Categories
Culture

Don’t Look Back: The Definitive Dylan on Screen

By Matthew Dodd

‘I didn’t consciously pursue the Bob Dylan myth, it was given to me–by God’, Bob Dylan told People Magazine in 1975. And yet, despite his best efforts, he remains the centre of a vast cultural legendarium encompassing university modules, murals in North London suburbs, street names in rural Minnesota and almost everything in between. He is, perhaps, the most documented, revered, critiqued, impersonated and mythologised musical figure of the last century. It’s no surprise then that he should also receive the 21st century’s favourite tribute to the giants of recent history: an Oscar-tipped Hollywood biopic. James Mangold’s A Complete Unknown, starring Timothee Chalamet in the lead role, depicts the life of the young Dylan arriving in New York and builds towards his infamous decision to ‘go electric’ at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival. Yet, despite being the first major biopic of Dylan, A Complete Unknown is far from the Nobel laureate’s first foray into the world of cinema. The Coen Brothers’ Greenwich Village fable Inside Llewyn Davis only features Dylan – or a version of Dylan – for a few seconds near the end but is nevertheless a beautiful evocation of the time and place which gave rise to his legend and an ode to the music that made him. More obviously, Todd Haynes’ 2007 film I’m Not There sees six actors – including Heath Ledger, Cate Blanchett and Marcus Carl Franklin – playing different sides of Dylan’s persona, offering a kaleidoscopic view of this most multifaceted of figures. Still, however, no effort to capture Bob Dylan on film has been so singularly powerful, so essential to understanding the artist, as the very earliest: D.A. Pennebaker’s 1967 documentary Don’t Look Back. Recorded over the course of Dylan’s 1965 tour of Britain, Don’t Look Back offers an unceremonious and impromptu insight into a man who, before our very eyes, is being transformed into a myth.

As the film opens, we find our hero flanked by his team, shuffling through an airport interchange, ruminating on whether he’s allowed to smoke indoors and singing a nursery rhyme to himself. The genius of Pennebaker’s film is that he doesn’t approach his subject as though he were the most significant artist of his generation, but rather as though he were a 24-year-old college dropout with a talent for being supremely obnoxious. Coincidentally, this is exactly who Dylan was. Over the course of the film, we are presented with the dichotomous visions of Bob Dylan, a pop culture sensation who is shaking the very foundations of contemporary music, and Bob Dylan, a man. Between these warring images we almost find some granule of sincere truth about both figures. Through the window of a London phone box we watch as a middle-aged critic sends back a review of Dylan’s concert line by line, fearing that the audience ‘applaud the songs and miss, perhaps, the sermon.’ This insistence from the press that there must be something more to Dylan’s music, a serious literary value that couldn’t possibly be understood by lank haired teenagers, dogs the film. In response to every suggestion of genius, or even intent, Dylan obfuscates – ‘I don’t write for any reason’, he tells a Time magazine reporter before sounding off a polemical diatribe about the inherent phoniness of the mainstream press. The film looks on from afar at the active mythmaking put upon this young songwriter by the world around him. It argues, instead, that genius is happening largely by accident in little, unmajestical ways. While sitting improvising over an unfinished song, Dylan casually throws in a lyric, ‘I’m a rolling stone’. This line of improvisation does not lead him anywhere before the film’s end.

Other moments speak more overtly to the developing sense that this young star might just be something special. In the back of a car, Dylan hears about a British folk artist, a young man named Donovan, and insists on meeting him. This meeting, documented in full, sees the pair perform songs to one another. Donovan plays a sweet but unremarkable rendition of ‘To Sing for You’, to which Bob jovially responds ‘Hey, that’s a good song, man!’ before bringing the room to an awed silence with ‘It’s All Over Now Bay Blue’. The gap between these two artists, even at this stage, appears cavernous. For all his cocksure posturing, there is an acceptance that Bob Dylan is, by the age of 24, already an important artist. With the benefit of 50 years’ retrospect, the film now seems morosely vindicated. The artists who surround him, such as Donovan and the Animals’ Alan Price, have not quite faded into obscurity, but have certainly become footnotes in the grand narrative of Bob Dylan.

