Terpene

thcscience_admin
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 21:41, 26 July 2010 [1].

The Basement Tapes

[edit]

The Basement Tapes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Moisejp (talk) Mick gold (talk), I.M.S. (talk) 03:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We are nominating this for featured article because we believe it meets the standards of FA. This nomination arose from work done by WP:DYLAN collaboration team. Mick gold (talk), I.M.S. (talk), Moisejp (talk) 03:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comment: The article seems very comprehensively sources, with even T.S. Eliot's biography in there somewhere. The only issue I could find concerns Harris, John (ed) (2000). This appears to relate to an article in Q magazine, which is a monthly. We need to know in which 2000 issue the article appeared. Otherwise, all sources look OK. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton, thanks for your comment. The references are not to Q, the monthly rock magazine, but to a publication entitled: Q Dylan, edited by John Harris, dated October 2000. This was published by Q magazine and EMAP from the the usual editorial address of Q magazine. It was a special issue: all the content was devoted to different facets of Bob Dylan, and it was 148 pages in length. There was no isbn. At this time, in early 2000s, Q magazine published a series of special issues devoted to The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Pink Floyd, et al. Mick gold (talk) 10:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I suggest you date the source "October 2000", to facilitate its identification. Brianboulton (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Moisejp (talk) 08:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media review: One image.

  • Usage: Good, standard.
  • Rationale: Very good.

I'm surprised that the article includes no sound samples. I see on the Talk page there was a brief discussion around the end of May about introducing some, but the matter was dropped unresolved. For an article on a 77-minute-long album with 24 tracks and a complex production history, it would certainly be appropriate and very helpful to the reader to include a few samples.—DCGeist (talk) 22:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Samples from three songs have been added. Mick gold (talk) 23:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good point, altered. Mick gold (talk) 23:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm uncomfortable with both mentions of Woodstock in the third paragraph of the lede - The Band without Dylan's involvement were added to sixteen songs recorded during the Woodstock sessions. Overdubs were added in 1975 to songs from both categories. The Basement Tapes was critically acclaimed upon release, and reached a peak of #7 on the Billboard 200 album chart. However, the album's format has led critics to question the omission of some of Dylan's best-known 1967 compositions and the inclusion of material by The Band that was not recorded in Woodstock. - However nothing was actually recorded in Woodstock because most of the songs were recorded in West Saugerties in the basement at Big Pink, although apparently a few early sessions were held in Dylan's house in Byrdcliffe (which is in Woodstock) but nothing recorded there was used. I think there is an overuse of Woodstock (just as the actual Woodstock concert was in White Lake, New York), because the Basement Tapes were recorded mostly at Big Pink in West Saugerties, which is near Woodstock. By using the more catchy Woodstock You have rootsy stuff not wanting to be rootsy...Modernist (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first "Woodstock" in that graf was my doing—part of a broader copyedit to deal with some awkward phrasing. I've replaced it so it reads "Big Pink sessions". I'll leave it to the nominators to address how best to handle the second occurrence.—DCGeist (talk) 04:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There were probably three locations for recordings: Dylan’s house, named Hi Lo Ha, in Byrdcliffe, Big Pink, and, after vacating Big Pink in October ’67, Helm & Danko moved to a house on Wittenberg Road where more recordings happened. No tape logs exist so what was recorded where is based on speculation and interviews with The Band, particularly Robertson & Hudson. The most detailed account of The Basement Tapes, Griffin’s book Million Dollar Bash, begins with a map of the area showing these three houses within a few miles of each other. Throughout the book, Griffin refers to the Woodstock recordings to differentiate what was recorded in these three houses from recordings in other locations. (The title of The Band’s first album, Music From Big Pink, led many to believe it was recorded there, but it was recorded in a studio in New York.) Take Three of “Nothing was Delivered” was almost certainly recorded in Wittenberg Road, because it features Helm on drums, but Griffin argues that Take One of that song was released on the album. The majority of the recordings probably came from Big Pink but we don’t know for sure. To further complicate things, Howard Sounes’s biography of Dylan, Down The Highway, introduces a fourth location, "the Ohayo Mountain home of Clarence Schmidt", an eccentric retired mason, where Sounes claims some of these recordings were made. (I shall add this point to the article.) In the same vein as Griffin’s book, I would suggest that Woodstock recordings is a useful way to refer to the entire body of work recorded by Dylan and The Band between June and October 1967 (probably). Mick gold (talk) 08:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Clarence really didn't have a house but rather he lived inside the mountain, at the top; - great view; surrounded by everything conceivable in the universe from Mobile Gasoline signs to tinfoiled trees; I cannot believe any of these songs were recorded there. They might have all gone up there, they also might have all played up there; but it was very primitive. Although anything was possible I suppose, he might've had a spot up there...Modernist (talk) 18:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Surely it’s not right to flatly state that all the Dylan-Band songs were recorded in Big Pink. We simply don’t know. We do know they were all recorded in (probably four) locations in the Woodstock area between April & October 1967. There are authoritative interviews, in Griffin and in Sounes, which state that songs were recorded at Wittenberg Road and at Clarence Schmidt’s home. I’ve amended lead with this in mind. Mick gold (talk) 13:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—I mostly think this is a very good article, except for that Songs and themes section, which is long and unwieldy. A particular problem I have with it is that many of its sub-sections are barely a sentence long, and I doubt a non-Dylan-enthusiast would be interested in the personnel details for every song (a Personnel section at the bottom of the article should suffice). Further, since you have a Themes section that discusses the album's lyrical themes as a whole, the big list of songs is also mostly a redundancy. I wonder if you can transport the section wholesale to the 'List of BT songs' article; the Themes section in this article can subsequently be beefed up to cover all the major info from the erstwhile Songs and themes section. Minor quibbles:

  • "Consider how much "Odds and Ends" owes to Fats Domino." - quotes within quotes should be in 'single quotation marks'.
Done. Moisejp (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "#7" → "number seven" per MOSNUM. Billboard → Billboard. Audit this and the above point throughout.
Done. Moisejp (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • if you guys decide to retain the Songs and themes section, is there a way to prevent the songs from showing up on the TOC? The TOC is currently way too long.—indopug (talk) 08:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please clarify: what is the TOC? Mick gold (talk) 09:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Table of Contents—indopug (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the song titles were prefaced with a semi-colon(;) rather than being subsections (==*==) they wouldn't show up in the TOC, but would be emboldened. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 11:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your suggestion, Indopug. I've made it so that the songs are no longer in the TOC. Is this a satisfactory improvement for you? I think Mick gold and I are in agreement that for us the short description of each song is an important part of the article. I think it gives a little flavour of the variety of different songs, and their varied recording history, and I would say that if someone is not a Dylan enthusiast he or she could easily skim over that section. I'm sure in any Wikipedia article there will be readers with varying degrees of interest, and it's normal to expect that there will always be some who get more out of certain details than others—but having details that can be easily skimmed over by those who are less interested without detracting from their overall enjoyment (for example, the personnel information for every song) while still having those details available for those who are interested is, I believe, not a bad thing. If the song descriptions with the personnel info does not bother you too much, we would very much like to keep it. Moisejp (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Moisejp's comments above. Indopug suggests transporting all the sub-sections on individual songs wholesale to the List of Basement Tapes songs, which is a much more basic article - both in its scope and in the quality of the prose. Such a radical revision of The Basement Tapes articles is possible, in our opinion it would be a poorer article, so I'd like to know if that's the clear consensus of the editors reviewing this article. Mick gold (talk) 12:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I would be happy to go with consensus (which is why I am not opposing over the matter). One last thing, I see you have formatted the song titles as '''Goin' to Acapulco'''<br />; it should ideally be ;"Goin' to Acapulco" (lesser code, and song names should be in quotes).—indopug (talk) 17:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the song-by-song analysis is one of the best things about the article, though it certainly was a good idea to remove them from the TOC.—DCGeist (talk) 17:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the song-by-song layout is clunky, awkward, and not the best way of conveying the information in prose. The format is too list-y, and it's jarring that you have another "Themes" section later in the article. On that count, I'd have to state Oppose. This section could use some serious reworking. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:35, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WesleyDodds correctly points out that it is jarring to have two sections labelled 'Themes'. The first section is obviously a detailed analysis of the lyrical and musical contents of each song, so it has been re-titled 'Songs'. The 'Themes' section addresses the ways in which various critics have perceived thematic unities in the collection of songs known as The Basement Tapes—from Michael Gray to Greil Marcus. Mick gold (talk) 08:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I'm a member of wikiproject Bob Dylan, I haven't heard any song on this album, so I wouldn't say I'm a Dylan enthusiast. Having said that I think the song formatting system on this article is brilliant, because the info about each song is easily accessible. Any other way of conveying this info for an album article with so many songs wouldn't make much sense to the reader and so would get lost quite easily. However I also think more info needs to be added about the lesser songs to make this system work, because some sections are too short.  Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 21:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having contributed to and reviewed various FA-level album articles, I'm quite convinced the current layout for song information isn't the most effective or elegant way to convey this information. It certainly isn't "brilliant" prose, and could use with some compacting. Also, consider exporting some of the details to articles devoted to the songs themselves. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The writers of this article (Moisejp, I.M.S. and myself) embarked on improving The Basement Tapes after we had taken The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan to FA on May 4, 2010. That article also employed a song-by-song format, so I'm puzzled why this format is said to be neither elegant nor effective to convey information about TBT. Mick gold (talk) 10:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Could somebody, um, reformat the Freewheelin' article to remove the songs from the TOC, like they did here? Thanks,—indopug (talk) 23:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]
OK, done. Mick gold (talk) 08:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If I had been around for that FAC, I would've opposed it on the same grounds. The approach is overly cluttered and is inelegant prose writing. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media review (supplemental): One image added.

