Piranga wrote:
 
It's a mutation

I give it an 8. The words are baffling but thoroughly interesting. The melody is nice enough. The singing, well, I'm not going to add anything someone else probably hasn't said more eloquently. 

Never knew that Zimmy used all the other names shown on the Wiki page here.

So many people don't understand how great Dylan is, it's like not understanding how great Shakespeare is.

 Canadese wrote:
 
Well, sure, but whenever someone posts a negative comment, they get shouted down. So looks like a bunch of people (understandably) don't like this, hit 1, and moved on.
 
This is definitely not one of Dylan's best.

 aspalathin wrote:
 

"Oh, Mama, can this really be the end"

Every time he says it, I get my hopes up that it's almost over.

Yet it goes on and on, interminably so.

Feels like I'm getting trolled simultaneously by both the artist and the DJ.  

Almost as many 1s as 10s. That says it all. I don't have the BD gene. it's a 1 for me.

10

The torture never stops.

It's not "you must know about my debutante," it's "you know you know about my debutante." 

What is he singing about?

 Canadese wrote:
 

RP more Dylan please!

I can't believe this only has a 6.6 rating, especially with all the positive comments.
A true classic Dylan song worth a 9 every day.

The genius of the song is so apparent it takes only a minute for it to work it's magic on me, which frees me up to move on with my day.

 stalfnzo wrote:
 

Yes... it is.

That's it! 

His shows are always special, but for the two I'm gonna see in October, I'm gonna search for debutantes. 

I once had a  young female chorus sitting behind me, singing "blowin in the wind",  while he was singing it on stage. 

They sounded and looked like angels.  Or maybe...debutantes. 
   

I confess to a perverse liking of the Sisters of Mercy line "Stuck outside of Memphis in a mobile home".

Bobby,

Get your ass back here for Summer tour!

Geeeez, Summer is almost 1/2 over!

Nope. No matter how hard I try, it just doesn't work for me.

I suppose this is how my wife feels about Phish.

Went downstairs for a potty break, came back and Bob's still banging on. 

 dc_zee wrote:Proclivities wrote: 
I've always thought part of Bob's brilliance was how his timing and phrasing changes subtlety throughout a song (esp. on this cut) and the use of that technique provides part of the story of the song.  Repeating the chorus in this song many times is sort of an expression of the idea of being 'stuck' and yet even when one is stuck things can change, if ever so slightly, and that to me is the beauty of this song.  I'm sure my discussion here is not well expressed...and my guess is that 'experts' have written A LOT about this exact idea already.  Still....that's how my ears/brain feel it and that's the whole point, right?  LONG LIVE RP and Bob Dylan!!  10→11!! 

 dc_zee wrote: 
By "of the time", do you mean it sounds like it was recorded in 1966?  I'm not sure which cadence you you mean by "between the refrains".  I assume by "refrain" you mean the chorus ("Oh, mama, can this really be the end.......with the Memphis blues again")  The parts between them (the verses) sound like the phrasing of a lot of Dylan's stuff and that other folk singers of that time.

The comments seem (understandably) focused on the lyrics.  I find the cadence of the song between the refrains to be so of the time (1966 release I believe) and wonder if musicians could enlighten me further on that?

Man, this album and this track in particular still speak to me.

Bill, I played this on my radio show last Friday.  Are you listening?

Its Friday! Where are the debutantes! And what do they need? 

brilliant. you have to have been stuck to understand the lyric and the urgent bitterness. classic dylan. 

 lizardking wrote: 
Me too on the PS.  Always enjoy your comments, and will track you down at the funeral!  Have always loved this song, BTW.

 On_The_Beach wrote: 
Yes, that title "Blonde on Blonde" probably meant something different then than it does now so he would get lots of click bait on Youtube!
 

 idiot_wind wrote:
 
  Oh yeah, Bobby's up all night counting his "likes" on Facebook!

Uh oh.  It appears that Bob's songs have some people irritated, annoyed, and maybe upset. 

Wow...that's never happen before. I'm sure Bob will change his musical approach as to stay trendy and perhaps get some tweets, and get mentioned on various forms of social media.         

Oh mama can it really be PSD time again?

Aaawww, Momma, Can This Really Be The End? Down and Out in Vegas, with Amphetamine Psychosis Again?  — H.S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Part 2.10)

 kurtster wrote: 
Key words here "no one".  The rest of us notice.

Funny how no one notices the musicianship behind stuff like this.  This is a superb riff, hooky even.  Some crazy drumming, a wistful organ.  Much more going on besides Bob's singing.