One major character whose legend has survived the Dylan monolith is his friend, on-and-off lover and creative partner Joan Baez – another of the folk movement’s most iconic figures. She first appears here making faces at the camera and doing mock accents before explaining to a reporter – who takes her as simply another element of Dylan’s cavalcade – how to spell her name. By the ‘Z’ of ‘Baez’, the reporter realises his mistake, jolting back with a peculiarly British ‘Oh strewth! I’ve been looking for you all day.’ The relationship between Dylan and Baez is perhaps one of greatest mysteries in the history of folk music, and one of the most beloved points of discussion amongst self-proclaimed Dylanologists, but it comes out here as nothing so nebulous, more so a casual intercourse between two young people drawn together into a massive and unknowable world of cameras, reporters and sold-out music halls. In the back of a car, she sings a deformed version of ‘Baby Blue’, ‘crying like a banana in the sun’. She uniquely refers to Dylan as ‘Bobby’, sticking out as quite possibly the only person in the film who doesn’t view him as a prophet, financial prospect or spoiled brat. Through this narrow window into the lives of two musical titans, we see them quite simply as tender friends.

Walking hand in hand with the development of Dylan the myth is the administration of Dylan the business. Long scenes are dedicated to Dylan’s manager attempting to squeeze as much money out of record executives as possible, the name ‘Bob Dylan’ becoming a byword for riches. Later, Bob and co. quibble over the position of ‘Subterranean Homesick Blues’ in the charts – a meagre number 16 at first. These scenes are a bold reminder that the pursuit of art is not always one run on good will alone. The cultivation of this ‘voice of a generation’ was an opportunity to make a great deal of money, a fact that Don’t Look Back finds no shame in acknowledging. It is the banal, ugly and crass moments that Pennebaker chooses to spend his time on which makes Don’t Look Back such a singularly powerful accomplishment. It is a rare documentary which seems genuinely interested in revealing something about who its subject is, rather than trying to place them into an imposed narrative of success. We watch Dylan perform to sold out venues, but we also watch him, perhaps even more closely, as he awkwardly re-tunes his guitar after ‘The Times They Are A-Changing.’ This is a portrait of the artist unscripted, unceremonious and unpolished. 

The central limitation of the biopic in its current form is its futile desire to aggrandise its subject to legendary status, mapping a hero’s journey onto the life of a real human being. Perhaps the most egregious example of this in recent memory is Bryan Singer’s 2018 film Bohemian Rhapsody. Instead of painting an intimate picture of one of the most iconic rock bands of all time, Singer’s film insists on transforming Queen’s career into a three-act tragedy and Freddie Mercury into its tragic hero. His homosexuality is treated as hamartia, his exploration of his sexuality as the pit of his moral degradation. It cannot go unnoticed that this film was made with the express supervision of the band’s surviving members – no wonder, perhaps, that one of the film’s climactic scenes see Freddie apologise at length to the rest of the band for his errant behaviour. This style of biopic turns people into caricatures and, as in Bohemian Rhapsody’s case, risks imposing prejudicial readings onto real lives. All too frequently, these films turn some of the most exciting figures of our time into obnoxious burlesques of their public persona, with every moment of their lives steeped in some sort of divine knowledge of their own greatness. How many times must we watch a biopic tell us just how important every aspect of an artist’s life is in leading them to write one of a dozen or so popular hits? Perhaps the sorry state of the music biopic was best diagnosed by the 2007 satire Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story, in which the fictional folk/rock/pop star’s drummer tells crowds ‘Dewey Cox has to think about his entire life before he plays!’