  • License: CC-BY-2.0. Verified.
  • Quality: Fine.

Three audio samples (fair use) added.

  • I'll discuss these as a group. It's clear that the selection was well-considered, and the rationales are good in all three cases. However, I didn't feel the captions were quite up to snuff. Where possible, we want to give the reader an idea of specifically what to listen for in the sample.
  • The caption for File:Apple Suckling Tree.ogg didn't really do that with the Danko quote, and it made a claim about Marcus's view that I didn't find was well supported by the source. I moved the Danko quote into the narrative, and substituted a quote from Marcus that suggests a couple specific things to listen for.
  • The caption for File:Open The Door, Homer.ogg was largely composed of a quote from Shelton that actually gives his view of The Basement Tapes as a whole. I substituted Shelton's immediately preceding sentence, which directly addresses "Open the Door, Homer". Still, it doesn't really aid the reader in focusing their attention on what to listen for, and further improvement can probably be made here.
  • The caption for File:Don't Ya Tell Henry.ogg, which I've left for you untouched, simply does not work. It focuses on a chorus line that is not heard in the sample. One possibility here would be to use Marcus's description from Invisible Empire of Dylan "shouting encouragement through a stuttering horn break, the singing wild ('I was outasight!') and then cool, distant" (p. 243). (That would require sampling the appropriate section of the song, of course.) Or I'm sure you could track down another description that, again, would give the reader a more specific idea of what to listen for.—DCGeist (talk) 23:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DCGeist, thanks for improving the audio file captions. Your suggestion about using Marcus's comment on "Don't Ya Tell Henry" from Invisible Republic won't work, because it describes the Dylan-Band version which has been released on bootlegs, but not officially. The Band-only version was re-recorded later and appears on The Basement Tapes 1975 album; it has been described as a prototype of the sound The Band would reveal on their albums, so I've articulated this point in a new caption. Mick gold (talk) 07:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That works great. It really enhances the value of the audio clip to the reader.—DCGeist (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The new captions are really great. Thanks, DCGeist and Mick gold! Moisejp (talk) 13:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indopug, to clarify, you'd like to see the song descriptions like this, with the song titles de-bolded, in quotation marks, and no line break between the song title and the personnel, like this?

"Ruben Remus": Manuel – vocal, piano; Robertson – guitar; Hudson – organ; Danko – bass, backing vocal; Helm – drums. Recorded at Music From Big Pink sessions, 1968.

Engineer Rob Fraboni identified this track as a 1968 recording by The Band. Griffin says the song is "as effortlessly charming as "Katie's Been Gone" and "Ferdinand The Impostor", two more out-takes from the same era."

I wasn't sure if your request included removing the line break. Personally I think the break (and the bold) make it visually easy for the reader to see where one song analysis ends and the next one starts. But I appreciate that you have changed your Delete [the song descriptions] vote to a Neutral vote, and we are certainly willing to compromise to reach a happy consensus with everyone. Moisejp (talk) 13:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you missed a semi-colon that I used. That takes care of the bolding as well as the line break. Here's a sample edit.—indopug (talk) 16:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, indopug. I have made the changes. Looks good. Moisejp (talk) 13:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Clarence Schmidt see my comments above - re-reading Sounes - he actually says on page 224 The musicians have forgotten what songs exactly were recorded at the Schmidt house, but Garth Hudson thinks "Apple Suckling Tree" sounds like it may have been recorded there. Sounds like parsing to me, Schmidt's wife lived in a small old house next to his place and it sounds as though they certainly played up there, but it is ambiguous at best whether or not anything was used from any playing up there - given Clarence Schmidt somewhat esoteric and legendary status as an outsider artist it just sounds like bragging to me, I cannot support the article...Modernist (talk) 16:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Modernist, how can we improve this article? Schmidt was mentioned in the article only because of p. 223 of Sounes which says: "These songs became known as "The Basement Tapes", though not all were recorded in the basement at Big Pink. Some were recorded at Hi Lo Ha—in the so-called Red Room—and others at the Ohayo Mountain home of Clarence Schmidt." Sounes's book has been described the most authoritative biography of Dylan. You clearly have local knowledge of the area. Should we ignore this sentence in Sounes because of your knowledge of the area and Schmidt? I carry no candle for Schmidt. The argument could be made that other detailed accounts of The Basement Tapes (Griffin, Heylin, Shelton) do not mention Schmidt and he is therefore questionable. Mick gold (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mick in my opinion I would ignore the input about Clarence Schmidt's house being a place where they recorded material used on the album: [2], and just go with your other locations. The place was an insane although wonderful happening in process - Clarence was a unique character who looked a little like Ernest Hemingway, and who would sometimes chase tourists away with his shotgun; the house in the picture wasn't really like a house - its a strange construction being built down the face of Ohayo Mountain. In one of these pictures [3] you can see one with Van Morrison... I'm sure he was probably friendly to the idea of playing music, but the ramshackle truth of the place belies any credible result coming out of there. Might be worth mentioning in some context, like Garth Hudson's alluding to the Surrealist atmosphere there, maybe an inspiration for some of the material. This is only my opinion. I only knew Clarence briefly in 1962 and 1963, and the last time I saw him was around 1972...Modernist (talk) 22:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. It does not seem to be a plausible recording location and no other study mentions it. Mick gold (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proviso - Is this article supposed to be in English english or American english? Currently there is a little of both, although IMO it should be in American spelling - given it's about the Band and Dylan and their written material...Modernist (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that an article about Dylan & The Band should be in American English, and I'll correct aberrations when I spot them, other editors too. Mick gold (talk) 15:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In copyediting the lede a few days ago, I added the names of the five Hawks/Band members. I oppose the recent edit that removed them, for the following reasons:

