advertisement
follow us
Newsletter signup
Get a little Crawdaddy! right in the inbox once a week:
Straight to Video
Rock Art Rock
The Decemberists
September 19, 2009
Terminal 5, New York, NY
By Amanda Hatfield "The Decemberists played a special one night 'lottery show,' where the songs played were picked at random by a master of ceremonies, played by John Wesley Harding..."
Ra Ra Riot
April 4, 2009
Webster Hall, New York City, NY
By Amanda Hatfield "This show was, at the time, the biggest one Ra Ra Riot had sold out as headliners, and it was clear to me after watching it that the band is destined for even bigger and better things..."
Florence and the Machine
October 28, 2009
Bowery Ballroom, New York City, NY
By Amanda Hatfield "Florence Welsh and her backing band delighted and mesmerized a sold-out crowd at Bowery in her first official NY headlining show..."
Dirty Projectors
July 19, 2009
Williamsburg Waterfront (Brooklyn, NY)
By Amanda Hatfield "I was skeptical about how well Dirty Projectors' gorgeous, complex vocal harmonies would carry over outdoors, standing under hot sunshine..."
See more in the Rock Art Rock gallery.
Most Read Articles
- The Smoke-Filled Room: Music and a Woman’s Right to Choose
- What Goes On: Liam Gallagher Reveals Post-Oasis Plans, and Other News
- My Life Is the Road: Clarence White and Jim Morrison Stretch on a 747
- It Shows, What Goes On: Live Show Review: Devo at the Regency Ballroom, San Francisco
- What Goes On: This Just In: Steven Tyler Is the Rainbow
- Reviews: Weezer: Raditude
- Introducing: His Name Is John Michael Rouchell
polls
Loading ...-
Freewheelin’: Bob Dylan vs. Conor Oberst
A surefire way to upset the most level-headed music critic is to refer to a young artist as “the next Bob Dylan.” It works every time. I should know; I’ve rolled my eyes at the comparison myself. It’s the kind of thing a reviewer says when they’re trying to make a deadline. It’s the type of thing a person will say when they don’t 
know much about Dylan beyond “Like a Rolling Stone.” Let’s face it: the Dylan comparison is a pretty heavy one to carry. It’s even kind of cruel when you think about it. Who wouldn’t collapse under that kind of weight? On the other hand, what’s good criticism without some devil’s advocacy? So, for argument’s sake, if nothing else, let me stand one of my favorites up in front of the firing squad and say this: I can understand why people have been calling Conor Oberst the next Dylan.
Still reading? Good. You’re more patient than I’ve been with other writers who’ve tried this.
Now, let’s be fair. If anyone understands the epic proportions of Bob Dylan, it’s me. I was locked up in my bedroom at age 12 listening to Blood on the Tracks and, more years later than I care to admit, will still argue the merits of Self Portrait ‘til I’m blue in the face. I realize that comparing anyone to Dylan is, on some level, an exercise in compromise. I realize that it’s no longer the ‘60s and that music has changed irrevocably from those days; I also realize that Dylan had something to do with that change, which is a mark of status that’s almost impossible to replicate. With that in mind, in order to make even a halfway legitimate point, it’s absolutely necessary to lay some groundwork and prove that I know the scope of what I’m claiming.
So, let’s establish some facts:
- Bob Dylan is, barring perhaps his early days of folk/Guthrie imitation, almost endlessly original. His lyrical scope and constant piling-on of heady imagery are practically unmatched by any other songwriter. His words form mental pictures, often indelible; there is something intensely personal and literary about the best of his lyrics. Who could argue with Shakespeare in the alley, the idiot wind, or six crooked highways?
- Bob Dylan came along at the right time. His rise to folk prince status, followed by his switch to electric, was impeccably timed—although the latter didn’t seem like it to plenty of fans at the time. He was, and often has been, one step ahead of the change that needed to happen.
