Bob Dylan

[EyeSeeCold]

I don't want to confirm the bias, but overall he seems like a down to earth individual. He said he wasn't into the hippie scene. He liked to stay out of the rush of stardom. He occasionally distanced himself and kept himself secretive.

"The thing about rock'n'roll is that for me anyway it wasn't enough ... There were great catch-phrases and driving pulse rhythms ... but the songs weren't serious or didn't reflect life in a realistic way. I knew that when I got into folk music, it was more of a serious type of thing. The songs are filled with more despair, more sadness, more triumph, more faith in the supernatural, much deeper feelings."

You learn from a conglomeration of the incredible past - whatever experience gotten in any way whatsoever.

[stray]

Honestly, I'd be curious what makes him Fe. Mostly because I have no clue in general on what these functions mean in socionics.

I agree though, he can be pretty angtsy. I always thought that Pennebaker film was kind of awkward and unnecessarily confrontational.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Oh, then he can't possibly be Gamma. Because Gammas are all about being materialist whores for fame and money. Indeed, it is part of their documented mating rituals, that they rub $100 bills across their naked bodies in hopes of luring a fellow Gamma mate.

Also you said he is 'secretive', which means Beta. And I saw him use the word 'incredible', which is way too dramatic-sounding to be used by an ennui, aka any non-Beta. Then he babbled some kind of emo crap about supernatural and 'deeper feelings' or something. Only an INFp would say that.

Hey, I think I'm getting the hang of the16stereotypes now.

They probably say that because they find him difficult to comprehend, and since it doesn't make sense to them, they conclude it must therefore be (+) by default. That's more or less the operating standard.

Don't just copy and paste a bunch of quotes and seemingly randomly assign them to information elements if you're going to accuse people of stereotyping. Provide a good case might be better. It might also be good not to say that the people on this forum stick purely to stereotyping, lest you be accused of hyperbole and stereotyping.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Hmm. I don't see much of anything I'd call 'symbolism' here; most of the statements seem fairly direct and obvious to me. Though I can see how / could appear like that to someone who doesn't value those elements. Galen mentioned some things along similar lines about Suzanne Vega (ESFp) and that POV was interesting.

His songs and his speech are full of symbolism and metaphors, often to baffling levels.

Who hasn't had experiences like that? You've never gotten involved with someone or something only to later realize, "hmm, this wasn't quite what I hoped or felt it was going to be. I don't think this is right for me, so I'm going to have to abstain from it." I'm pretty sure it's a common thing everyone goes through from time to time.

It's also worth pointing out that celebrities often get implicitly co-opted into causes without their consent.

Such as when or about what?

If you're going to say that nothing is type-related, then I don' think this is the forum for you. I would think it obvious that my observations of his life are based on what I see to be particularly significant or prevalent.

I am thinking of in particular his history of representing causes without a high level of care, his oversimplifying of incidents and stories, the way he has his own interpretation without a strong connect to reality.

A prime example is the history behind the song Hurricane. I think also his on and off dabbling in religion, taking bits and pieces here, making it more significant, then less significant, etc., may also be indicative of Ni dominance and\or Te PoLR. Also, listening to Bob Dylan present his own radio shows...they seem to primarily be lots of stories that don't really make that much sense and seem heavy in Fe-creativeness, and again, perhaps Ni-dominance rather than Si-dominance.

[EyeSeeCold]

All Along the Watchtower. Like A Rolling Stone.

/.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Primary source material is considered good evidence in most fields, not sure why this one should be exempt? Most of the IE assignments I made were derived from that IE semantics page I've linked before. I don't think the assignments are entirely perfect, but I'm not just pulling them out of thin-air either. It's a start at least, and that's all it was intended to be.

I'd link interviews, but that base has been somewhat covered. Do you want more?

But where pray tell is your good case, other than vague allusions to supposed instances of him flaking out on his involvement with various causes and what not? Let alone your inference about how that suggests PoLR…

I'm surprised you'd say that was a primary source, when it was actually hand-picked quotes with your processing added on (with no explanation whatsoever). I don't think I've been vague, I have spoken initially in general terms expecting that those who know his history would know to what I allude to. I would think this would be a better approach than selectively using quotes.

