Funny, I remember something about Dylan spandex and wings from a gossip column a couple years ago http://www.corfid.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

quote:Originally posted by ColoradoSue:
The only way Dylan could wierd me out is if he was prancing around, wearing a satin thong & those dreaded angel wings....

Now THAT would paint some pretty unsavory images in my mind.

http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif


[This message has been edited by ColoradoSue (edited April 08, 2004).]

Funny, I remember something about Dylan spandex and wings from a gossip column a couple years ago http://www.corfid.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

quote:Originally posted by ColoradoSue:
The only way Dylan could wierd me out is if he was prancing around, wearing a satin thong & those dreaded angel wings....

Now THAT would paint some pretty unsavory images in my mind.

http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.corfid.com/ubb/wink.gif


[This message has been edited by ColoradoSue (edited April 08, 2004).]

Since when does a folk artist of Dylan's caliper have to go commercial in order to be around beautiful women? There was a time when Dylan was booed for playing an electric guitar at a folk festival. Now he gets a pass for selling underwear. Incrementalism has even worn down artistic standards. I suppose it would be OK if he were selling toothpaste or long distance carriers. I don't know what defines a sell out if this isn't it.

Since when does a folk artist of Dylan's caliper have to go commercial in order to be around beautiful women? There was a time when Dylan was booed for playing an electric guitar at a folk festival. Now he gets a pass for selling underwear. Incrementalism has even worn down artistic standards. I suppose it would be OK if he were selling toothpaste or long distance carriers. I don't know what defines a sell out if this isn't it.

I read this in the paper yesterday:

...................................
Quote Of The Week

“Ladies’ Undergarments”

Bob Dylan, when asked in an interview in 1965 what would tempt him to sell out.
...................................

So, I suppose you can’t say we weren’t warned!

I still think he’s taking the p*ss.

as i said, i think its just a sarcastic nod to his long time fans that have seen the 65 press conference..

And more on this online at Slate ("Tangled Up in Boobs"): http://slate.msn.com/id/2098635/

Here's an excerpt:

"But I think the most likely motive for Dylan is exposure. It's a real struggle for older rockers to remind the world that they still exist. Their music's not played on the radio, and their videos (if they even make them) aren't in heavy rotation on VH1. Thus you see the Jaguar ads with Sting, or the MCI ads with James Taylor and Michael McDonald—all of them prominently featuring the artist's song. It's essentially a way to put a video on the major networks, where an older audience might see it. Yes, in exchange for publicizing their art they sacrifice some integrity, but this is basically an understandable tradeoff. And Dylan even gets, in the terms of his deal, a mix CD of his songs sold at Victoria's Secret stores.

So, it makes some sense for Bob. But what about Vicky? Why would a brand that's about sexiness, youth, and glamour want any connection at all with a decrepit, sixtysomething folksinger? The answer, my friend, is totally unclear. The answer is totally unclear.

Even if Victoria's Secret hopes to bring in more boomer women, do those women want their underwear to exude the spirit and essence of Bob Dylan? Or, conversely, is Bob Dylan the sort of man they're hoping to attract? Even if you're of the belief that men frequently shop at VS for their ladies, I still don't see the appeal of this ad. I, for instance, am a man, and I can assure you that Bob Dylan is not what I'm looking for in a woman's undergarment. (And if I found him there—man, would that be disturbing.)"

And more on this online at Slate ("Tangled Up in Boobs"): http://slate.msn.com/id/2098635/

Here's an excerpt:

"But I think the most likely motive for Dylan is exposure. It's a real struggle for older rockers to remind the world that they still exist. Their music's not played on the radio, and their videos (if they even make them) aren't in heavy rotation on VH1. Thus you see the Jaguar ads with Sting, or the MCI ads with James Taylor and Michael McDonald—all of them prominently featuring the artist's song. It's essentially a way to put a video on the major networks, where an older audience might see it. Yes, in exchange for publicizing their art they sacrifice some integrity, but this is basically an understandable tradeoff. And Dylan even gets, in the terms of his deal, a mix CD of his songs sold at Victoria's Secret stores.

So, it makes some sense for Bob. But what about Vicky? Why would a brand that's about sexiness, youth, and glamour want any connection at all with a decrepit, sixtysomething folksinger? The answer, my friend, is totally unclear. The answer is totally unclear.

Even if Victoria's Secret hopes to bring in more boomer women, do those women want their underwear to exude the spirit and essence of Bob Dylan? Or, conversely, is Bob Dylan the sort of man they're hoping to attract? Even if you're of the belief that men frequently shop at VS for their ladies, I still don't see the appeal of this ad. I, for instance, am a man, and I can assure you that Bob Dylan is not what I'm looking for in a woman's undergarment. (And if I found him there—man, would that be disturbing.)"

Put in that context it does make sense to me. My generation, ahem, has never exactly been welcomed with open arms by VS. Using an icon from the era of an audience you want to capture is a cheap, cut to the chase, way to appeal to those roughly of the boomer generation. That is, assuming that is their goal. Then again the person who dreamed up the ad campaign could just be a huge Dylan fan.

quote:Originally posted by Auburn Annie:

Even if Victoria's Secret hopes to bring in more boomer women, do those women want their underwear to exude the spirit and essence of Bob Dylan? Or, conversely, is Bob Dylan the sort of man they're hoping to attract? Even if you're of the belief that men frequently shop at VS for their ladies, I still don't see the appeal of this ad. I, for instance, am a man, and I can assure you that Bob Dylan is not what I'm looking for in a woman's undergarment. (And if I found him there—man, would that be disturbing.)"

Put in that context it does make sense to me. My generation, ahem, has never exactly been welcomed with open arms by VS. Using an icon from the era of an audience you want to capture is a cheap, cut to the chase, way to appeal to those roughly of the boomer generation. That is, assuming that is their goal. Then again the person who dreamed up the ad campaign could just be a huge Dylan fan.

quote:Originally posted by Auburn Annie:

Even if Victoria's Secret hopes to bring in more boomer women, do those women want their underwear to exude the spirit and essence of Bob Dylan? Or, conversely, is Bob Dylan the sort of man they're hoping to attract? Even if you're of the belief that men frequently shop at VS for their ladies, I still don't see the appeal of this ad. I, for instance, am a man, and I can assure you that Bob Dylan is not what I'm looking for in a woman's undergarment. (And if I found him there—man, would that be disturbing.)"