- Bob Dylan is unafraid of evolution; despite a few unlistenable forays into Christian discovery and a few skippable tracks on some of his best albums, the fact that he’s changing all the time has been one of his strongest assets. Not since the days of the outraged folk fans has Dylan been faced with what so many musicians get when they venture into a different genre: the accusation of selling out. In fact, among true Dylanphiles, his constant evolution is both expected and respected.
Now, Bob Shelton wrote 500-odd pages on Dylan and still didn’t cover his whole career, so I certainly can’t summarize him in three bullet points. But I doubt many Dylan fans will argue with the admittedly general statements above. So let’s move on to the second half of the debate.
Who, exactly, is Conor Oberst? Known to many under the moniker of his band Bright Eyes, Oberst is a 27-year-old from Omaha who began his career by recording screaming tirades in his basement during his tender 
teen years. During the early 2000s, Oberst was a large part of the reason that both Omaha and the indie rock movement exploded into popularity. In fact, he truly came into his own on the very cusp of the so-called emo movement, when sensitive boys with guitars were all the rage, and most of us (or our children) were sporting tight vintage t-shirts and asymmetrical haircuts. But from the beginning, despite the fact that he was practically a figurehead for the movement, it was virtually impossible to lump Oberst in with the rest of the coffeehouse crowd. The very fact that he’s still around, that he hasn’t gone the way of the Dashboard Confessional clones, proves that there’s something else going on here. While acknowledging the danger of being too pat, it’s time for an echo of my bulleted list from above.
- Proficiency/originality: check. Oberst’s boundless imagery, unlike the abstract love lyrics and nonsensical word-stringing of too many other young artists, actually means something. We don’t get vaguely dramatic lines about not wanting the world to see us; instead we get girls in tomato fields with broken jaws. We get wars televised in peaceful suburban living rooms and traffic like a pack of dogs. Even his teen angst lyrics have a weight to them that’s sorely lacking from so many other things produced during the same time period.
- Good timing: another match. I can attest to just how bleak much of the music scene was right around the turn of Y2K. I remember the day I turned off the radio forever; I believe it was the 18th time Sister Hazel was played in a four-hour period, or something of that nature. Hootie and the Blowfish were whining somewhere, and Dave Matthews was warbling a song that sounded a lot like all of his other songs. Was it the ‘60s? No. Was the world just as in need of an original voice as it was during Dylan’s time? Hell yes. Ask my 20-year-old self locked up in a dorm room smoking cigarettes out the window like a true emo kid should. I have no doubt that, just as many people during Dylan’s time adored the Monkees, there were plenty of people who felt that mainstream late ‘90s music really was speaking for them. But for me (and, it turned out, plenty of others too), something was missing. We just weren’t sure what it was until we heard it. I still remember the awe and surprise I felt when I realized that other people besides me showed up to see Bright Eyes play in Minneapolis one cold day in the winter of 2000. The fact that someone was saying what needed to be said, and that people were listening, was as earth-shattering as any social revolution to me.
- The early Fevers and Mirrors is an emotional scream against young confusion; 2005’s simultaneous releases Digital Ash in a Digital Urn and I’m Wide Awake, It’s Morning were respectively electronic and countrified, the latter especially containing a political bend; the newest full-length release, Cassadaga, is a marvelous sampling of alt-rock in an assortment of 31 flavors. For an artist who supposedly was born into a niche market, Oberst has expanded well beyond expectations, walking out of one sound and straight into the next, without stopping to consider what the rest of the market is doing. And if history is any indicator, the movements will follow him rather than the other way around.
It’s a fact that the Dylan comparison is a lofty one to make, with implications that go far beyond anything I can summarize in a few pages. Part of the reason people get so impatient with this sort of thing is because Bob Dylan has been recording for nearly 50 years, and upholding a young artist to that kind of legacy is nothing more than pure speculation on the future. But I’ll risk it in this situation and say this: I think we’ll be hearing from Oberst for 50 years. I think there’s a basis for this particular comparison. I think that, at some point in the future, some music reviewer desperate to make a deadline will be calling some young musician the next Conor
Oberst. Let’s hope that the music world, always in need of a solid debate and a good shot in the arm, is so lucky.