This is not to say that the biopic is a doomed genre altogether, recent offerings such as last year’s Oppenheimer and Priscilla are proof of that, but there is a sense in which the best examples are those which do not propose to be an authoritative biographical extravaganza but rather a reading of a life. Often, these films work best as a synthesis of artist and subject: Oppenheimer may be read as a film as much about Christopher Nolan’s own guilt of creation as his protagonist’s, Priscillia as a story not unlike Sofia Coppola’s own as a young girl forced to meet all too early the scrutiny of the public eye. But fundamentally, they are all simply versions of the story: recollections, urban legends, re-translations of ancient manuscripts.

A Complete Unknown may be a wonderful film about a young songwriter who changed the world, but he will be Bob Dylan the myth rather than Robert Zimmerman the man. It will tell us how this boy became the voice of his generation; how he, with little more than a guitar, a funny haircut and a polyamorous spirit, revolutionised popular music. But it will not give us, across two hours, any of the same insight into who this most elusive of artists actually was as D.A. Pennebaker does when he captures Dylan laughing at the British pronunciation of ‘bloke’, throwing a tantrum at his harmonica being out of tune or, most crucially, instructing his rowdy posse to ‘be groovy or leave, man.’ Bob Dylan has always been a figure who revels in indefinability. Throughout his life he has rejected classification as a folk singer, protest singer, poet, anarchist, and most every other moniker thrown at him. A Complete Unknown will try its best to define him again as one thing or another – voice of a generation, genius, asshole etc. – but, in Don’t Look Back, Dylan himself put all such definitions to rest in perpetuity, telling student journalist Terry Ellis, quite simply, that ‘I’m just a guitar player. That’s all.’

Image credit: The Criterion Collection

Categories
Culture

Silver Swans, China Plates and Memories from the Pits: The Bowes Museum and ‘Kith & Kinship’

By Rohan Scott

County Durham’s Bowes Museum is a fabulous French Second Empire edifice nestled in a corner of the charming town of Barnard Castle. It was purposefully built in 1892 to house the collections of Josephine and John Bowes. Given the context of the ‘Kith & Kinship’ exhibition, it is important to acknowledge the source of the Bowes family fortune. The coalfields of County Durham and Northumberland did well to service the wealth and station of the Bowes family, but would not have been possible without the graft and toil of many working people in the region. If this museum may be a sweet fruit from bloodied and ashen soil, then I hope the beauty of its contents and the ‘Kith & Kinship’ exhibition goes some way to serve as a testament to the communities that enriched the very foundations of this museum.

The museum is endowed with an excellent ceramics collection that beautifully illustrates the intersection between art and functional wares. Over the past century it has subsumed other nationally renowned collections, allowing it to enamel a picture of the history of porcelain. Items range from ancient Qing wares to intricate nineteenth-century European open-work pieces. A favourite of mine is a pair of faience felines coloured canary yellow, made by Émile Gallé.

The parquet-floored picture gallery sits on the second floor, occupying a grand space reminiscent of the rooms in the National Gallery. Upon entering the gallery, a conspicuously placed Canaletto might catch one’s eye, unless first drawn to the bizarre novelty that is a silver swan automaton. Works by El Greco, Goya and Fragonard can be found on the walls, interspersed with paintings by none other than the museum’s founder, Josephine Bowes. 

I will briefly pay some attention to a concurrent exhibition called ‘Framing Fashion: Art and Inspiration from a Private Collection of Vivienne Westwood.’ It displays items from collector Peter Smithson alongside pieces from the museum’s collection to explore historical inspiration in the works of Vivienne Westwood. I feel entirely underqualified to make any discerning comments on this exhibition – but I thoroughly enjoyed the pieces from Dressing Up (Autumn/Winter 1991/92) which feature Harris Tweed corsets, velvet jackets, tattersall skirts and stalker hats. It somehow manages to make a country wardrobe fit for the runway.

