“Only Dylan shows something equivalent to the Beatles in his combination of talents as a composer, lyricist, and performer.”
Richard Poirier writing in Partisan Review in 1967
•
When contemplating serious rock and roll in terms of rivalry, the tendency is to compare the Beatles with the Rolling Stones. And why not? The two groups led the musical British invasion of the 60s. With all due respect to other bands, some of them great in their own right, the Beatles and the Rolling Stones are the two best. One question will persist: Who’s your favorite, the Beatles or the Stones?
By the way, my favorite group is the Stones. But it has to be conceded that the Beatles are considered the best. Their impact was (and is) second to none. But aside from considering rivalry in rock and roll, a more important consideration is which individuals had the most parallels. Because whereas the Beatles and the Stones made up the greatest rivalry, the Beatles had more parallels with Bob Dylan. The Beatles maintained a constant eye on Dylan and vice-versa.
Jim Windolf of The New York Times has provided a thoughtful consideration of Dylan and the Beatles in their mutual context in “Where the Music Had to Go: How Bob Dylan and the Beatles Changed Each Other—and the World.” Let me say first that Windolf has contributed a valuable tool in music scholarship. His book will come as a revelation to most fans who are under the impression that the Beatles’ main rivalry was with the Rolling Stones.
But let me also say that Windolf’s book is more informative than persuasive. The premise of the book is the influence Dylan and the Beatles had on each other. It’s not clear that Windolf makes his case. There are mutual influences between Dylan and the Beatles. The Beatles had in mind Dylan’s “John Wesley Harding” when they recorded “Rocky Racoon” on the “White Album” in 1968. And the Beatles compositions “You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away” and “Norwegian Wood” are Dylanesque. Nor is there any doubt that Dylan and the Beatles cherished the comparisons. They shared mutual admiration and their friendship was deep.
To be sure, Dylan and the Beatles had much in common. Both were huge fans of Elvis Presley and were even more influenced by Little Richard (who befriended both Dylan and the Beatles). Indeed, Dylan and the Beatles both had a debt to Black American artists and they were forthright in acknowledging this debt.
So Dylan and Beatles had much in common (on top of undisputed genius). But how much alike was their music? Dylan began as a folk artist before going electric. And even after having gone electric, Dylan never abandoned his folk roots. For their own part, the Beatles were masters of pop music in the early to mid 60s before going psychedelic. Both Dylan and the Beatles put out their share of love songs (or love gone wrong songs). But there is still more to contrast than to compare.
Of course, what Dylan had most in common with the Beatles was drugs. Dylan introduced the Beatles to marijuana when they first met in 1964. And both Dylan and the Beatles had nice things to say about LSD. John Lennon’s heroin problem was common knowledge. That Dylan had a bout with heroin addiction came to me as a surprise.
British pop group The Beatles, from left to right: George Harrison (1943 – 2001), Paul McCartney, John Lennon (1940-1980) and Ringo Starr, in Sweden in 1963. Keystone/Getty Images
As stated, Dylan and the Beatles were friends. When Dylan was heckled by crowds accusing him of selling out (for introducing the electric guitar to his music), the Beatles remained loyal to their friend. What was ironic is that Dylan continued to tour despite hostile audiences while the Beatles stopped touring in 1966 despite enthusiastic audiences.
Windolf goes deep into treatment of Dylan’s tension with the crowds over his electric sounds. He also treats Dylan’s 1964 motorcycle accident with the eye of a journalist. Windolf relates how Dylan’s injuries in his motorcycle accident might not have been as serious as reported. He was never hospitalized and seemed to have just wanted to disappear out of exhaustion.
“Where the Music Had to Go” is a first rate book in terms of both history and journalism. Whether Windolf makes his case on the influence Dylan and the Beatles might have had on each other the reader can decide. But the book is a must read for anyone interested in the huge strides in music which define the 60s.
John O’Neill of Allen Park writes a weekly review.
John O’Neill