Watch: Conor Oberst “Waste of Paint” [at youtube.com]
Watch: Bob Dylan “Mr. Tambourine Man” [at youtube.com]
» Previously: Protesty: Phils Ochs vs. The Nightwatchman
45 Comments
I grew up in a city tucked in between cornfields, with highways screaming and stockyards which sat empty. I grew up in a city where three nights a week teenagers would pack themselves into the shammbles of a club with no heat, at times no running water all in hopes to understand. If not ourselves, but something, or at least gain the sense that someone got something. That someone cared enough to create, that someone cared enough to pick up a guitar. And stepped onto that stage was a fourteen year old boy to a city that was blizzard wild outside and a crowd of less than a dozen. And he belted and rose and fell and tugged. And was something.
Part of these comments that you are leaving are in complete denial of the fact that quite a bit of Oberst’s promise and potential hit the kid at an age that most are graduating from high school. While Dylan may have been “mid-career” and into “semi-retirement” some may argue that Oberst has gone through some of the same ups and downs in his early twenties/late teens.
From shy kid who couldn’t sort through the talking in the back of rooms at shows or quite understand why he’d be mentioned on covers of teen magazines, I saw a Oberst of his early twenties that was quite like the Dylan early twenties. Agressively coping with being in the spotlight when the spotlight, Mr. Time Magazine, didn’t quite seem to add up to what his songs were trying to say, what he was contesting with, the world he was growing up in. Not quite understanding living in a neighborhood sandwiched between, what in Midwestern standards, was horrifying racial segregation and poverty.
I think what Brenda may be trying to have you investigate for yourselves outside of her editorial word limitation of an article is trying to actually mine early careers of both artists to see similarities. Bright Eyes started long before Fevers and Mirrors and although it broke through to media attention there was a long road of being backpages golden boy that led up to the misunderstood center of attention shoved into a pair of perfectly worn denim jeans and a slim fitting vintage tee.
Oberst was recording quite amazingly poetic snipets of thought by the age of 11 until you’ve heard that or attempted to understand that through finding, and listening then you are just as much of a chump as the music writers you are chiding, kiddies.
“Are you going to see the concert tonight? Are you going to hear it?” Dylan
Cassadaga is one of the most lasting and pseudo-spiritual albums of the past decade IMO. And lime tree (the last song on the album) made me shake the first 50 times I listened to it…and still does from time to time. This was a well written argument front to back, there are definitive similarties between the two, but at the end of the day, Conner is Conner and Dylan is Dylan.
Skip this clown and check out Iron and Wine for Dylan-esque imagery without the pretentious Dylan-wannabe style.
There is a really fantastic writer banging around new york as we speak. he stands on his own apart from Oberst and Dylan, as many young songwriters do, there will never be a new Dylan, and as far as placing the crown on Oberst just because he is the only one in the public eye during the age of mass communication where there is no excuse for not noticing someone just because they are not on the cover of a music magazine, well, its ridiculous, check out this guy for a start
its really fantastic, hes only 24
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gElnKasQXOo
http://www.myspace.com/mattpless
This is a well-drawn argument. Those of you who are freaking out don’t realize the point of Switchback (at least, as I read it) isn’t to say ‘this new person is a clone of the old person’ but rather to say ‘these two people share some common qualities in their art’ and to that extent, yup, I can see this. It’s nothing to get worked up over. They both produce quality lyrics and have very original, constantly-evolving sounds. That’s all that’s being said here. Not the end of the world, as much as I love Dylan he is indeed human and saying another musician has qualities in common with that isn’t sacreligious or ridiculous. Nor is it pigeon-holing the younger artist. It’s like saying purple and blue kind of look alike. Does it make either one less of a color??
just out of curiosity, ryan… you know… since you brought it up. who are all these hundreds of songwriters?