The ‘Kith & Kinship’ exhibition revolves around the works of Norman Cornish (1919-2014) and L.S Lowry (1887-1976). The exhibition seeks to illustrate the relationships and social webs of Northern England’s working class communities during labour disputes, wars, the Great Depression and industrial decline. Cornish and Lowry captured the lives of working people in moments of joy and moments of hardship to create a colourful testament to the people of Northern England – their history, their kith and their kinship.

The selected works of Cornish and Lowry work beautifully in tandem, complementary in intention, contrasting in approach and outcome. Cornish draws directly from his experience in the pit in Spennymoor, County Durham. The scenes of his artworks reflect an ‘insider’ perspective as a member of the very community he was capturing on canvas. By contrast Lowry conveyed the toil of Northern industrial life – in Pendlebury, Greater Manchester –  as an empathetic outside observer. The exhibition has been curated with sensitivity and purpose – that is – purpose to highlight an aspect of English history and society so often overlooked. The works of Cornish and Lowry are delightfully paired together to create a sort of correspondence between the two artists. 

Some painting that deserve particular attention are as follows:

‘Chip Van at Night’ (Cornish)
Cornish delivers the warm glow of a Spennymoor chip van, conveying a sense of warmth and respite from a long day’s work.

‘Teenagers’ (Lowry)
Lowry’s signature waifish matchstick figures present a still of adolescent life in industrial Britain.

‘The Gantry’ and ‘Pit Gantry Steps’ (Cornish)
Two paintings of miners climbing the pit gantry steps, the overcast skies and ominous steel structures induce a powerful sense of dread.

‘The Big Meeting’ (Cornish)
A sea of flat cap-crested miners against a backdrop of the silhouettes of Durham Cathedral and Castle. An inspiring image of a community celebrating their heritage and demonstrating labour solidarity.

‘Cricket Match’ (Lowry)
A joyous image of play, set against a backdrop of urban decay – representative of declining industry, unemployment and uncertainty during the Great Depression.

Postscript: I thoroughly recommend a visit to the ‘Kith & Kinship’ exhibition and the permanent collection of Bowes Museum. I apologise for the late delivery of this article as the final day of the exhibition is Sunday 19th of January. The ‘Framing Fashion’ exhibition is on until the 2nd of March. I hope this might inspire some last minute weekend plans – or perhaps a cause to see the museum and the other fabulous exhibitions they put on later in the year.

Categories
Reviews

Review: Nosferatu

By Edward Bayliss

Since he was nine years old, Robert Eggers says he has been ‘obsessed’ with W.F. Murnau’s 1922 vampire horror, Nosferatu. In his years long process of writing the screenplay, one can imagine his rubber wearing faster than his lead. He arrives now on Christmas day, 2024, at one incredibly well researched and well loved iteration of Bram Stoker’s original. This title bears all the familiar Eggers-hallmarks of the folkloric, the gothic, the supernatural, and Willem Dafoe as our wild eyed occultist. The film looks exceptional – its creation of a dim atmosphere of unnaturalness is remarkable, and due credit is owed to DP Darin Blaschke. To use Mark Kermode’s favoured phrase (now especially apt), it’s heart is in the right place – a sentiment with which I think only very few would contend. All this, but my praise comes caveated. Though Eggers’ world creation is ever imposing, there isn’t much in the way of sharp arrest, or sudden stabs to our side. Let it be said, I am not a lover of movies made just of ‘moments’. I do however want to feel the instant chill of putting on cold clothes in the morning, but instead I somehow only get the constant sensation of a loose shoe-lace.

The story of Nosferatu remains almost unchanged from the Murnau original, save some added sexual ornamentation. This is one aspect of reinvention. The traditionally white fanged, bulbous headed vampires with high collared cloaks won’t run. Neither also will their simple object of blood. Instead, Nosferatu here has bloody and bodily lusts, as well as a period accurate Transylvanian outfit.