  • The article describes a collaboration between six musicians. It is odd to name just one of them in the lede.
  • The added informational value of their names far outweighs any concern over additional length. This lede is far from being oversized.
  • Someone who reads the lede may now quite possibly wonder, "How many of these Hawks were there?" Were they a duo? A trio? Maybe a big band?
  • As a stylistic concern, the resulting reference to Dylan and the unnamed, unnumbered Hawks as "these musicians" is quite awkward.—DCGeist (talk) 17:10, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DCGeist, I would be delighted if we could work together on this. I moved the names of the Hawks/Band members lower down thinking that would chime better better with the composition of The Band: 4 Canadians + 1 American. Please re-write in your preferred structure. As you may have noticed I've been doing c/e on lead, trying to make prose better. Apologies if we are at cross purposes. Mick gold (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've given it another shot. I like how the first section of the main text reads now, with the Band members' names and national breakdown, so perhaps the lede doesn't also require the names—let's see if other reviewers have an opinion on that. The lede does need to make clear the number of musicians involved, and I've edited along those lines. I've also made another substantive addition. Here are the results of the two primary changes I've made:
  • "During his world tour of 1966, Dylan was backed by a five-member rock group, The Hawks, who subsequently found fame as The Band."
  • Given that Dylan had famously been a folk musician, I think it's important to immediately make clear to readers less than familiar with the history that The Hawks were not a folk quintet, but a rock band ("group" here, for obvious reasons). If there's consensus against this point, the sentence could be phrased, "During his world tour of 1966, Dylan was backed by The Hawks, whose five members subsequently found fame as The Band."
  • "For some critics, the songs on The Basement Tapes, which circulated widely in unofficial form, mounted a major stylistic challenge to rock music in the late 1960s."
  • I added the clause "which circulated widely in unofficial form". Something like this is necessary because we've told the reader the album did not come out until 1975. Given that, how did the songs have an impact in the late 1960s? I've offered one solution, but it's not the only possible way to approach this. Were the songs performed widely in concert by Dylan and/or The Band? Was that a primary source of their impact that should be added to or substituted for the unofficial distribution of the tapes?—DCGeist (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I'm happy with your changes, also happy you left the Band's names lower down with their national identities. I think "circulated widely in unofficial form" is good. In 1968, leading musicians (including Eric Clapton and The Beatles) heard the 14 song demo version of the Basement Tapes. After 1969, musicians & Dylan fans were listening to the Basement songs on the bootleg, Great White Wonder.
Dylan made just a handful of appearances between his crash in July 1966 and his national tour with The Band which launched in January 1974, he was virtually invisible as a live performer. Basement songs also made an impact via the cover versions inc Mighty Quinn, Wheel's On Fire, Too Much of Nothing, You Ain't Goin' Nowhere, all charted in 1967 & 1968. The Band included three Basement songs on their debut album in 1968, Music From Big Pink, which was v well received in the music community. The process of diffusion & transmission of BT songs is described in detail in section "Dwarf Music demos and GWW". Mick gold (talk) 19:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Moar comments

I just observed that for an album article, this is huge.

  • Throughout the Background and recording section, you use The Hawks and The Band interchangably. Is that technically correct? Why not use just one, or call them Hawks till the specific point when they became The Band, then start calling them The Band.
Mick gold or I.M.S., do you have an opinion about what to do about this? I kind of agree it might be good to call them The Hawks for any info that is about anything that is clearly before they changed their name, unless you think it is too confusing or have a better solution. Moisejp (talk) 15:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the group are known as The Hawks during the first part of the article. In the 'Dwarf Music demos' section, their formal change of name to The Band is recorded. During the song-by-song analysis, comments from Hoskyns, Griffin & Marcus call the group The Band, because they are writing about the development of the musical style that will reveal itself on their debut album, Music From Big Pink. Also The Basement Tapes was an album by Bob Dylan and The Band, so we have to acknowledge that. I suggest it would be wrong to use The Hawks in this section. Obviously, criticism and commentary on the album after 1975 refers to them as The Band. Mick gold (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You cover some four months of recording in 1967 in great—I'd even say a little too much—detail. A lot of stuff can be cut without affecting anything:
  • "Dylan had married Sara Lownds in December 1965. By the time the basement recording sessions started in Big Pink around June 1967, Dylan had two children: Maria (Sara’s daughter from her first marriage) and Jesse Dylan. Anna Dylan was born on July 11, 1967."—Four new names, two new dates. None of them in any way related to The Basement Tapes. Can you replace with "By July 1967, Dylan was raising three children with his wife." or some such? In fact why is this stuff so far away from the bit at the top where you mention Hi Lo Ha? I suggest reducing this to 1-2 lines and moving it up to Early recordings.
  • That Sgt. Pepper bit can be reduced too, especially his quote.
  • A lot of stuff is more suited for the Themes section, like the whole domesticity thing at the end of New composition.
  • Lead Belly, not Leadbelly.
Debatable: many recordings, including 2 78s that I own, list him as Leadbelly. See Lead Belly for mention of this. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some examples here –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Basement Tapes refers to the 1975 album. The Basement Tapes, without italicization, refers loosely to the set of songs that were recorded in the Woodstock area in 1967, including those did not appear of the album. It is commonly referred to as such in Dylan biographies, etc. but if you think it is unclear we could try to come up with a substitute expression. As Jezhotwells says below "the basement tape(s)" and "the Basement Tape" are only used when we are quoting someone who has referred to them that way. In 1969, when Jann Wenner wrote the Rolling Stone article, I guess either "the Basement Tape" was the term used at the time, or else there was no established name, and Wenner happened to call it that, without the "s." Moisejp (talk) 15:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The lower case is part of several quotes so is reproduced verbatim, per MoS. I don't see a singular instance of "basement tape". The article is large compared to many album articles as the Basement Tapes, in privately circulated, bootleg and official releases, was without doubt a seminal album and a significant influence on musicians of the late sixties and early seventies. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The singular is only used once, in 1969 Rolling Stone headline: "Dylan's Basement Tape Should Be Released". We can't alter that. Mick gold (talk) 18:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not just a seminal album. The way in which the songs were recorded, the ways in which the songs reached the public (bootleg, cover version, demo), the way in which the 1975 album was assembled are complex, more complex than Dylan's other seminal albums such as Freewheelin', BIABH, H61R, BoB. Mick gold (talk)

Comment: I support all the recent edits by Indopug that were just reverted.—DCGeist (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I thought that the nominators should have a chance to comment before such changes are introduced. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fair. I'd say in general that the article still has a bit of a distance to go to meet the 1a prose quality criterion, and editing such as Indopug's for flow, focus, and concision is exactly what's called for.—DCGeist (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indopug's edits for prose flow are excellent. I would argue for retention of footnote on The Hawks/The Crackers/The Band as this demonstrates that their name was fluid during this 18 month period, only finalised by release of Music From Big Pink. Mick gold (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored all of Indopug's edits, except for the The Hawks/The Crackers/The Band footnote until consensus is reached on it. Moisejp (talk) 13:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I re-wrote the sentence about the Manchester concert this morning (to explain audience hostility as per Indopug) so I've made a small c/e to avoid repetition. Mick gold (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have always and nearly only ever seen Leadbelly never until the other day Lead Belly, In my opinion Leadbelly is correct. I think this is informative, interesting and relevant - "Dylan had married Sara Lownds in December 1965. By the time the basement recording sessions started in Big Pink around June 1967, Dylan had two children: Maria (Sara’s daughter from her first marriage) and Jesse Dylan. Anna Dylan was born on July 11, 1967." And should stay. The Hawks became the Band - not that complicated but when they were working with Dylan in 67 the name the Band hadn't happened yet; it was all part of the overall creative process - not that complicated - I think the article is fine...Modernist (talk) 02:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As Indopug and Kitchen Roll have expressed concern over the length of some of the shorter song descriptions, I have added additional material to three of the shorter ones: "Ruben Remus," "Yazoo Street Scandal" and "Goin' to Acapulco." Moisejp (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Overall I think the page is very strong and by and large needs just rewording to take it across. Except for the fact that I find the song by song treatment a little monotonous and at times forced. Its very much according to "source"... bla...Two or three sentences from a single source is always going to be unsatisfactory, and the prose, frankly tend in this section towards the repeditative: all para openers
According to Sid Griffin,
Shelton describes
Hoskyns estimates
Griffin notes that
Hoskyns identifies
According to Bowman's notes
Heylin writes
Describing this song as a good-natured nonsense song that really swings, Griffin speculates
As Heylin notes
Marcus refers

And there is more, though it improves after this. Ye really tend to tend to these, as I say I think the article is very strong otherwise, and would be one I would be proud to eventually support. Ceoil (talk) 01:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil, thank you very much for your suggestions. I really liked the series of edits you and Mick gold made. There were just three cases where I felt it was better to mention the source in the text in order to clearly maintain a neutral, objective stance. I hope you are still happy with the overall changes in this section. If not, I'd be happy to discuss this further with you. Thank you! Moisejp (talk) 15:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No Moisejp, I'm fine with your edits. Any changes I make are suggestions and preferences only, I dont have a problem with reverts or partial reverts. As I say, I'm leaning towards support, but would like a few passes over the wording before I sign off. Ceoil (talk) 15:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is inconsistency as regards the serial comma. It appears some places (e.g., "Rick Danko, Garth Hudson, Richard Manuel, and Robbie Robertson") but not others (e.g., "Danko recalled that he, Richard Manuel and Garth Hudson joined"). I'm happy to go through the article and make sure the style is consistent. Nominators, which style do you prefer?—DCGeist (talk) 01:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer no serial comma. Thanks a lot for offering to do that! Moisejp (talk) 01:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with that as well, if Mick gold has no objections. - I.M.S. (talk) 03:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No objections. Mick gold (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Some substantive queries on the Songs section: *By positioning this track first, Dylan and Robertson were suggesting that the entire Basement collection could be heard as a series of musical odds and ends.