Conor Oberst is whiny? Maybe 10 years ago you could have said that and convinced people you knew what you were talking about. Back then he got that criticism a lot, and sure, his stuff was pretty raw sometimes- I loved it, but then again, I was at the right age for it. But the kid’s grown up while you weren’t paying attention. “Four Winds”? “Lua”? “When the President Talks to God,” for goodness sakes? Within the last several years both his songwriting and his voice have matured at an amazing speed and he’s producing intriguing, arresting, sophisticated songs that cover a much wider subject range than people realize. Pity so many people heard one song and latched onto the popular opinion that he was “whiny” and now they go around spouting it. Like those who hear “Blowin’ in the Wind” and then tell everyone they hate Bob Dylan because all he does are protest songs. Differing opinions are one thing; opinions based on a lack of information are lazy.
The beginning of this article told me that the writer was actually sane….and had a solid grip of Dylan’s greatness. And whereas I have listened to Oberst and Bright Eyes a fair amount….it’s completely absurd, and unfair to Oberst for that matter, to even suggest that a comparison is worthy of discussion. Dylan trumps, dwarfs and squashes everyone. The bright young artists, like Ryan Adams and Conor Oberst, are indeed terrific songwriters and musicians. But, please….don’t embarass yourself as a music columnist by staging the notion that Oberst will be putting out work comparable to Dylan for the next 50 years. Elvis Costello, Bruce Springsteen and Graham Parker, for all their legitimate greatness, each have elements that may let you compare them to Dylan in many ways….and actually, Bruce stands above Dylan from a sheer performance standpoint….and Costello is close from a writing standpoint…but this Oberst kid may be off the scene in a few years.
brenda, thank you for providing an intelligent, level-headed comparison on this subject. it’s so rare to find anything well-written, intelligent, or level-headed on the internet, much less when talking about great music. kudos!
I love how opinions that differ from someone else’s are automatically called not sane and/ or embarrassments. If you have good reasons to back yourself up, your opinion can be disagreed with, but that doesn’t mean you don’t know what you’re talking about. Why not disagree without outright insulting the well-supported opinion and intelligence of someone else who has every right to make their statement? The writer thinks Oberst will be recording for 50 years. Rob doesn’t think so. That MUST mean the writer is NOT SANE/ embarrassing herself…. right?? If she is, there appears to be quite a few commenters on this article that she’s taking down with her.
It’s worth reminding ourselves every now and again that Bob Dylan isn’t “endlessly original,” which is one of this articles starting points. In fact (like Shakespeare, perhaps) his content is often borrowed if not downright stolen. For one of many discussions on this topic, the the New York Times:
http://tinyurl.com/2l7cgm
I don’t think this diminishes his importance as a musician, recording artist, or a performer. I do think it is weird to deify the guy and say that no comparison to him is valid, which many of the comments do (”blasphemous?” Really?).
More importantly, I’m not sure it does anyone any good to drudge up this really old comparison, which has been made since at November of 2004 with the “leaked” releases of I’m Wide Awake… and Digital Ash…
See Stephen Thomas Erdlewine’s somewhat-legendary review (published 3 years ago) here:
http://tinyurl.com/2fplz2
I think that for pure charm and timely relevance Conor exceeds Dylan. As for songwriting, Dylan does little for me. He’s hokey and his voice annoys. It just isn’t my bag. Not to say he didn’t innovate and all that. I am sure he did. Again, its just not my thing.
To respond to Rob from- Sunday, January 27, 2008 09:46 PM: Conor has been on the music scene as Bright Eyes for something close to fifteen years, and I think that his efforts with Cassadaga would imply that he’d not going anywhere anytime soon.
