deep.


Bob Dylan is not God.

Bob Dylan is a man who makes you believe there could be one.

This is a must see film.
Lawrence Blanchard