  • Dylan was involved in sequencing the album? There's no indication of that elsewhere in the article.
I don't have the Gill book that this is sourced to, but presumably Gill assumed that both Dylan and Robertson may have been involved in choosing the sequence—Mick gold, does Gill mention both of them specifically? I agree that elsewhere the information we present, in particular "Fraboni told Griffin that Robertson was the dominant voice in selecting the final tracks for The Basement Tapes and that Dylan had not been in the studio very often." in "Columbia Records compilation release" suggests Dylan may not have had much to do with it. If Gill mentions Dylan, we can't very well just leave him out, but would one solution be to replace "Dylan and Robertson" with "the album's compilers"? Too vague/evasive? Moisejp (talk) 05:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's Gill's point, and I've phrased it more carefully. Mick gold (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*One critic heard in this song two references to The Coasters: "'Along came Jones'—a song title in itself—and 'emptied the trash'—a reference to 'Yakety Yak'."

  • Please name the "critic". Is it Heylin (whom the article identifies as a "biographer"), who's cited at the end of the sentence, or is he quoting someone else?
It is Heylin and I've now named him. His comment is in Revolution In The Air: The Songs of Bob Dylan: Volume 1: 1957-73 (amazing how many colons you can get into one title) which is arguably a work of criticism since it consists of 300 detailed analyses of Dylan songs. For now, I've simply used his name. Mick gold (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. On the more general issue, what we might call "consistency of epithet" is important. If you're going to use "critic" as shorthand for a given person late in an article, you can't introduce him simply as "biographer" early in the article. It would have to be "critic and biographer" on first mention. At any rate, on Wikipedia, the actual name is almost always preferable to the "one critic" construction.—DCGeist (talk) 12:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*One critic heard the anguish of Blonde On Blonde return to haunt the basement proceedings. "The song proposes a romp in that posh Mexican resort, but the heavy spirit is down in Juarez again."

  • Please name the "critic". Is it Shelton (whom the article identifies as a "biographer"), who's cited at the end of the sentence, or is he quoting someone else?
It is Shelton, and I've added his name. Mick gold (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Another critic detected a strong Biblical theme in the song, noting that "life is brief" is a recurrent message in the Old Testament books Psalms and Isaiah. Furthermore, Dylan (writing now as a father) realizes now that "no broken heart hurts more than the broken heart of a distraught parent."

  • Please name the critic (or critics) and add a citation after the quote.
The second half of this para, after "their father's wishes", is taken from Griffin's book, so i've tried to make this clearer. Mick gold (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*It has been claimed that Homer was a nickname for the late Richard Fariña...

It's Heylin's point, & I've changed this. Mick gold (talk) 13:14, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Critics have commented that "This Wheel's On Fire" closes the album at a peak of sinister mystery: "It is virtually impossible not to see the locked wheel of Dylan's Triumph 500 in the title, the very wheel upon which his own accelerating pursuit of disaster was borne so swiftly, and then arrested so abruptly. The verses brim with unfinished business, anchored by the certainty that 'we shall meet again'." Several critics suggest that Dylan's lyric once again draws upon Shakespeare's King Lear, echoing Lear's tormented words to his daughter: "Thou art a soul in bliss; but I am bound/Upon a wheel of fire, that mine own tears/Do scald like molten lead."

  • "Critics" plural have made this observation? Please name them. Which one provided the quote? Please add a citation directly after it. "Several critics" suggest that the lyric draws on Lear? Please name them.—DCGeist (talk) 04:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've clarified comments on TWOF by Gill & Shelton. Thanks for comments, DCGeist Mick gold (talk)
We did have all of the references in the Songs section much more spelled out up until this version of 01:32 July 16 [4], but Ceoil felt that it got monotonous (see Ceoil's Comment above) to see the same "So-and-so argues that"-type quotation introduction over and over. So Mick gold made a series of edits to reduce the mention of names. I guess he intended that a reference beginning "One critic said" and sourced to someone would be interpreted as meaning that person was the critic in question. However, I can see how that could be ambiguous. Personally, I wouldn't mind restoring these quotation introductions to how they were a few days ago, but I would like to keep Ceoil happy as well. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to solve this question? Moisejp (talk) 05:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Ceoil's point was that monotony set in due to how similarly so many of the paragraphs opened. It's possible to restructure for variety without eliminating the necessary attributions. Open with the claim or the quote, and then place the source's name in the middle or at the end of it. Aside from that, we simply can't identify someone as a "biographer" in one spot and a "critic" in another when we're referring to the same work, call one critic "several", or present quotes without direct citation.—DCGeist (talk) 06:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think DCGeist makes the right point. Ceoil's criticisms were about monotony of style. I probably went too far in eliminating critics' names. I'll start restoring some of them so that each critical point is clearly sourced. As for biographers & critics. Heylin's Behind The Shades Take Two is billed on the cover as A Biography of Bob Dylan. Heylin's Bob Dylan: A Life In Stolen Moments: Day By Day : 1941 - 1995 is a daily chronology of Dylan's life. Heylin's Revolution In The Air and Still On The Road are detailed exegeses of 600 songs by Dylan. So I would suggest Heylin is both a biographer and a critic. Such mixing of the two is surely not unusual. Andrew Motion's Philip Larkin: A Writer's Life is billed on the cover as a biography of Larkin, but, in this book, Motion writes very detailed criticism of Larkin's poems. Similarly, Sounes's Down The Highway: The Life of Bob Dylan is described as a biography, yet Sounes makes detailed critical points in the book about the differences between Dylan's successful and unsuccessful works. I'm not disagreeing with DCGeist, we should strive for consistency. Mick gold (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All points of attribution of criticism addressed, I think. Mick gold (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Credit line in Songs missing recording date info (or "Recording date disputed") for one Band-only song: "Orange Juice Blues (Blues for Breakfast)".—DCGeist (talk) 00:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recording date suppplied. Mick gold (talk) 06:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see you added that the 1975 overdubbing on this song was done in Los Angeles. Was overdubbing done anywhere else that year? For consistency's sake, the best thing might be to remove that clause from that one credit line, and address the overdubbing location in the Songs section's introductory passage. That would be helpful, as well, because there has been no mention at all in the main text of overdubbing (it is mentioned in the lede) before this credit line.—DCGeist (talk) 06:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I've added material about the 1975 recordings to the Songs section's introductory passage. Mick gold (talk) 07:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've come across a couple of instances in the article of quoted material lacking the necessary quotation marks—which, of course, constitutes plagiarism, even when a citation follows. (This edit, for example, created one such instance. And here's my correction of another instance.) With that in mind, this passage, from the discussion of "Open the Door, Homer", concerns me:

Gill characterizes the song as loping along jauntily while proffering various bits of advice, some common sense and some baffling: value your memories properly, they won't come again; flush out your house if you don't want to be housing flushes; swim a certain way if you want to live off the fat of the land; and forgive the sick before you try to heal them. The sensible ones lend a bogus credence to the less sensible ones.

Can someone with access to Gill please make sure that nothing here needs to be enclosed in quotation marks?—DCGeist (talk) 16:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This as well, also attributed to Gill:

"This Wheel's On Fire" closes the album at a peak of sinister mystery...