But the point of this article doesn’t seem to be to assert one viewpoint versus the other, but rather to talk about and outline the topic which is already out there. Dear Ms. Paro, you’re brave for bringing this up considering the storm it always brews up on both the sides, not least those alleged music snobs who feel that anyone making music in the past 20 years can’t be accoladed beyond a certain point.
Kudos. I read your article for its intent, and you did a fine job.
To cornfed:
If it’s good to remind ourselves that Bob Dylan isn’t endlessly original, then drudge up this issue was perhaps worthwhile? Eh?
Gosh, I didn’t realize my critical reply to Paro’s article would draw such negative whiplash. Perhaps my words were a bit harsh. My apologies. Let me say that her article was well thought-out and written. She grasps Dylan in full force. I actually like Bright Eyes. Oberst is a very talented songwriter and musician. I just think it’s terribly difficult for anyone to make claims that suggest someone will be making music 40-50 years from now that has the same type of “relevance” as the body of Dylan’s work. And part of my stance here is that, in fairness to Oberst, music has become so derivative the past decade. It’s going to be even more challenging for people of Oberst’s generation and age to continue making music that’s fresh, genuine and not recycled. Dylan had an advantage in that he was part of the movement from folk to electric. Even as good as Ryan Adams is, he still cleverly steals and packages from the Grateful Dead, the Stones and a myriad of others. And he’s an outstanding young singer-songwriter….perhaps even a bit more gifted than Oberst.
uhh… how bout Mark Eitzel…anyone heard of him he even pissed off ole’ bob or so i’ve read…
Bob Dylan is good (esp. the John Wesley Harding album), Bright Eyes is good. Music critics exaggerate to an extreme degree. The comparison neither bugs nor particularly intrigues me. I suppose it was a decent article.
Good article. Music critics in general however, seem to hold an overly romanticized view of Dylan. They put him on a pedestal so high that it would be seemingly impossible for anyone to reach it.
In my opinion, if this comparison must be made, then with his latest album he is already there, just. It’s easy in hindsight to look over Dylan’s career and throw praise his way. Don’t get me wrong, the guy is an absolute hero. But some of the latest albums, I haven’t been blown away by them, that’s for sure. Oberst, at 27, has already evolved from love-longing angsty teen, to social commentator, now to an older, wiser, American great. The Mystic Valley Band record is fantastic and for me seals the deal on Oberst’s status (IMO) as the greatest songwriter of my generation (I’m 21). What’s more, he’s so incredibly young and arguably keeps improving, and so bears the potential that Dylan never could. But for now let’s lay this argument to rest; they have each done plenty to earn their respective places in musical history, and that’s all that needs knowing for now.
as a response to all of you saying that oberst has not gone through as many musical shifts as dylan by the time he was 27:
oberst started out making folk songs when he was 13, was in a screamo/punk band called commander venus when he was 15-17, went back to making his alternaitve folk, and then joined another punk band deciparcidos. He has shifted into full on country with his new album, and 2005’s digital ash saw him test out full on electronic pop.
ok so, punk/scream/folk/rock/country/electronic.
not enough musical shifts for you?
Yeah, music has changed. But Bob has been called “The greatest artist of all time” even by Rolling Stone, and thats “THE” music mag. I mean I like Conor’s music but I’d say Jakob Dylan is the greatest artist of our time. Get his record “Seeing Things” You’ll see what I mean. I’m not saying that because he’s Bob’s son though. I wouldn’t say Conor could be the next Dylan but that doesn’t mean I dont like him. Plus why do we weed the next one, or new one? Bob’s still going strong, and out touring as much as ever. =)
Great article; I feel you adequately assessed the whole situation. I think Oberst is truly on another level of songwriting than anything that has come out anytime lately, but obviously he will never have the cultural impact that Dylan has had.
And while Dylan’s latest albums haven’t wow’ed me much at all, Oberst’s “Outer South” was kind of a disappointment as well. Hopefully Conor’s longetivity supasses 29 years of life.. for the sake of modern music, let’s hope.