<DIV id=RTEContent>This is why, per Mo on last night's Simpsons rerun, I only like non-funny Woody Allen. Louis Kontos <Louis.Kontos@liu.edu> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Carl, Did Dylan do something bad to your sister or something else we should all know about, that would help make sense of your recent posts? It doesn't seem that you know much about Dylan or music or writing. You do seem, though, to have strong opinions on these subjects. Dylan, I say again, is a serious artist -- which sets him apart from almost the entirety of our cultural wasteland (no small achievement). The story of Dylan's decline, demise, selling-out, etc. was written a long time ago. The only problem with this story, whatever purpose it serves, is that Dylan still creates powerful music, non-stop. I could list a few dozen recent Dylan songs that are pure genius, unparalleled in every way. But what's the point? All I see on this list is a bunch of people that stopped listening to Dylan in 66, or whenever, and who figure that their opinion on something they know nothing about (by their own account) is worth something. What makes 'Pawn in their Game' or 'Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll' more political than 'Political World' or 'Dark Eyes'? Anybody? Are these 'early' songs better artistically than 'I and I' or 'Jokerman'? Do explain. Frankly, I'd like to remind Carl and few others, there's an onus on people who contribute opinions in a public forum to know about the subject on which they opine. Louis </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <hr size=1> <a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTFqODRtdXQ4BF9TAzMyOTc1MDIEX3MDOTY2ODgxNjkEcG9zAzEEc2VjA21haWwtZm9vdGVyBHNsawNmYw--/SIG=110oav78o/**http%3a//farechase.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.</a>