—DCGeist (talk) 17:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-written those two songs so direct quotes are now clear. Mick gold (talk) 17:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I swung twice, connected twice. You don't think you need to go through the whole piece to check for other such cases? You're very confident those were the only two remaining instances of plagiarism in the article?—DCGeist (talk) 18:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take another pass and report back when I've finished.... Mick gold (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
....ok, I've gone through the article and tightened all the quotes that seemed questionable. Let me know if you have any more suspicions. Mick gold (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In the first paragraph of Early recordings, I think you need to briefly explain where Helm was while his bandmates were all gathered in the Woodstock area with Dylan.—DCGeist (talk) 01:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While Dylan's departure for Nashville is mentioned in the "Apple Suckling Tree" discussion, this really belongs in the historical narrative. The natural place would be right after the mention of Helm's October arrival in Woodstock. Except that currently seems misplaced in Early recordings. So...

I suggest moving the two sentences at the end of Early recordings concerning Helm ("Levon Helm arrived...") into an appropriate spot in the New compositions section. Once that is done, it could be followed by a line such as this:

Shortly after Helm's arrival, Dylan departed for Nashville to record John Wesley Harding.

You might even want to add a little something there about how JWH is seen as relating to The Basement Tapes.—DCGeist (talk) 02:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DCGeist, I’ve been mulling over your suggestion about Helm’s return moving to New Compositions. My problem is that I cannot see where it could go without, for me, disrupting the narrative. I think it would need to go after Dylan has composed "some of the most celebrated songs of his career", and after the succeeding para about the distinctive sonic ambiance of the basement recordings. But the next para is about Dylan’s family and the context of domesticity. So interposing Helm’s return between 3rd & 4th para feels wrong. Should it go after the 4th para? Then Helm’s comment that Dylan had absorbed some of The Hawks' musical influences seems misplaced to me. You make an interesting suggestion, but I feel a bit stumped.
You also suggest adding "a little something there about how JWH is seen as relating to The Basement Tapes." In an earlier draft of this article, I placed the following in the Legacy section, after the first para about TBT being at odds with the values of rock culture in 1967:
This aspect of the basement recordings became obvious when Dylan chose to record his next album in Nashville in the fall of 1967: John Wesley Harding. The songs on that album, according to Howard Sounes, showed the influence of Dylan's daily reading of both the Bible and the Hank Williams songbook.[146] The basic, down to earth sound of that album was also a shock to the rock world. As producer Bob Johnston recalled, "Every artist in the world was in the studio trying to make the biggest-sounding record they possibly could. So what does [Dylan] do? He comes to Nashville and tells me he wants to record with a bass, drum and guitar."[146]
During subsequent revisions of this article, I removed this because I thought the article was getting too long. Of course, this has always been an aspect of TBT that has intrigued me, the way they provide a halfway point between Blonde on Blonde and JWH. (Gray makes this point in Themes.) But I feel that Dylan’s departure for Nashville to record JWH should be in Legacy (alongside The Band and Beatles' recordings which take place after TBT) rather than in New Compositions section. Mick gold (talk) 08:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Commentary on JWH in the historical narrative that precedes Songs is not necessary, but mention of Dylan's departure is. You're telling a story of an artistic collaboration. To leave out how it came to a close is not proper story-telling. To suddenly get the answer in the "Apple Suckling Tree" song description is simply bizarre. As for the placement of it and Helm's return, yes, it may call for a little restructuring of the New compositions section.—DCGeist (talk) 08:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I've added material on Helm's return and Dylan's departure to record JWH. Let me know if you think this works. Would you be in favour of restoring comment on significance of JWH (above) which I removed? Mick gold (talk) 11:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would. You're discussing the ties between the Tapes and Music from Big Pink, so it seems natural to do this as well. You'll need to do a little rewording: "Down-to-earth" already appears in the article—can't have that twice. And "rock world" already appears twice in Legacy—three times would be overboard for that.—DCGeist (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Query: DCGeist, you’ve wiki-liked Griffin’s point that Apple Suckling Tree really ‘swings’ to Swing (jazz performance style). Interestingly, in the caption to the sound sample, Marcus uses the same term, calling the song a “half-written ditty about almost nothing but a country beat that swings”. I believe that both Marcus and Griffin are referring to a style of country music. In a comment on Million Dollar Bash, Griffin connects the swing of that song to early Elvis/Sun singles. From the context of his remarks, I think that Griffin is referring to either rockabilly or the country style of Charlie Poole or Bob Wills, rather than Swing Jazz. Is this wiki-link accurate? Mick gold (talk) 07:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The notion of swing in jazz and in country is very closely related. Given the restrictive (I believe, overly restrictive) nature of our article Swing (jazz performance style), a link to Western swing—the relevant country genre that is largely jazz-derived—may be more helpful. ("Apple Suckling Tree" obviously has little to do with rockabilly.)—DCGeist (talk) 08:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Was there any discussion among the nominators about including a mention of the fact that the Hawks/Band also accompanied Tiny Tim on several numbers during the basement recordings period? I know of at least two bootlegs (the well-regarded Blind Boy Grunt and the Hawks: The Basement Tapes Vol. I & II and Down in the Basement) where the Tiny Tim–Band material appears alongside Dylan–Band material. I'm not insistent on its inclusion, but we should know if it's been discussed.—DCGeist (talk) 09:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Griffin’s book, p. 66: "Robertson denies empathically that [the Tiny Tim recordings] had anything to do with the later Basement Tapes sessions in and around Woodstock. 'We were still living in New York and we hadn’t moved up to Woodstock yet, not at this point', Robertson says."
The Hawks collaborated with Tiny Tim to record music for the bizarre documentary, You Are What You Eat. Sessions were produced by John Simon, who would later produce Music from Big Pink and The Band. Page 69 of Griffin’s book: "As producer on the Tiny Tim sessions, Simon confirms that The Hawks did back up Mr Tim’s contributions to You Are what You Eat. Simon maintains that those tracks were recorded in a formal New York recording studio and certainly not in Woodstock." Because the material was recorded in a New York studio before The Hawks moved to Woodstock, I thought that mentioning the Tiny Tim recordings in this article was not a good idea. I have not yet discussed this question with Moisejp or I.M.S. Mick gold (talk) 10:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. You've got strong sourcing that says the Tiny Tim recordings were completely separate from the basement recordings. No need for further consideration of the matter.—DCGeist (talk) 17:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree there's no need to mention Tiny Tim. By the way, I quite preferred the Helm at the end of Early recordings b/c I really think it flows well with the Hoskyns quote about the influence of the Band on Dylan. But Mick gold and DCGeist apparently disagree? Well, I will accept the majority vote, but I do think it works better there. Moisejp (talk) 18:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the conceptual flow is a bit better there, but there are two compelling reasons to put it toward end of New compositions:
  • Chronology: Much better this way. Helm shows up in Woodstock when he shows up—just once.
  • Accuracy: When Helm showed up in October, he surely heard and responded not only to the collaboration's early cover recordings, but to Dylan's new compositions as well. The Hawks' interests "had rubbed off on him..."—DCGeist (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The wording of this note seems to me to reverse the actual certainty of the claims:

Griffin asserts that Helm's arrival in October meant that he did not play on most of the Dylan–Band 1967 Woodstock recordings, including the sixteen Dylan Basement Tapes album tracks—and it is unclear whether the drums overdubbed on "Too Much of Nothing" in 1975 were played by Helm. He did nevertheless perform on unreleased recordings made by Dylan and The Band in the house on Wittenberg Road that Danko and Helm shared after vacating Big Pink (Griffin 2007, pp. 201, 221, 236–241).

You say he "asserts" that Helm "did not play on most of the Dylan–Band 1967 Woodstock recordings, including the sixteen Dylan Basement Tapes album tracks". Does anyone actually suggest otherwise? I would have thought this was the consensus, noncontroversial view, well supported by the evidence. ("Asserts" is a word to watch.)