Almost 25 years ago I lived in an apartment building on 3rd St. in Brooklyn. Neighbors on my floor would have regular Dylan singalong parties. 6, 8 people knew most of the lyrics and they'd be in the unit across the hall Rolling Stoning Rainy Day Womening Memphis and Tombstone Bluesing until midnight. The knowledge and the passion was incredible. 

Still sucks!

Aaarrrrgh!  Why does this song never end??  AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!

When I saw Bob in concert in Oct, he did not have his Nobel prize in display. Bummer.

However, he did have a grammy showcase on his piano.  

Gosh...what an ego!

Please make it stop.

Please make it stop.

Saw him live 2 mths ago for the first time and he blew me away with his creativity...

Mr. Dylan’s lecture

Super Artist : )

 hakuindude wrote: 
Agreed.
Bob's music is not for the simple-minded.

Stop! Stop! Stop! Make it end already! Thank Goddess for the mute button.

Whomever keeps stepping on the cat's tail... please stop, right now!
 

He's going to pick up his Nobel soon, seeing as he'll be stuck in Stockholm agin.

Thank Goddess for the mute control.

 talus wrote: 

 pontfarrer wrote: 
Neither did I until I was challenged by a writing teacher.

Sometime, go stand on a corner and try to write allegories or metaphors to fit your observations.  Afterwards, I expect you'll have a new appreciation.

 

Just once, I wish I could meet a debutante.

But how would a person figure out what she wants and not need?

Ahhhhh....the age old insights raised by Bob Dylan.

Perhaps Bob will do more of this at his upcoming Nobel Prize event.  
    

 pontfarrer wrote: 
Too bad is all I can say.  I LOVE this song.  Maybe you just had to be there..  or actually lived some of this..  hard to explain, but I love that RP plays things like this.  But I sort of get it - I don't get Talking Heads..  or Opera..

 jab49 wrote: 
 . I'm visualising Mr. Burns recording many many songs in a studio and then replaying it over and over again at the nuclear plant to all his beloved workers 

 danayork wrote: 
Agreed! Maybe Dylan is the real voice-over for Mr Burns?
Burns giving advice to Homer, playing Golf, when Homer is stuck in a bunker:  "Use an open-faced club - a sand wedge" . Homer: "Mmm, open-faced club sandwich!"

that Mr Burns comment is the most accurate thing i've ever heard

STUCK inSIDE of MObile WITH the MEMphis BLUES aGAIN

 

 aspalathin wrote: 
LMAO! Ugh! My ears. Make it stop. 

Sounds like Mr. Burns singing

Play it louder! Genius is an acquired taste.

what a tune 

 marklaw wrote: 
Spot on Marklaw - one has to "see" beyond the voice which surprisingly, on such an eclectic station, so many appear to not have this ability

The singing is so annoying that I gave it a 7 for the attempt to get us all annoyed and not notice the fairly good lyrics.

Einmal ist keinmal.

hey Abilene,

How does it feel? To be stuck in inside of Abilene with the Dylan blues again?. 

 pontfarrer wrote: 
Gotta agree with you. 

 bam23 wrote: 
Nice sum up.  Commenting on Dylan's singing is like, well, commenting Leonard Cohen's singing,  What's the point?  That's not what they are about or what they bring to the table IMO.

 treatment_bound wrote: 
"...when 'as (sic, I suppose) he built a fire on main street and shot it full holes." is what I suspect is the blown/missed lyric referred to. I've always noticed this odd vocal gap. Considering that this happened after numerous takes, I guess it was seen as acceptable, even though 40+ years later the oddity still remains. What I find odd is the strong dislike this song elicits from so many listeners to this eclectic station. In a world where Arrowsmith songs still pollute the air in apparent perpetuity, I feel there is no shame in appreciating genuinely transgressive music. So there, you PSD types!

Ohhhhhh Mama ,,,, this song is at an end....

 pontfarrer wrote: 
Same here. I understand the poetry but not how he manages to pass off as a singer at all.

 pontfarrer wrote: 
Mr. Zimmerman is definitely an acquired taste. I had a guitar teacher years ago that was a Bob Dylan wack a doo. He spent more time talking about ol Bob than teaching guitar. Drove me nuts and back to my drum kit.   

torture, pure torture ... it doesn't end ... !!!!!

I so wish RP didn't play Bob Dylan ... I don't get him at all ....