Bill Skarsgård, originally pitted to play solicitor and husband figure Thomas Hutter, firmly hits the mark as Count Orlok. The original film, being silent, leaves Eggers with a playground of sound to explore. Skarsgård’s voice vibrates with a delicious bass, his training from opera singer Júníusdóttir becoming very apparent as he masters the tones and textures of the undead Romanian aristocrat. The heft of Orlok’s 1590s era authentic cloak plays brilliantly against Lily Rose Depp’s (Ellen) diaphanous night gowns and floral fabrics. Costume designer and longtime Eggers collaborator Linda Muir leaves us very impressed.

The tagline for Eggers’ film reads: ‘succumb to the darkness’. In a film so submerged in shadow, with only a lick of flame or shard of moonlight to illuminate our characters, we can’t help but surrender to the darkness. Pulling at the coattails of Kubrick, Eggers uses as much natural lighting as possible, avoiding VFX at all costs. The quality of the picture is outstanding. Some sequences are slowly unsettling; it feels almost as though it is midnight at midday at Orlok’s castle, recalling some of Magritte’s disorientating works. At the Roma village below, the air is thick with flamelight which sits heavily on smoke, affording a stuffy and full feel to the shot. To set this supernatural fable against such an urgently realist backdrop is a great achievement. Gypsy rites, accents, costumes, and interiors of the period have clearly all been studied meticulously – Eggers uses academic articles to supplement his vision, as well as past productions.

The original Nosferatu plot of 1922 is relatively bare, leaving Eggers opportunity to add some flesh to the bones of the action. We have added intrigue to Lily Rose Depp’s character as she goes more through the catharsis of the sacrificial ‘saviour’ figure. While her writhing and body contortions are striking and seem convincing without the support of special effects, they are too frequent and so dilute their initial shock. Eggers should have exploited the sexual weirdness between the triangle of Orlok, Ellen, and Hutter to a greater degree, this being the location of great narrative potential. Similarly to Ellen’s fits, the menacing silhouette of Orlok is brilliantly conceived at first behind a shifting curtain in the fictional German town of Wisborg, but the motif is repeated too often afterwards. I was never terrified during the screening of Nosferatu, though I didn’t find the appearance of Orlok amusing as critic Peter Bradshaw did. I think he has infantilised the great research and ingenuity of Eggers in his creation of the done-to-death Dracula character.

The camera work is first rate. We skim over seas and mountains, devil-set crossroads and cold stone corridors. The lens is at its best when we follow Hutter on his journey to Transylvania, producing some truly arresting wide angle shots. It feels often like miniature sets are used in tilt shift, especially when we see Orlok’s shadow (again) cast over the roof tiles and spires of Wisborg, adding a kind of fantastical unreality to the image. Eggers had custom lenses fitted to create the Murnau inspired blue tint to much of the picture – one of the main aspects of homage that doesn’t go missed.

This isn’t Eggers’ best work, contrary to what Roger Ebert critic Zoller Seitz would have you think. It lacks the penetration and sheer terror of The Witch, and falls short of the crippling bizarreness of The Lighthouse, but it certainly isn’t half hearted. It doesn’t bite us with the intensity we might want, but certainly it gnaws at our heels with the tenacity and investment of a director who knows his craft.

Categories
Perspective Uncategorized

Beatnik Meditations – Beatniks: From the Cornea to the Cock

By Matty Timmis

I’ve been obsessed with the idea of a ‘beatnik’, whatever that means, for quite a long time now. It started when I was fourteen; slinking through the sprayed and spattered side streets of a less than gentrified slice of Bristol, I stumbled upon a slightly ramshackle second hand bookshop. Already feeling emboldened by my adventure to a less than reputable part of town, and very much in the throes of the grease, grumpiness and cliched angst implicit in that stage of a middle class teenager’s life, I ventured valiantly forth. Creeping round the crumbling shelves, skimming the dog eared and moth eaten spines of reams of volumes of obsolete and puerile knowledge, I was about to capitulate to my budding reality of internet, xbox and wanking, so drab and musty was the poky shop. 