On the other hand, you state as a matter of fact that he "perform[ed] on unreleased recordings made by Dylan and The Band in [a] house on Wittenberg Road". Is there consensus that this is so? Does any other biographer/historian confirm this? If not, then this is what might be characterized as an assertion or claim.—DCGeist (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Helm on drums:
The question of which tracks Helm plays on is complex and there are no clear answers, so I would agree with not making any dogmatic statements.
Griffin suggests (pp. 236-241) there are 8 Wittenberg Road tracks, all with Helm on drums: "Wildwood Flower", "See That My Grave is Kept Clean", "Comin’ Round the Mountain", "Instrumental Jam", "Nothing Was Delivered" (take three), "Silent Weekend", "All You Have To Do Is Dream" (take 1 and take 2).
Heylin in Revolution In The Air airs his opinion that drumming is good on "Apple Suckling Tree" (p. 380) and "Odds and Ends" (p. 376), and speculates whether it could be Helm. Heylin also points out that the "Nothing Was Delivered" (take 3) with Helm on drums is sandwiched between two takes of "Odds and Ends" on the tape reel.
On p. 110 of Bob Dylan: A Life In Stolen Moments (1996), Heylin writes "it would appear that a couple of the Dylan/Hawks sessions postdate the first John Wesley Harding session (and therefore Levon Helm’s return to the fold)". Heylin then writes that he believes "Helm sounds present on 'Goin to Acapulco'" as well as "Wildwood Flower", "See That My Grave is Kept Clean", "Comin’ Round the Mountain", "Flight Of the Bumble Bee" and "Confidential To Me".
Griffin writes "there is a case for 'Confidential' and 'Flight of the Bumble Bee' coming from much earlier in the year".
Helm in his autobiography writes that the first track that he drummed on after re-joining The Hawks in Woodstock was "Nothing Was Delivered". Griffin and Heylin agree that this is Take 3 (which is incomplete). Unfortunately I don't have Helm's autobiography but Moisejp does. Mick gold (talk) 08:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given this, it would seem proper in the Songs section to indicate that Helm was possibly originally on drums on "Clothes Line Saga" and "Odds and Ends". I'm still not clear how the issue of possible Wittenberg Road recordings is addressed by the various sources.—DCGeist (talk) 08:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Heylin is suggesting that Helm might be the drummer on three tracks on the 1975 album: "Goin' to Acapulco", "Odds and Ends", and "Apple Suckling Tree". (note my correction above) So I've included this suggestion in footnote on Helm as drummer. I thought to add what Heylin acknowledges to be speculative (and adds the caveat "Hats off to Richard" if he is wrong about the date of the recording) to the Songs section might over-clutter them. I take your point that "asserts" is a word to watch. Mick gold (talk) 10:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good.—DCGeist (talk) 00:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Problem in the opening of Dwarf Music demos and Great White Wonder:

By early 1967, Dylan's contract with Columbia Records held that he owed the label "a minimum of fourteen different musical compositions not previously recorded by him". Clinton Heylin suggests that it was not a coincidence that Dylan and Albert Grossman copyrighted fourteen of the basement songs later that year.

This is cited to Heylin (2000), p. 282. I don't see anything there that indicates "Dylan and Albert Grossman copyrighted fourteen of the basement songs later that year." On the other hand, in Heylin (2009), p. 343, it indicates that "ten songs [were] copyrighted in September 1967 (registration date: October 9, 1967)".—DCGeist (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you cut the second sentence I blockquoted, but I believe the first sentence is not particularly relevant either. I can't access the Griffin source that describes the fourteen-song demo, but as I read Heylin, the coincidence of the number fourteen appears to be insignificant. The contract with Columbia naturally required not evidence of fourteen new compositions but rather "a minimum of fourteen...record sides" of material not previously recorded by him. It appears that John Wesley Harding effectively fulfilled that...or rather it fulfilled part of "the new contract he signed with Columbia on July 1" (Heylin [2000], p. 283.) Unless you have something in Griffin that ties the 14-song demo directly to the Columbia contract, I would cut the "By early 1967..." sentence, and begin the section with the "In October..." sentence, run in to what is now the next paragraph.—DCGeist (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, it would be far more likely that the business impetus for creating and distributing the demo tape would not be the Columbia contract, but the recent copyrighting of ten of those songs: Dylan—or, maybe more to the point, Grossman—wanted other artists to record those songs to generate publishing royalties for Dwarf...which is exactly what happened. Given that, you could well lead the section with the September copyrighting I noted above in Heylin (2009).—DCGeist (talk) 21:20, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree that Heylin's point about Columbia requiring fourteen songs points towards John Wesley Harding, since there was initially no question of Columbia releasing The Basement Tapes. I've added Dylan's comment in RS interview that he was being PUSHED into coming up with songs for other artists, to introduce topic of demos & cover versions. On p. 229, Griffin describes ten basement songs dubbed to mono by Grossman's office in August 1967. And then in October, a 14 songs demo was copyrighted and its songs registered with Dwarf music. So I've listed the content of the 14 song demo as the source of the cover versions. I'll respond to you queries about Helm and Wittenberg Road in the morning. Mick gold (talk) 21:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent—both the addition of the interview quote and listing the demo contents in a note.—DCGeist (talk) 22:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm concerned about the statement in the lede to the effect that Dylan's new basement songs "were a dramatic break from the verbally complex, surreal rock and roll" on his recent albums (emphasis added). Several of his songs on The Basement Tapes are arguably as surreal as—even more surreal than—anything on Bringing It, Highway 61 and Blonde: "Lo and Behold", "Yea! Heavy and a Bottle of Bread", "Tiny Montgomery", "You Ain't Goin' Nowhere", "This Wheel's on Fire". The article explicitly refers to the "surreal details" in "Clothes Line Saga". Is there even support for the claim of a dramatic turn away from "verbal complexity"? Frankly, I don't buy it...but let's go over the sources. (It's also rather jargonistic/insiderish to refer to his "critically acclaimed mid-sixties trilogy of albums" when [a] we never articulate what those three albums were and [b] I don't believe anyone was referring to them as a "trilogy" at the time.) One major change in lyrical content I do detect in The Basement Tapes is a marked decline in songs centrally devoted to concerns of romantic love.—DCGeist (talk) 03:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is absolutely not mandated by any Featured Article criterion, but it would be quite brilliant if one of our image magicians could take the album cover and create—for inclusion in the Cover art subsection—an "arrowed" version identifying Dylan (yes, obvious to most) and each of the five Band members (obvious to very few). This would be very helpful to readers and would certainly pass our fair use criteria.—DCGeist (talk) 06:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, notes towards lead: I agree that many basement songs are more 'surreal' than some songs on BoB, I was thinking the same thing, so I’ve removed that word. As for what characterizes the basement songs: I would suggest the songs are shorter and the language is simpler. "Stuck Inside of Mobile", "Visions of Johanna", and "Sad Eyed Lady” all over 7 minutes with many verses.

Gill suggests 3 characteristics of Basement songs:

1. "The sound of the recordings made in the basement is warm and intimate, markedly different from the big powerful rock sound Dylan had pumped out with the Hawks” and different from sound of Blonde on Blonde.

2. “The results drew heavily on folk music that Dylan had studied in his early years in New York – not the self-righteous protest songs but traditional music forms of early years of the century."

3. "Musically the songs were completely at odds with what was going on in the rest o0f the pop world" in the summer of 1967.

Shelton writes: "In these songs, Dylan has moved away from the death-heavy atmosphere, the trapped chaos of Blonde, into a communal feeling somewhere between a barroom rumpus and a gospel choir. The meditativeness of John Wesley Harding is forecast."

Sounes writes: "It was a very different sound from the ruckus that Bob and The Hawks made on stage in 1965-66, and altogether different from the late-night city sound of studio albums like BoB. It was closer to the rural old-timey music of Harry Smith’s Anthology.

Heylin suggests these characteristics of the basement recordings: an immersion in traditional material, a high level of improvisation (more than in previous recording session), a love of choruses and a love of creating characters. Mick gold (talk) 11:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Better, almost there. But this still doesn't seem quite right: Dylan's "new style of writing moved away from the complex, urban imagery that had characterized his most recent albums". Highway 61 perhaps, but the imagery in BoB isn't particularly urban.

More pertinent may be the point you raise at the top, concerning those three long BoB songs. Highway 61 also has several very long songs, including the epic "Desolation Row" and three others around six minutes in length. The longest of The Basement Tapes' 24 songs ("Goin' to Acapulco") would have been only the seventh-longest song on Highway 61 and the fourth-longest on Blonde on Blonde, and nothing else on The Basement Tapes is even close to it in length. In place of "complex, urban imagery", I would suggest something like "extended narratives" or "expansive narratives".—DCGeist (talk) 00:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just read through the entire article again, and done a final copyedit sweep. Something for the nominators to keep in mind for future FA efforts: You must be much more meticulous about accurately representing quotations. During my earlier copyediting of the article, I had to correct the wording of more than half a dozen quotations. The mistakes did not produce any significant changes in meaning—which would be very serious, indeed—but there's no excuse for not accurately representing the written words of others. I had to do this one final time in this last sweep. Take a look at how many corrections I needed to make in the quotation that appears in the first paragraph of Themes: [5].