Except I wasn't referring to the entire forum. It was a thinly-veiled reference to posts in this thread.

If you choose to continue that meme, it is your own affair.

[Not A Communist Shill]

All Along the Watchtower. Like A Rolling Stone.

/.

agreed. IEI specifically for his most famous songs (I don't think Gamma like you).

[Not A Communist Shill]

I try to be inclusive of as many as I can. Obviously any kind of evidence collection is going to be selective in some way or another, due to constraints of time and availability. Like I said, I'm not aiming for exhaustive perfection here. If you're honestly going to fuss about that, you may as well argue that any kind of evidence in the form of quoted excerpts, authored publications, video interviews, photographs, etc. are invalid due to their being 'hand-picked' in some way by the observer.

ah, but I questioned your lack of an analysis.

You're not incapable of opening that link up and rubbing a few brain cells together to figure out the possible connections yourself. I shouldn't have to spoonfeed it to you.

Erm that's not really how a discussion works. I disputed that your interpretation of those quotes were exclusively or even primarily related to the information elements you said that they were linked to, as did others.

I doubt that your subjective interpretation of that history, riddled with your own personal biases and skewed judgments (not a personal attack, you're only human after all), could be considered a better case. I'd rather hear or see things straight from the person being talked about, not what someone else alleges about them.

I didn't say it was a better case, although I believe that is true. I merely said that the quotes had been processed by you with no explanation. The context of those quotes isn't even clear - and I'm surprised you haven't played your usual game of saying "it's not type related". I think considering that you want Bob Dylan to be your dual and considering that seem to have spent a long time pondering on Bob Dylan, it is rather weak to just copy and paste a selection of hand-picked quotes as an argument for his type.

Bob Dylan's behaviour doesn't just manifest itself through speech - it manifests too in the way he has done his music, and the way he has lived his life - and aspects of both are externally visible to everybody.

[stray]

ah, but I questioned your lack of an analysis.



Erm that's not really how a discussion works. I disputed that your interpretation of those quotes were exclusively or even primarily related to the information elements you said that they were linked to, as did others.



I didn't say it was a better case, although I believe that is true. I merely said that the quotes had been processed by you with no explanation. The context of those quotes isn't even clear - and I'm surprised you haven't played your usual game of saying "it's not type related". I think considering that you want Bob Dylan to be your dual and considering that seem to have spent a long time pondering on Bob Dylan, it is rather weak to just copy and paste a selection of hand-picked quotes as an argument for his type.

Bob Dylan's behaviour doesn't just manifest itself through speech - it manifests too in the way he has done his music, and the way he has lived his life - and aspects of both are externally visible to everybody.

I would agree that his songs contain a lot of symbolism. I don't know if that means he's an INFp, but it is what it is. "Symbolism". As for his life, he's never seemed to be particularly accommodating or outgoing. I don't know if that's type related either. As cool as he is, he seems very independent and a bit self-absorbed. He doesn't like to be defined.. he's almost like this walking "Life of Brian" story, where he takes a dump on whatever new movement crowns him as their messiah. Starting with the folk movement, then into the 60s rock crowd. Even in the 70's, he became a a fairly staunch protestant/Christian - and then for whatever reason, he became silent about it. I was reading an article where one minister who knew him at the time just stopped hearing from him, and was speculating whether Bob still had God in his life, etc.. I think Bob was probably doing the same thing he did to hippies and the folkies. Like he didn't like being a leader or any of the fellowship associated on that level.

Sometimes he seems to go out of his way to "feign" stupidity at the depth or symbolism in his tunes as well. "It's just a song", "I'm just a guitar player, man", etc.. The guy just doesn't want to be labeled about anything for long.. even his best stuff. At least that's how I see it.

Anyhow..If I have a point, I wonder what the need to shun attention or definition on the level he does is type related. I do that too tbh, but not to that extent.

[717495]

It's not type related.