Almost broke my neck lunging for the PSD button.

 tkosh wrote: 

Thanks for the thumbs up, tkosh.

Just listened to it again on some vinyl...where's the "blown lyric"? 

Everybody in my alien space craft loves this song...  we be dancing like Willy Shakes...

for information about Bob Dylan's album that was released 46 years after this song, look here... 

 treatment_bound wrote: 
I always thought, too, because of the one blown lyric, this was recorded in one take.  Very interesting!

git ya some of that..

Opinion on this runs the gamut, but consider the times it was released into! Radical! Having fun! I really liked hearing it in a set with Hey St. Peter; it's so fun to hear how vocal inflections and timing can be used as part of the instrumentation/ arrangement of a song...

 mollie1202 wrote: 
Go do something else.  I ran to my computer to turn up the volume so I could enjoy this incredible song one more time (of many dozens).  Thanks RP for playing great music.

 akdavey wrote: 
Ah come on now....

 treatment_bound wrote: 
Hard to believe he could come up 20 takes as bob has that nasal tone perfected

uck .. add me to the list of haters. again.

 msymmes wrote: 
According to Wiki, they recorded this song 20 times...BELIEVE IT OR NOT!




>>All twenty takes of "Stuck Inside of Mobile" were recorded on February 17, 1966, in Columbia's Music Row Studios in Nashville. Earlier that day, Dylan had been writing, and he continued to do so in the studio, revising lyrics and changing the song's structure as he recorded different takes. Eventually, a master take, the twentieth and final take, was chosen after recording the song for three hours.  Take five would eventually be released on The Bootleg Series Vol. 7.

 steeler wrote: 
Oh Mama! 

I love it when this song comes on RP!  48 years of Bob Zimmerman' haters always come out of the woodwork.

Complaints about this song's length are akin to complaining that an engrossing novel would have been better and more easily digested as a comic strip.  

I get distracted from work every time this song comes on RP !     I can picture these guys recording this in one take.  It just seems spot on thoughout !

 

 meauclaire wrote: 
Sadly, they do - I love this song

I'm politely asking, please stop playing Bob Dylan's "Stuck Inside of Mobile with the Memphis Blues Again"
I am seriously going crazy every time you play this song. (also it's a very long song...)

Oh mama can this horrible nasal whine EVER end? ARRRRRRRGH!   Thank Goddess for the mute control.

 akdavey wrote: 
no, it's you.

 akdavey wrote: 
Contrary to your statement, this is one of the few Dylan songs that I don't want to turn off right away.

Just such an annoying song. This is the type of Dylan song that turns people away from him.

make it stop.  

 One of the finest albums ever made   

 Krakus wrote: 
oh andy yes yes ooohhh

 Krakus wrote: 

Thanks a lot, I got it now.

 Biscobret wrote: 
Just checked it out online. It's a stylish 2-minute spot, gushing Americana, and I'd like to think he's promoting Chrysler because he actually believes in the company, but still, you can't help but cringe a little when you know that ultimately, it was just an easy paycheque.

I wanna hear it again now.  What a great songwriter he was.  Again, again!!



(That being said, 1970 Dylan would punch 2014 Dylan in the face after seeing that Chrysler commercial!)

 meauclaire wrote: 
That's 39 verses better than the typical lame song that gets written today.

Do his songs ever end?  I think 40 verses is quite enough.

Every time I listen to Dylan, I can't get a picture of Floyd the Barber out of my head.

Such is genius..!

Sorry to besmirch the spirit of an acknowledged classic, but I keep thinking of a famous photo of Alexander Calder crossing a street carrying one of those contraptions - you know what it's called.

What's the matter with you people... it's DYLAN. Even at his worst he is better than anyone.

one of my favorite Dylan songs!

I really like this song.  It's the playing and not the singing nor the lyrics that turns my crank.
 

 MilesW wrote: 
With all due respect...you're being redundant with your comment. Bob Dylan's endings are the best! They lead to a different song entirely.

why is he singing like that? is he doing an impression of himself?

Worst Dylan song ever....

 rdo wrote: 
Too often in your debates with me you resort to sweeping, unsupported generalizations.

"These are all the robotic A-students who swallow whatever the other robotic A-student professors cram down their throats.  They are required to agree with them, or they will not get a degree. There is no room in there for honest debate about the value of art." 

