Bob Dylan’s Noble Prize in Literature has been nothing if not controversial. It is generally considered the first time the award has been given to a songwriter – though the work of Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore crossed the boundaries with song. Dylan is certainly not a novelist, playwright or poet (unless song lyrics are considered poetry) but then neither was Winston Churchill, who received the award for his historical works.
Is the Dylan decision really a radical departure? And, if so, is it a good one?
Reaction falls roughly into four camps.:
Thesis 1: Giving Bob Dylan the Nobel is an inspired choice which acknowledged the fluidity of literature as a genre and the importance of Dylan as the voice of a generation.
Thesis 2: This is a ridiculous decision which over-inflates an ageing hippie who wrote some good songs but whose work lacks the subtlety of great literature.
Thesis 3: Dylan is a great songwriter but he does not write literature and giving him a prize for literature undermines the real value of the art form of the novel, drama and poem.
Thesis 4: Dylan is just another white, ageing, American, male. There’s nothing radical about this decision which is less radical than the controversy suggests.
To see who thinks what and how they expressed it scroll down or watch the slideshow.