[glam]

god poli you crack me up

[marooned]

i still think he's a Beter (said in butchered Australian accent) NF... but i find Si leading interesting as an idea

[stray]

There's no point in trying to find his type then. If it's not type related, whatever. The whole "reluctant messiah" thing is probably a big part of who he is though, in the same way people point to Madonna's or Bowie's ability to reinvent themselves. I mean, it's one of those big things that stands out about his personality, over decades.

Dylan reinvents too, but almost as a means to get away from something, while they seem to like being relevant and connecting. I don't think he likes that level of connection - and if you watch that Pennebaker film linked to above.. he almost seems to not like another individual (let alone a crowd or a movement) saying they can "get him".. Or at least, he wants to say who does and who doesn't. He'll tell that Times magazine guy that he (Bob) has him pegged, and will tear him apart.. but he's very deflecting when it comes back to him. It's very exclusive.

[Slacker]

I will preface this by saying that I have listened to a lot of his music but not to the point where I feel I have some deep understanding of him or anything. My opinions are based only on a superficial knowledge of him, so mainly just based on the vibe he gives off to me. So my opinion is not a strong one.

His language use seems Ni to me, and that's the main vibe I get. . I can see why people figure NiFe, though in his line of work he could seem more Fe than he is. I'd say maybe either ILI or IEI. I could see him as either.

[Marie84]

Hmm. I don't see much of anything I'd call 'symbolism' here; most of the statements seem fairly direct and obvious to me. Though I can see how / could appear like that to someone who doesn't value those elements. Galen mentioned some things along similar lines about Suzanne Vega (ESFp) and that POV was interesting.

He's speaking metaphorically when he makes statements like this, there's no actual explanation intertwined, it's all very ambiguous

“To live outside the law, you must be honest.”
“Morality has nothing in common with politics.”
“A mistake is to commit a misunderstanding.”

etc, etc

[Slacker]

They aren't that straightforward. They appear to be potentially hypocritical on the surface, but you have to read beyond that to see that he's intentionally playing with language to make a statement about society. One might think that to uphold the law you have to be honest, but he's saying the opposite of what one would expect. It's a play on the language and not straightforward.

[Galen]

He's speaking metaphorically when he makes statements like this, there's no actual explanation intertwined, it's all very ambiguous

“To live outside the law, you must be honest.”
“Morality has nothing in common with politics.”
“A mistake is to commit a misunderstanding.”

etc, etc

Where's the metaphor? I don't see how there's any double meaning in any of these statements, it's all super straight-forward to me. "Be an honest person," "morality and politics are two complete separate things," and I can't even paraphrase the last one because it's so obvious as to what it's about. Seriously, I want to know what's ambiguous about all this.

[Bob Dylan]

What's all this talk about 'typing' Bob Dylan? You guys, you think you can put a type on me? You really think, you can just, you know, sit there, read some quotes or whatever, and then know me? That's crazy. That's like, like I'm going to sit on a subway for five minutes and watch a man, you know, I've never even met him before, but I'm gonna watch him and then after the five minutes is over - after the five minutes is over I think I know everything about this man. That's crazy! Doesn't even make sense. I've never met a single one of you people and you think you know me. That's just crazy.

[Galen]

What's all this talk about 'typing' Bob Dylan? You guys, you think you can put a type on me? You really think, you can just, you know, sit there, read some quotes or whatever, and then know me? That's crazy. That's like, like I'm going to sit on a subway for five minutes and watch a man, you know, I've never even met him before, but I'm gonna watch him and then after the five minutes is over - after the five minutes is over I think I know everything about this man. That's crazy! Doesn't even make sense. I've never met a single one of you people and you think you know me. That's just crazy.

i love you

[Slacker]

What's all this talk about 'typing' Bob Dylan? You guys, you think you can put a type on me? You really think, you can just, you know, sit there, read some quotes or whatever, and then know me? That's crazy. That's like, like I'm going to sit on a subway for five minutes and watch a man, you know, I've never even met him before, but I'm gonna watch him and then after the five minutes is over - after the five minutes is over I think I know everything about this man. That's crazy! Doesn't even make sense. I've never met a single one of you people and you think you know me. That's just crazy.