That said, I have also made the change to the lede I suggested immediately above. We can discuss it further, alter it if necessary, but I made the change so I would feel comfortable giving my su-...

...And then I realized that the bottom of New compositons could use a little more narrative. I'm thinking we need to say (a) that basement-style recording continued, now at the Wittenberg Road house that Danko shared with Helm after the latter's arrival (I assume Hudson and Manuel also "vacated" Big Pink? Is that right?) and that (b) this recording appears to have continued for a couple months after Dylan's departure until The Band themselves left Woodstock to record their debut (if I'm understanding correctly). That's a natural part of the historical narrative and provides a fuller context for Band basement tracks such as "Yazoo Street Scandal" and "Ruben Remus".—DCGeist (talk) 03:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly prefer "extended narrative" to "expansive narrative"; the latter conjures up, for me, Tales from Topographic Oceans by Yes. I still think "complex, urban" imagery is a good description of the world of H61R and BoB, and I hope I can persuade you, Dan.
Above, I quoted from Sounes, who refers to "the late-night city sound of studio albums like Blonde on Blonde". Al Kooper said that Blonde on Blonde was a great album because of the collision between two worlds: Nashville musicians and New York sensibility. Kooper said of Dylan’s recording the album: "He was the quintessential New York hipster—what was he doing in Nashville?" I hope these two testimonies to the urban milieu of BoB might persuade you that "complex, urban imagery" is a good description of the tone of H61R and BoB, particularly in contrast to the more "traditional", "rootsy" qualities of The Basement Tapes. I’ll think about your suggestion about the end of the narrative, and try to reply tomorrow when I get time. Thanks Mick gold (talk) 09:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounes refers to the "sound" of the albums—that's irrelevant to "imagery." Kopper is, as you say, describing a sensibility—but he, too, appears to say nothing to indicate that this sensibility translates into urban imagery, which is a matter of manifest lyrical content. I would have no problem substituting sensibility or tone for imagery, though I'd suggest cosmopolitan might be more to the point in this context than urban—more evocative of "New York hipster" and even of "late-night city". (Of course, complex wouldn't apply to sensibility or tone). —DCGeist (talk) 18:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: With no action for a day and a half, I got to thinking, which...sorry...means one last proposal:

There seems to be a logical flaw in the current structure, where the discussion of the specific 24 songs that appeared on the official 1975 Columbia release precedes the discussion of how that album came to be, eight years after most of the recordings were made. The Songs section, in fact, begins "The liner notes for The Basement Tapes give the following personnel credits for all songs on the album"—yet no such album has so far been discussed in the main text. (The most logical contents of a Songs section immediately following Background and recording would actually be discussion of all 100+ individual songs laid down in Woodstock.) On the other side of the coin, there's some redundancy in the discussion of the '75 overdubbing in the intro to Songs and the first part of Columbia Records compilation release that could be eliminated in a partial merger.

What I'm suggesting is that the text of the first part of Columbia Records compilation release, which describes how the album came to be, be placed before the individual discussions of the specific songs on that album. I've created a sandbox version of the article to show how this could easily be done. I think the result is a much clearer narrative.

Instead of:

  • 1. Here's what happened in 1967 and immediately afterward.
  • 1. Here's the selection of songs on the album, some of which may have nothing to do with 1967.
  • 2. Here's how an official album release finally happened in 1975.
  • 3. Here's how the album was received.

We would have:

  • 1. Here's what happened in 1967 and immediately afterward.
  • 1. Here's how an official album release finally happened in 1975.
  • 2. Here's the selection of songs on the album, some of which may have nothing to do with 1967.
  • 3. Here's how the album was received.

