I've got some habits
That I can't explain
~ Bob Dylan, 바카라Why Try To Change Me Now?바카라
On 13 October, the day the Nobel Prize was conferred on Bob Dylan he gave a concert at Las Vegas. He did not mention the Prize or his feelings about receiving it on that occasion. During another concert in Coachella the next day, he yet again kept silent about it. Dylan바카라s official website removed mention of the prize after putting up the sentence, 바카라winner of the Nobel prize in literature바카라 on the page for The Lyrics: 1961-2012.
The world was informed that Dylan did not respond to repeated phone calls from the Swedish Academy, which made a prominent member call him 바카라impolite and arrogant바카라 on public television. All this has intensified speculations whether Dylan is going to repeat Jean-Paul Sartre바카라s gesture in 1964 and reject the Nobel honour. Are there grounds for Dylan to repeat Sartre?
Sartre had spelt out his reservations about receiving the prize in a famous statement made to the Swedish Press, where he regretted that his rejection 바카라has become something of a scandal바카라. He wasn바카라t aware, he said, that the award is given without 바카라consulting the opinion of the recipient.바카라
Sartre바카라s central argument for the rejection was his political belief that a writer must refuse to be 바카라transformed into an institution, even if this occurs under the most honorable circumstances바카라. He justified his rejection by explaining his consistency: He had earlier refused the Legion of Honor, never sought to become part of the Collège de France, and maintained he would not accept the Lenin Prize despite his ideological predilections. But Sartre turned back on his own principle regarding Pasternak, calling his nomination for the Nobel 바카라regrettable바카라 for he was 바카라banned in its own country.바카라 It is Sartre바카라s hypocritical logic that is regrettable, siding with the censorship of the Soviet establishment instead of Pasternak바카라s anti-institutional writing.
The literary world got fiercely divided on the news of Dylan getting the Nobel. Margaret Atwood said on BBC News, she finds a 바카라strategically placed바카라, broad political message behind awarding Dylan the prize this year, with the US elections coming up and the Academy selecting a 바카라counter cultural figure from the 60s바카라. Salman Rushdie and Joyce Carol Oates are the other serious literary figures to have welcomed the award.
It sounds unlikely that the lukewarm response from the literary world could have hurt Dylan. Meanwhile, there are clues on offer. Dylan ended the Las Vegas concert with his version of Frank Sinatra바카라s famous song, 바카라Why Try To Change Me Now?바카라 The lyrics appear teasingly resonant for the occasion: 바카라So let people wonder / Let 'em laugh / Let 'em frown / You know I'll love you / Till the moon's upside down.바카라 Is that Dylan singing to his fans, his fellow Rastafarians, as much as to the wider world? That he will remain the distant mystic, the contrarian Prophet, the devil-may-care troubadour? Then there is surely a whimsical method behind his silence that has already caused something of a scandal.
Perhaps the most Sartrean characteristic in Dylan is his ability to contradict himself. Sartre often acknowledged his contradictions regarding the status of the 바카라other바카라 and god, in his existential philosophy.
Sartre also took contradictory political stands vis-à-vis the communist regimes of his time. Dylan gave contradictory remarks in his interviews on whether he considered himself a poet or not. To Nora Ephron and Susan Edmiston, Dylan said, 바카라I don't call myself a poet because I don't like the word. I'm a trapeze artist.바카라
In the interview to Rolling Stone, when asked if he was 바카라a poet, a singer, a rock & roll star바카라, Dylan replied, 바카라All of those. I see myself as it all바카라 poet, singer, songwriter... all of it. I'll be it all. I feel "confined" when I have to choose one or the other.바카라
The Dylan mystique is helped by the poet musician바카라s refusal to attach a customary label to his creative identity and his unwillingness to grade his artistic skills.
Sara Danius, the permanent secretary of the Swedish Academy, has underscored, Dylan will remain the recipient of the 2016 Nobel Prize for Literature whether or not he delivers the Nobel lecture at the ceremony he has been invited to, whether or not he accepts the prize. The songwriter and singer will be forever tied to that acclaim as much as Sartre. By not accepting it however, Dylan will intensify debates that will no longer narrow their scope on whether he deserves the award or not. That would be the most poetic twist Dylan can offer to the tale of a world divided in its opinion regarding his literary status.
(Manash Firaq Bhattacharjee is a poet, writer and political science scholar from JNU. He has most recently contributed to Words Matter: Writings Against Silence, edited by K. Satchidanandan (Penguin, 2016).He is currently Adjunct Professor in the School of Culture and Creative Expressions at Ambedkar University, New Delhi)