OK, this is why I love this place. All kinds of awesome.

[Trullie]

I can't imagine Bob Dylan as anything other than some sort of INxx.

[lemon]

[Galen]

There's a Bob Dylan remix contest thing going on right now. You have to use off-sync instrumental loops and "remix" Subterranean Homesick Blues. I'd enter if I was actually inspired by any of the remixing tools provided. Apparently you can upload your own stuff though, so I dunno.


EDIT: I took the time to listen to Subterranean Homesick Blues. I'm sure what he's saying would be very direct if I knew what the fuck he was saying hahaha. To me it feels like a giant hodgepodge of, uhm, stuff; stuff that feels connected and cohesive, and on an emotional level I kinda get it, but trying to analyze it is just a lost cause to me. I guess it's a bunch of "the world is going to hell" stuff, but overall I have a tremendous desire to strangle him and demand that he make sense. It seems like it's comprised solely of observations, which may be where the discord is coming in. It's kinda like Tom's Diner in that respect, like a bunch of observations that have no explicit meaning to me. What's more is that they both make me go "well this is interesting I guess, but what's the point?" Type related mayhaps?

DOUBLE EDIT: This is now Ne egos interpret Bob Dylan music

[Galen]

Lol. It's mostly just a warning to young men coming of age, that the world's a shady screwball place… so be cautious/alert, and don't be afraid to rely on yourself for answers ("you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows").

lol wtf how did that make so much sense to you? Shifty / voodoo.

[Marie84]

What? AFAIK there's no metaphor(s) being used in any of these 3. Nor any suggestions of ulterior meaning, or any hidden implications extending beyond what was explicitly stated. Pretty sure they mean just what they say. Maybe you're trying to look at it too deeply?

Mariella pretty much covered this

They aren't that straightforward. They appear to be potentially hypocritical on the surface, but you have to read beyond that to see that he's intentionally playing with language to make a statement about society. One might think that to uphold the law you have to be honest, but he's saying the opposite of what one would expect. It's a play on the language and not straightforward.

which is what a Metaphor is

a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our god.”

[Galen]

which is what a Metaphor is

Except that all the talk about society he makes doesn't require reading beyond anything. I'm still baffled at how we're looking at the exact same things and coming to opposite conclusions.

Lol, odd. It's all pretty obvious I thought? I can translate it if you want. There's some details I don't get (since the cultural context here is from the late 50s/early 60s or so, and obviously I wasn't alive back then), but the overall meaning seems clear nevertheless.

Haha, no translation is necessary. Just knowing what the hell it's about is a good start. It's kinda funny though, because even though I had no real idea what the specific content of the song was about, I've been listening to it over and over again.

[Slacker]

Except that all the talk about society he makes doesn't require reading beyond anything. I'm still baffled at how we're looking at the exact same things and coming to opposite conclusions.

He never explicitly says what he means. “To live outside the law, you must be honest.” The explicit thing to say would be "While lawfulness and honest are intended to be related, they really aren't related, because we've created a society where laws are no longer about keeping people honest and in fact might hinder honesty." Figurative language doesn't necessarily take a great deal of work to figure out. Most people are good at decoding it without effort. But it's still figurative language, and he uses a lot of it. He is expecting us to decode his statement and take his political message from it. He never explicitly states that political message. It is an example of verbal paradox - a figure of speech where his message appears to contradict itself but when you think about it more maybe doesn't.

[Galen]

He never explicitly says what he means. “To live outside the law, you must be honest.” The explicit thing to say would be "While lawfulness and honest are intended to be related, they really aren't related, because we've created a society where laws are no longer about keeping people honest and in fact might hinder honesty." Figurative language doesn't necessarily take a great deal of work to figure out. Most people are good at decoding it without effort. But it's still figurative language, and he uses a lot of it. He is expecting us to decode his statement and take his political message from it. He never explicitly states that political message. It is an example of verbal paradox - a figure of speech where his message appears to contradict itself but when you think about it more maybe doesn't.