But just as the vibrato of my yawn threatened to become too much to stifle, I saw it. Jack Kerouac’s On The Road. True to its nature it was lying down, sprawled out amongst an orgy of terse and commanding leather bound editions, boxed together, standing to their intellectual attention. The cover was black on the top half, and beneath was a stripe of mauve or violet, a deep hue on a shot taken seemingly from the underside of a car, mountains beckoning in the distance, the very white lines of the road bleary, leering dangerously close to the camera. My interests were piqued immediately, even the name ‘Kerouac’ had a charmingly melancholic timbre in the roof of my mouth (as a side note if I were ever to have a kid I think their name, or at least their middle name, would have to be Kerouac).

On the back a review: “the bible of the beat generation”. I needed no further enticement. The very idea of a bible for a generation, whatever that generation, “the beat generation”, entailed, was incredibly seductive in its certitude, its belief in its wholly comprehensive nature. Then I think I was beginning to feel the prickles of awareness that quiver through one’s mind when they become aware of the vast and transient community of the generation they pass through life with. Even the name of that generation sounded cool, ‘beat’, without any preconceived notions yet already connoting a down and out nature complimented by the snappy and upbeat cadence of the central vowels, inflecting it with a strange optimism.

I can’t remember if I bought it or nicked it, more likely than not I did buy it; I wasn’t as cool then as I now like to imagine. I set to work on it immediately, unusually sincerely, in the nearby park.

For the benefit of all those who, shamefully, are not familiar with the text, it centres round two friends criss crossing 50s America with minds relentlessly open; drinking, taking drugs, sleeping with women, and listening to jazz, transcribed in an endlessly fascinating “first thought best thought” prose, a style Truman Capote snidely described as “not writing but typing”. This was heady stuff for a sheltered young teenager, the kind of thing that really makes you dream, really makes you compare your prosaic life with the unrestrained energy leaping from the page. Pretty much immediately I set about trying to transform my pampered middle England life into the life of a bohemian, a free spirit, a beatnik.

Without cars, drugs, alcohol, girls, or the vast expanses of 1950s America however, it seemed slightly difficult to pinpoint precisely what it meant to be a beatnik. I felt pretty far away, in my suburban semi detached home, from the wild adventurers reeling through my mind. What does it mean to be a beatnik has quietly niggled at me since. 

Webster’s dictionary defines Beatnik as thus:

“Beatnik (noun): : a person who participated in a social movement of the 1950s and early 1960s which stressed artistic self-expression and the rejection of the mores of conventional society’

Broadly: ‘a usually young and artistic person who rejects the mores of conventional society”

Well, the more technical definition is a bit lost on me, not least because, through my own misfortune, I don’t exist in either the 1950s or 1960s. Whilst I am certainly now older than I was when this question first occupied my mind, I would still describe myself as ‘young’, I would even say, at a slightly indulgent stretch, that I am artistic. Do I reject the ‘mores of conventional society’? Well readers I can disclose that I have not only tattoos and an earring, but a nose ring too, making me a veritable bastion of the counterculture.

Frankly though, I’m uncomfortable with the constraints of this definition. If nothing else, I don’t believe for a second that the nerds and virgins who write the entries in those things have the faintest idea of how to define something so culturally distinct from themselves. Beatnik by the dictionary is almost an anathema – it cannot be carved out from the parameters of such a rigorous and inflexible book, it is too wrapped up in desire and freedom, curiosity and hope – faith in the strange journeys we can stumble into.

So after a summer of fairly gentile bumming around western Europe I flew to Munich to meet two of my closest university friends. As is ever the case with a ludicrously skimpy travel budget, my journey there in itself was absurd, involving a creaking old absinthe bar, two dutch girls and a very uncomfortable park bench. That, however, is besides the point. I was still a civilian then, before my supposed ascension to the hallowed grounds of the true beatnik.

This then is the story of the closest I ever got to my teenage dream, where for a second I thought I really might be a beatnik.