(Note that the sandbox version does not include the lede image or sound samples because of our restrictions on fair-use media in non-article space.) Let me know what you think.—DCGeist (talk) 20:51, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be slow but the weekend was busy for me. I was replying to your suggestion for extending narrative, before I saw your sandbox. Here's the reply:
I guess we can compromise on "urban sensibility" in the lead. I don’t feel enthusiastic about continuing the narrative in the way you suggest. I don’t think it would anything substantive to our account of The Basement Tapes (1975 album), and what we can add would be speculative.
When Big Pink was vacated in October, Helm and Danko moved to a house on Wittenberg Road, while Manuel and Hudson moved to a house off Ohayo Mountain Road. Griffin is the only writer who breaks down the recordings into 3 specific locations: Dylan’s House, Big Pink, Wittenberg Road. Griffin writes that recording sessions continued in the Wittenberg Road house; he suggests (pp. 236-241) there are 8 Wittenberg Road tracks with Helm on drums: "Wildwood Flower", "See That My Grave is Kept Clean", "Comin’ Round the Mountain", "Instrumental Jam", "Nothing Was Delivered" (take three), "Silent Weekend", "All You Have To Do Is Dream" (take 1 and take 2). All feature Dylan vocals, apart from Instrumental Jam.
Heylin advances the rather speculative thought that "it would appear that a couple of the Dylan/Hawks sessions postdate the first JWH session", which took place in Nashville on 17-18 Oct 1967. However, in Revolution In The Air, Heylin gives Big Pink as the recording location of virtually all the Basement Tape compositions he lists in that book, including the final basment recordings. Heylin suggests that Helm "sounds like" he is present on "Goin’ to Acapulco" and a few other songs. The only thing Heylin and Griffin agree about is that Dylan & The Hawks recorded "See That My Grave is Kept Clean" and "All You Have To Do Is Dream" (take 1 and take 2) after Helm’s return. Neither of these tracks is included on the 1975 albums and they are not very well known.
Hoskyns, who wrote the most detailed history of The Band, simply states that after Helm’s return, The Band (plus John Simon) started to prepare material for Music From Big Pink, which they began to record in a New York studio in January 1968. So... after Helm’s return, The Band and Dylan went in different directions. Dylan recorded JWH and released it on Dec 27, 1967. The Band recorded their debut album. They continued to live in & around Woodstock until 1973.
I think all the critics we have quoted describe TBT as a moment that occurred between May and October 1967, when Dylan and The Band recorded a new style of improvised songs. They think that most of the Dylan tracks on TBT were recorded at Big Pink. Writing about further collaborations between Dylan and The Band after that point would be impossible to verify and not add any substance to the article, imho.
As for the sandbox, all I can say is, Well done! It's much truer to the material to describe:
1. The process of recording the songs.
2. The fragmented way in which those songs reached the public via rumor, cover versions, and bootlegs.
3. The official 1975 album.
That's a much clearer narrative. Thanks.— Mick gold (talk) 08:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given your description of how the sources deal with the end of the basement sessions, yes, it seems appropriate to avoid going further into that topic in the main text.
Per your response, I'll apply the sandboxed restructuring in a single edit for final vetting by you and the other nominators.—DCGeist (talk) 11:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This line really doesn't work - While some of the basement songs are humorous, others exhibit a morbid preoccupation with guilt, betrayal and the void. What exactly does a morbid preoccupation with the 'void' mean - and which song or songs are you talking about? This theme of the void is not followed up later in the article either...Modernist (talk) 11:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The "void"—which, per the citations, is a term used by both Marcus and Shelton—is specifically referenced in the discussion of "Too Much of Nothing." This theme is also followed up in the discussion of "Nothing Was Delivered" and its "aching sense of nothingness". Both Marcus and Shelton appear to use the "void" in a customary fashion: as referring to the absence of anything beyond death, further implying the possible meaninglessness of life.—DCGeist (talk) 11:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm while I don't have the Shelton book, I do have the Marcus book and there is not one single mention of the 'void' by Marcus that I can find. According to the theme section Shelton speaks of salvation and joy being the dual themes he hears in the songs no mention of the void, further I do not interpret Too Much of Nothing as even remotely referring to the 'void' - rather I hear - meaninglessness, poverty, idleness, - and you make a case for the 'wasteland' of T.S. Eliot. Perhaps add a Shelton quote - and do you have page numbers?...Modernist (talk) 12:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Marcus citation is not to his book, but to his liner notes for The Basement Tapes. In his first of two mentions of the "void" there, he writes:
The "acceptance of death" that Dylan found in "traditional music"—the ancient ballads of mountain music—is simply a singer's insistence on mystery as inseparable from any honest understanding of what life is all about; it is the quiet terror of a man seeking salvation who stares into a void that stares back. It is the awesome, impenetrable fatalism that drives the timeless ballads first recorded in the twenties...
He follows up by describing how Dylan and the Band
came to terms with the void that stares back—in the summer of 1967; in the most powerful and unsettling songs on The Basement Tapes, they put an old, old sense of mystery across with an intensity that has not been heard in a long time.
In one passage in No Direction Home (p. 385, as cited), Shelton writes of how "'nothing' and 'nowhere' perplex and nag" in "Tears of Rage", "This Wheel's on Fire", "Nothing Was Delivered", "Too Much of Nothing", and "I Shall Be Released". He concludes:
The "nothing" echoes the artist's dilemma: death versus life, vacuum versus harvest, isolation versus people, silence versus sound, the void versus the life-impulse.
—DCGeist (talk) 12:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I do have the Shelton book too. On page 440 almost as an afterthought descriptive he says The "nothing" echoes the artist's dilemma: death versus life, vacuum versus harvest, isolation versus people, silence versus sound, the void versus the life-impulse. However he hardly identifies awareness of the void as a major descriptive of these songs, I still question the lead...Modernist (talk) 12:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Shelton certainly does identify an apprehension of nothingness as a major descriptive of the songs. An apprehension of the void is both an aspect of that and effectively synonymous with it (it is, inarguably, the conclusive term Shelton uses that signifies "nothing"). Given Marcus's focus on grappling with the "void" as a central force in the songs, there would seem to be no better, and no better justified, word in the context of this article.—DCGeist (talk) 13:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On p 385, Shelton mentions "Tears of Rage", "This Wheel's On Fire", "Too Much of Nothing", "Nothing Was Delivered" and "I Shall Be Released". Shelton then writes: "Throughout these songs, as throughout King Lear, 'nothing' and 'nowhere' perplex and nag." Surely, Shelton is here identifying nothingness as a major theme of TBT. The void is synonomous with a sense of nothingness." Mick gold (talk) 13:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, I don't think nothingness and the void necessarily are synonymous. Maybe the theme section should elaborate on the meaning of 'nothing' and the presence of 'the void' - the only connection that I hear to the void is Dylan's refrain - to the waters of oblivion, and that is vague at best, mostly I hear about a yearning for salvation and meaning in a meaningless culture. The void a definition - [6]..Modernist (talk) 14:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've altered lead to: "While some of the basement songs are humorous, others exhibit a morbid preoccupation with guilt, betrayal and a sense of nothingness." Surely a valid summary of Shelton, Marcus, et al. Modernist? DCGeist? Mick gold (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The void" is the more elegant and concise phrasing, and is the term used by both Marcus and Shelton. I can see what's lost in the edit, but I'm not clear what's gained by it.—DCGeist (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One gain may be that the lead now takes you to two songs - "Too Much of Nothing" and "Nothing Was Delivered" - rather than presents the reader with an abtraction. Mick gold (talk) 14:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A better option might be to follow Modernist's suggestion to expand on the point in Themes, thus:
Robert Shelton has argued that The Basement Tapes revolves around two sets of themes. One group of songs is "tinctured with the search for salvation": "I Shall Be Released" (on the demo, but not on the album), "Too Much of Nothing", "Nothing Was Delivered", "This Wheel's On Fire", "Tears of Rage" and "Goin' To Acapulco". "'Nothing' and 'nowhere' perplex and nag" in these songs, he writes. "The 'nothing' echoes the artist's dilemma: death versus life, vacuum versus harvest, isolation versus people, silence versus sound, the void versus the life-impulse."[1] A second group, comprising "songs of joy, signaling some form of deliverance", includes most of the remaining songs in the collection.[2]
Note, I've emended "two themes" to "two sets of themes". Shelton's literal phrase is "two principal categories"—each of those categories embraces more than a single theme (1: the search for salvation and an apprehension of nothingness/the void; 2: joy and deliverance).—DCGeist (talk) 14:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I almost agree DC, elaboration is called for in themes although I also agree with Mick's change. The void as a term is pregnant with religious complexity and should be used carefully and not as a synonym for nothing...Modernist (talk) 14:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the "void" is pregnant with religious resonance. That's precisely how Eliot uses it and very clearly how Marcus, like many modern critics, uses it—to refer to the palpable absence of any post-mortal existence or transcendent realm. Shelton also uses it, though perhaps with less precision. I would have thought that "the void" had the advantage over a "sense of nothingness" because in its modern usage it is much less vague than that alternative. It is as definite, in fact, as "guilt". (Is "guilt" actually established as a focus of "preoccupation" in The Basement Tapes? In contrast to the "void", "guilt" in fact never appears again after the lede.) It is as definite, in fact, as "betrayal". (Is "betrayal" actually established as a focus of "preoccupation" in The Basement Tapes? In contrast to the "void", "betrayal" in fact never appears again after the lede.)—DCGeist (talk) 14:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You make my point - the entire line in the lede does not work because there is no follow up...Modernist (talk) 15:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well...there is and has been follow-up on the "void" (though it's fair to ask for more). In fact, there is no follow-up on "guilt" and "betrayal".—DCGeist (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One advantage of “a sense of nothingness” is that it corresponds to what Dylan sings about on "Too Much of Nothing" and "Nothing Was Delivered". DCGeist makes the point tht Eliot, Marcus and Shelton use the term ‘the void’. They do, but what Dylan writes about is simply ‘nothing’. I must think about guilt and betrayal. Mick gold (talk) 15:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you both evidently favor "nothingness" to the "void" in the lede, I can accept that. Given the existing content of the article, the following sentence in the lede would be justifiable:
While some of the basement songs are humorous, others exhibit a preoccupation with nothingness and the search for salvation.
I don't see enough to justify "morbid" (which literally relates to "disease") as a qualifier for "preoccupation". Perhaps "dark" or "grave", if it's felt there's a need for one.—DCGeist (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with DCGeist. May I suggest enlarging his sentence to:
While some of the basement songs are humorous, others exhibit a preoccupation with nothingness, a sense of betrayal, and the search for salvation.
And then quote some of this passage from Gill in the section on "Tears Of Rage":
Gill writes: “’Tears Of Rage’ is Dylan’s equivalent of the blind king’s wasteland soliloquy in King Lear, applied to his own nation… In its narrowest and most contemporaneous interpretation, the song could be the first to register the pain of betrayal felt by many of America’s Vietnam war veterans… In a wider interpretation of ‘Tears Of Rage’, this song harks back to what anti-war protesters and critics of American materialism in general felt was a more fundamental betrayal of the American Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.”
Mick gold (talk) 15:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've made change outlined above. Modernist, DCGeist, edit if you disagree. Mick gold (talk) 18:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. I felt we needed a bit more on "betrayal" to justify its inclusion in the lede—I added a modest-sized quote from Marqusee to Themes that addresses it (among other things). See what you think. I also supplemented the Shelton passage there, as discussed above.
As for the lede sentence, good, but again no need for "a sense of". Just "betrayal", no less accurate, is shorter and stronger.
You could consider, in place of "exhibit a preoccupation with", simply "dwell on".—DCGeist (talk) 19:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support: You've taken a very complicated story—has any other album ever had such a complex compositional history, complex production history, and complex distribution history?—and made it accessible and engaging, with a backbone of solid, wide-ranging research. Given the varied sources of the individual songs, the scholarly disputes over when and where they were recorded, the ever-shifting contributions of the six multi-instrumentalists (and five vocalists) involved, and the wealth of critical analysis that's been applied, the song-by-song discussion is both essential and enlightening. An article of which to be proud.—DCGeist (talk) 21:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Declaration entered after FAC was archived. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
  1. ^ Shelton 1986, p. 385
  2. ^ Shelton 1986, p. 384
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Basement_Tapes/archive1&redirect=no

Leave a Reply