I'm not interpreting quotes like that as figurative. I'm just taking them at face value, because that's where the value exists. It just seems to me that you're looking too deeply into what he's saying and are trying to draw too much information from something so up front to me. For example, to me that quote just means "be an honest person, regardless of what the law says." Sure you could extrapolate further meanings from it, but when you do it kinda feels like you're trying to milk a tapeworm: you're not gonna get much else.

[Words]

I don't know what I'd say his type is yet, except for Gamma introvert.

[Slacker]

I'm not interpreting quotes like that as figurative. I'm just taking them at face value, because that's where the value exists. It just seems to me that you're looking too deeply into what he's saying and are trying to draw too much information from something so up front to me. For example, to me that quote just means "be an honest person, regardless of what the law says." Sure you could extrapolate further meanings from it, but when you do it kinda feels like you're trying to milk a tapeworm: you're not gonna get much else.

That quote doesn't even explicitly or literally say "be an honest person regardless of what the law says." I'm not interpreting it as figurative language. It just is a figure of speech called a paradox. There are so few things I'm an expert at. In fact, writing is the only thing. That's what I studied and what I worked at. It is a figure of speech. I don't understand how or why anyone would argue that it isn't a paradoxical statement when it so obviously is.

[Galen]

That quote doesn't even explicitly or literally say "be an honest person regardless of what the law says." I'm not interpreting it as figurative language. It just is a figure of speech called a paradox. There are so few things I'm an expert at. In fact, writing is the only thing. That's what I studied and what I worked at. It is a figure of speech. I don't understand how or why anyone would argue that it isn't a paradoxical statement when it so obviously is.

Well I am just as confused as you are.

[Slacker]

Oh, the sky is blue.

No, it isn't blue.

Sure it's blue. Look at it. Blue.

Well, I don't interpret it as being blue.

Huh?

That's where I'm at.

[Galen]

You're not the only one.

[Slacker]

OK so this quote says A (to be honest you have to live beyond the law). You say, "I don't think it's figurative langauge. I just take it to mean B (be an honest person regardless of what the law says) ." But it doesn't literally say B, it says A, so if you are taking it to mean B, then it IS figurative langauge. Calling a person "bright" is figurative langauge, because the word "bright" is literally about the intensity of light. It's a minor example but it's still figurative, and in the same way taking "In order to be honest, you have to live outside the law" to mean anything beyond that to be honest you have to break laws is figurative, and the suggestion that to be honest you have to do something generally considered dishonest (break laws) is a paradox.

[Words]

BTW, the quote, to be honest, you have to live above the law reminds me of something Lord Kames wrote in his book about the stages of society and the law. Basically he said that the purpose of law is to protect the individual as much as possible while taking the majority into account. So basically there are times when there will be a personal wrong doing even although the majority is protected.

Bob Dylan is saying that to be honest within oneself, true to ones convictions it's necessary to realise that the law in complex societies doesn't always allow for that, which is quite an Fi thing to say.

Anyway I thought it was interesting that they're thinking along the same lines but from different angles, given that Kames was an ENTj.

[Galen]

OK so this quote says A (to be honest you have to live beyond the law). You say, "I don't think it's figurative langauge. I just take it to mean B (be an honest person regardless of what the law says) ." But it doesn't literally say B, it says A, so if you are taking it to mean B, then it IS figurative langauge. Calling a person "bright" is figurative langauge, because the word "bright" is literally about the intensity of light. It's a minor example but it's still figurative, and in the same way taking "In order to be honest, you have to live outside the law" to mean anything beyond that to be honest you have to break laws is figurative, and the suggestion that to be honest you have to do something generally considered dishonest (break laws) is a paradox.

It's only paradoxical if you consider breaking the law to be dishonest. I never saw "living outside the law" in and of itself as being a dishonest way of living because, as Words said, so long as you're true to yourself and those around you, the law becomes unnecessary.

[Slacker]

It isn't a metaphor, but it is a different figure of speech, regardless of how obvious it seems.

[thePirate]

IEI

[Galen]

Fuck off, no.

Calm down man, he hasn't even contributed to the thread much at all.

[Galen]

Lol, we know each other. So I'm just being friendly.