Exhibit A. Wow. Putting aside issues of financial and opportunity costs related to studying art, music, literature, etc. in college, the value gained from the experience is up to student's diligence and the competence of the professor. Personally, I disagreed with my literature professors when I wanted to and at times disagreed strongly. My professors never insulted me for or dropped my grades for it. I have never read of cases supporting your assertion that "there is no room in there for honest debate about the value of art." Christ, debates rage within college departments and between university faculties over critical theories and interpretative approaches.

But you claim that professors force all students to toe the line of critical theories in order to succeed. Sorry, NO. It's such a ridiculously overgeneralized and undeveloped claim that I would be embarrassed to publicly assert it. 

"Academics are useful in that they do hard research, but the decision behind this research reflects what the real aesthetes in the public have already validated."  

And just who are these "real aesthetes" ? Who made them the collective fount of wisdom? What makes them real? Did their genius erupt spontaneously from within them like Athena emerging from Zeus's head? Did they gain their aesthetic insights and authority without any formal education, or did they somehow all escape the collegiate robot-factories you feverishly dream about and smash away the dogmas that threatened to enchain them? And how do you distinguish academics from "real aesthetes", especially when academics write highly influential reviews, champion a work or artist and otherwise look a helluva lot like "real aesthetes"? Your distinction between the two groups rings false. And then you throw in "professionals"--a third group? Are "real aesthetes" not "professionals"? Are they independently wealthy do-gooding freelancers, like Batman?

"His (Proust's) reputation is what it is because millions of readers like me have read and loved him and sang him praises from the mountaintops.  That is the reason academics decided to study him (it's after the fact, as it is in all similar cases)."

I'm very impressed with your millions of readers, because the latest English translation of À la recherche du temps perdu apparently holds the Guinness World record for longest novel. Maybe there are secret Proust boot camps where drill sergeants force recruits to read 100+ pages of Marcel a day. And they all fucking love him by the end of their ordeal. 

Look: we've had this debate before, mostly about music and I doubt you want to rehash it. I fully agree with your apparent assertion that the public has a large hand in determining which works are great and enduring, and that academics study these works because the public has determined they are great. However, it actually is OK for the direction of influence to go in the opposite direction and it does happen quite a bit. Critics and academics do bring artists to the attention of the public, which in turn come to embrace those artists' works. William Faulkner was largely out of print by WWII and the critic Malcolm Cowley helped re-establish him as a literary figure. Faulkner was intensely grateful to Cowley for his influence: "I owe Malcolm Cowley the kind of debt no man could ever repay.” I doubt James Joyce or TS Eliot could have succeeded commercially without positive critical reception and the attention of academics prior to their becoming famous. 

I don't know how well "In Search of Lost Time" sold at first. My guess is that when the second book won the Prix Goncourt in 1920, the public began to notice and buy Proust's work. Winning a literary prize like the Nobel, Pulitzer or Prix Goncourt make sales skyrocket. While some prizes are given to works that have had popular success--the Pulitzer often goes to works that have already sold well--most of the time a small group of people determine the awarding of those prizes on that group's determination of merit. Critics, "real aesthetes", and academics award those prizes, which in turn drive sales and enduring recognition. 

And certainly even great writers such as these need later critics and academics to repeat words of their greatness in order to remain in print. The public doesn't sing the praises the of Proust from the mountaintops all on its own down the track of time. It needs to be reminded from time to time by publishing houses, other writers, critics and gosh yes academics that Proust was amazing and that his 4000+ tome is still worth reading. The fame of Proust doesn't thrive on its own and neither do sales of his books. Commercially popular and well-reviewed writers do OTOH disappear from public memory (John Dos Passos says hi; he's becoming more popular now that the USA Trilogy got re-published). 

There is a give and take between art and the public. Some art requires you to stretch, to look at or listen to it more than once before you understand and like it. We both agree on that I think. I think that artists owe it to their audiences to help them perceive or learn the purpose of a work and its underlying structure so that those audiences can better appreciate those works. It's up to the individual to determine how hard s/he wants to work to understand a work of art; some people simply don't see the point of reading thousands of pages of Proust before the narrator presents his theory about remembering lost time. Others do and are willing to learn how to think about Proust from "real aesthetes", critics and those goddamned academics--either because they see advertising for the new translation of Proust or because they have a vague (and yes, possibly dangerous) notion that really getting Proust will make them smarter, more enlightened, cultured, etc.

