Bob Dylan might have been the one who 'broke folk'

After watching the Dylan film 'A Complete Unknown', I wrote about it on my blog at the time.
Reading that post again after a long time, I thought I would change my perspective a bit and summarize it again on note.

Watching this movie, I thought about it again.
Perhaps Bob Dylan was not a 'folk hero', but rather the one who 'broke folk'.

I suspect that people's impressions of this film vary quite a bit depending on who watches it.

Those who already knew Dylan well versus those who hardly knew him at all.
Or, those who came through folk versus those who knew him from the rock side.

I felt that the view one sees changes significantly depending on that standpoint.

For those who don't know Dylan, everything must have been fresh.
However, for someone who has followed him for many years, the events depicted in the film from around 1961 to 1965 are, in a sense, an 'era that has been told as a legend'.

Even so, when shown again as a film, I couldn't help but be curious.

In the end, I even bought and watched the DVD of the Newport Folk Festival (1963-1965).

In the film, when Dylan performed with an electric set, he was showered with intense boos from folk fans, and things were even thrown onto the stage.

But looking at the actual footage, it didn't seem like a 'hellish scene with objects flying everywhere', at least.

Rather, the problems were:
- Poor sound quality
- Short performance time
- Confusion on the audience side
It seems those factors were also significant.

In fact, he later reappeared with an acoustic guitar and performed several songs.

Of course, Dylan's shift to electric must have still been a shock to the 'folk purists' of the time.
But looking back now, I don't feel that moment was just a 'change of style'.

Wasn't thatthe moment he tried to update 'the folk genre itself'?

Timothée Chalamet, who played Dylan in the film, was truly wonderful.
The way he sang, held the guitar, and carried himself—I think he must have studied it quite a bit.
However, I did feel that the 'mysterious, unfocused expression' he showed at times was a bit heavily influenced by cinematic direction.

The real young Dylan was more natural and, at times, surprisingly charming.

That carefree smile he shows in the Newport footage.
That was unexpected.

And I felt it again.
Music like blues and rock truly never gets old.

In the film, there is a scene where a blues singer sings during a TV show recording, and then sessions with Dylan and Pete Seeger and others.
That performance is truly wonderful.

The sound of a hollow-body electric guitar.
It's a bit rough around the edges, yet raw and strangely alluring.
What's more, it's surprising to learn that the man playing that blues singer was none other than Muddy Waters' son, Big Bill Morganfield.

"Ah, I've finally heard real blues..."

That was the feeling I had.

And then, rock.

The coolness of "Maggie's Farm," which Dylan performed at Newport in 1965 backed by the Paul Butterfield Blues Band.
That was shocking.

Especially Mike Bloomfield's guitar.
That riff.
That tone.
That slightly wild blues feel.
It's irresistibly good.

Moreover, Dylan continued to perform "Maggie's Farm" in his live shows thereafter, changing the arrangement each time.

It became a wild rock song during the 1975-76 Rolling Thunder Revue.
It turned into a funky arrangement with horns at the 1978 Budokan concert.
Even though it's the same song, it's like a completely different thing.

Yet, every version is still unmistakably "Dylan."

"Like a Rolling Stone" is the same.
It keeps living on while changing its form.

On the other hand, what about folk?
Of course, there are many wonderful songs in folk as well.
The lyrics are beautiful, too.

However, I feel that what is called "traditional folk" is strongly tied to the zeitgeist of the 1960s.
It was music that shone brightly precisely because it was that era.

For example, right now,
"I want to master Carter Family picking from here on out"
I don't think there are that many young people who feel that way.

But blues and rock are different.
They keep being updated while changing their form.

And Dylan had already begun that "update" as early as 1965.

Naturally, many folk purists pushed back.
I can understand the feelings of Pete Seeger and others.
For them, folk was not just music, but also an "ideology."

But what if Dylan had followed those voices and continued only as a folk singer-songwriter?
Would he have remained a leading figure for this long?
Or perhaps he might have ended up as just "a person from that era."

Thinking about it that way, the "electric incident" at Newport feels less like a mere controversy and more like a major turning point in music history.

Dylan didn't betray folk.
He refused to "stay in the same place."

That must have been terrifying.
He might be hated by his fans.
He might be criticized by his peers.
Even so, he chose to change.

Perhaps that is why Bob Dylan did not end up as just a person of that era.

As his song goes, the times are always changing.
Society, values, and music as well.
You cannot stop that flow.
That is why he was singing about it from an early stage.

—as in, "The Times They Are A-Changin’."