No one is forcing those readers to agree with the "experts." Even massive, complex works like "In Search of Lost Time" and "Ulysses" can be enjoyed merely by reading them and not consulting other books (Joyce believed that the popular public could love "Ulysses" just like that).  There is no cultural Gestapo...well, maybe in North Korea and other such places where yes you are told to love certain works of art and your life as well as your grade depend on toeing the line. But I do think that people who care about literature and other forms of art do pay some attention to what "experts" think is great art; it's not all just bandwagoning off of Amazon sales and pretty four-color ads. 

What I'm saying to you, rdo, is this: over time, you went from reading stuff like Beatrix Potter to really enjoying Proust. You did not get there on your own and I doubt you discovered Marcel all on your own, prior to someone (a friend, a "real aesthete" ) mentioning him as a Great Writer. I invite you to think about how you became such a sophisticated, intelligent and patient reader that you can sincerely enjoy such a tough work. (I really believe that you love Proust).  My guess is that your appreciation of all forms of art comes from a mix of sources, including "experts" or "real aesthetes" or "academics" who persuaded you that you could accept and absorb some of their opinions about Proust et al. as your own. Whether you've been brainwashed at some point is up for you to decide. My guess is that you've listened to people, perhaps academics, put out opinions about art and have rejected some of those opinions. But you've likely agreed with such people at least some of the time...

But I do wish you would get over this notion that there are groups of people (academics, non-real aesthetes, cultural and artistic bullies) who demand and get obedience to their notions of what constitutes true and great art. The worst you'll get these days for herd-thinking about art is peer pressure ("Dude, how can you like that sucky band?"). I just don't see in our society this fear of being shamed by a critic or cultural figure that you've made reference to elsewhere. If people today don't like Proust's work after hearing someone gush over him or seeing an ad, they say so and put the bloody book down. 

 

 kcar wrote: 

I don't want to sound too anti-education, because I would never board an airplane that was not designed by someone who I knew had a degree that taught him how it should be designed...but the notion that I need to pay $100,000 each year for 4-6 years in order to read a novel (!) is such a strange notion to me, that it leaves me dumbfounded.  Sorry kcar, but I really think you might have been brainwashed by this idea of academic legitimacy/imprimatur. I actually tend to think these people (academics) are the least qualified to judge art.  These are all the robotic A-students who swallow whatever the other robotic A-student professors cram down their throats.  They are required to agree with them, or they will not get a degree. There is no room in there for honest debate about the value of art.  Don't get me wrong kcar, I respect scholarship very much.  You can see my shout-outs to scholarly writers here all the time.  But the idea that a professional decides what is "good" or "bad" is wrong.  You should know better.  Academics are useful in that they do hard research, but the decision behind this research reflects what the real aesthetes in the public have already validated.   To answer your question, neither my reading of Proust, nor his reputation, had anything to do with academics.  Of course books were assigned to me in school, like all students, but not him.  His reputation is what it is because millions of readers like me have read and loved him and sang him praises from the mountaintops.  That is the reason academics decided to study him (it's after the fact, as it is in all similar cases).  You have it backwards.

 stevendejong wrote:  No that's opinion.

YES.....   ........   ..the best that exist's                                                                                                      

 rdo wrote: 
I have a split personality. I give "Stuck" a 10 but the other bastard won't go above a "2." 


rdo--you assume, apparently, that ratings on RP reflect members' honest, uninfluenced opinions of a work. That they don't vote higher than they intended for a song because it's a highly rated "classic." Or vice versa for a song that leaves you indifferent but revolts your fellow listeners. I've felt that sort of peer pressure when I go to rate something a "6" but other RPers have posted comments about how that song is a life-affirming "10" for them. 

Generally I agree with you that RP ratings reflect honest feelings about songs, at least among those who "rate like adults". (May I offer you this delightful  mint?). But it's not so easy to be sure that opinions on the Web are honest. Authors can buy a crowd of five-star ratings on Amazon for their work or product.  And as we've discussed at much length elsewhere on RP, it's not always so easy to separate out your feelings for a work of art from what you've been taught or told about that art form, specifically about what constitutes a great work. 

I agree with your opinion stated elsewhere that education can be a straitjacket dictating what you should think is great, perhaps even pushing to say you like a song or book that you don't really like. But rdo, do you really think you would have liked Proust if first introduced to him in 4th grade? Can you state with certainty that you've not been conditioned to like Proust, perhaps falsely, through formal education? How did you come to appreciate such a difficult but rewarding writer? 

 richlister wrote: 

you must be 12, or 13, maby  just not enough drum machine bass and dissssssssssssssss ?

 stevendejong wrote: 

idiot

more bob is needed............