35_gaibty/did_dylan_steal_canadee.htm

   1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
   2 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   3 "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
   4 <html lang="en" xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
   5
   6
   7
   8 <head>
   9 <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
  10 <title>Did Dylan steal Canadee</title>
  11 <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/general.css" />
  12 <link href="../css/articles.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
  13 </head>
  14
  15 <body>
  16 <div id="content">
  17 <h2>Did Dylan steal Canadee-i-o?</h2>
  18   <p class="first">I received the following letter:</p>
  19   <div class="quote">
  20     <p class="first"><em>Dear Sir, </em></p>
  21     <p class="first">&nbsp;</p>
  22     <p class="first"><em>I feel moved to write after coming accross your site about &quot;Canadee'i'o'&quot;.
  23       </em></p>
  24     <p><em>It seems to me that you should at least research your subject matter before
  25       inclusion in your website. I have only recently come into contact with Nic Jones's music
  26       and I must disagree with your assumption that his version of Canadee IO is not up to the
  27       standard of Bob Dylans borrowed arrangement. </em></p>
  28     <p><em>I say borrowed because that is exactly what it is. </em></p>
  29     <p><em>This is the original song and also Nics Arrangement, they can be found here </em></p>
  30     <p><em><a href="http://www.sarcon.demon.co.uk/engfolk/21/nic_jones.htm">http://www.sarcon.demon.co.uk/engfolk/21/nic_jones.htm</a>
  31       </em></p>
  32     <p><em>I think that you will agree that Bob's lyrics are very close to Nics and nothing
  33       like the original. I find it hard to come up with any other explanation, but that Bob's
  34       version was based, if not almost totally copied from Nic's. </em></p>
  35     <p><em>If you want to here Nics version there is a excerpt at <a
  36   href="http://www.checkout.com/music/title/info/0,7642,71960,00.html#preview">http://www.checkout.com/music/title/info/<br />
  37       0,7642,71960,00.html#preview</a>
  38     </em></p>
  39     <p><em>Other links that you may wish to look at are below. </em></p>
  40     <p><em><a href="http://cvrc.med.upenn.edu/~greenberg/td-cana1.html">http://cvrc.med.upenn.edu/~greenberg/td-cana1.html</a>
  41       <br />
  42       <a href="http://www.lesk.demon.co.uk/pages/penguin.htm">http://www.lesk.demon.co.uk/pages/penguin.htm</a>
  43       <br />
  44       <a href="http://www.folkmusic.net/htmfiles/inart338.htm">http://www.folkmusic.net/htmfiles/inart338.htm</a>
  45     </em></p>
  46     <p><em>I hope that this gives you more information. </em></p>
  47     <p>&nbsp;</p>
  48     <p><em>Best Regards. </em></p>
  49     <p><em>D[...] B[...] </em></p>
  50     <p>&nbsp;</p>
  51     <p class="first"><em>PS I admire Bob Dylan and his music a lot, but I also think that he should give
  52         credit where credit is due to others</em></p>
  53   </div>
  54   <hr />
  55   <p class="first">A lot of things are at issue here. The one most directly relevant to me is how to
  56     present a tab of Dylan's version of the song, if Dylan has stolen it from another
  57     musician. Then there is the technical question whether or not Dylan has actually stolen
  58     it. Then the question of Dylan's moral, further accentuated by the fourth issue: Nic
  59     Jones' situation, as an invalid after a car crash. The answer to the first question
  60   depends on the three others, but these should be kept apart for as long as possible.</p>
  61   <p>So did he steal it? I actually did some research before I put up the tab - in fact one
  62     of the reasons why it took me so long to put it up, was that I wanted to check for myself,
  63     and until I found the tab of <a href="canadee__nic_jones_version.htm">Nic Jones' version</a>
  64     I didn't have a chance to do that. The discussions in various news-groups have mainly
  65     centered around the <em>arrangement</em>, because that is what the copyright matter (and
  66     hence the emotional aspect of the case) has been all about: whether Dylan stole Jones'
  67     copyrighted arrangment by taking all the arrangment credits for himself, thereby
  68     deprieving a handicapped man of a well-needed (and certainly better-needed than Dylan)
  69     income. The <em>lyrics </em>have not been an issue, as far as I have seen, because, as it
  70     is said in one of the links above : &quot;I remember that Jones's manager replied to to
  71     the magazine [Folkroots], stating that Dylan was under no obligation to credit Jones since
  72     many people had sung the song.&quot; Although the quote is a recollection, the point is
  73     simple enough: copyrighting folk song lyrics isn't easily done, and the notion of an
  74 &quot;original&quot; version is questionable. </p>
  75   <p>So has he stolen the arrangement? With the tab and the sound clip it is possible to
  76     compare the two versions. Much to my surprise, given the prominence this question had been
  77     given in the discussions, I found them not very similar. The main differences are: <br />
  78     a) The tuning. Jones' trade-mark so to speak was his use of open tunings. Dylan's version
  79     is in standard tuning. <br />
  80     b) The arrangment/style. Jones' is a quite sophisticated finger-picking arrangement, and,
  81     again quoting from one of the links, &quot;His classic Canadee-i-o accompaniment, for
  82     example, incorporated a scale phrase in tenths and some very tasteful 'bends' &quot;. It
  83     also incorporates (as in his general style) &quot;modern chords and syncopations&quot;.
  84     There is no trace of any of this in Dylan's version, which is a rather straightforward
  85     (but skillful) melody-ish strumming, with hammer-ons and sus4-chords over a basically very
  86     simple three-chord skeleton. <br />
  87     c) to this can be added the singing style and the melody, on which points the versions
  88     also differ considerably (in addition, of course, to the obvious difference between their
  89     general styles). The melody line is different on some points, and Jones sings behind the
  90   beat, Dylan mostly very much on the beat. </p>
  91   <p>(For the record: I've nowhere written that &quot;his version of Canadee IO is not up to
  92     the standard of Bob Dylans borrowed arrangement.&quot; They are different. Jones' is more
  93 &quot;dexterous&quot;, Dylan's more . . . - Dylanesque, and inimitable in its own way.)</p>
  94   <p>This is not to say that I don't think that Dylan had heard Jones' version prior to
  95     recording the song, which I suppose he had. But &quot;Having heard&quot; or even
  96 &quot;being influenced by&quot; is not the same as &quot;stealing&quot;. Whatever moral
  97     obligations Dylan may or may not have towards Jones, I prefer to leave that judgement to
  98     Dylan himself to make. My personal opinion--for what it's worth--is that we should allow
  99     even the &quot;giants&quot; to be influenced. If not, we are heading towards a music
 100     culture that I wouldn't like to be part of (and where &quot;folk music&quot; would be in
 101     serious trouble). I'm not saying Dylan is, was or has ever been a saint - again, that's
 102     not up to me to say - all I'm saying is that his guitar arrangement of Canadee-i-o isn't
 103   very similar to Nic Jones' after all. </p>
 104   <p>Don't take my word for it, though. Go through the links above and form your own
 105     opinion. If it differs widely from mine, feel free to <a href="../mail.htm">drop
 106   me a note</a>, and we can discuss the matter.</p>
 107   <p>(And, no, I was not bought by Sony to say this. And, yes,
 108   <a href="../faq.htm#dignity">I exist</a>)</p>
 109   <blockquote>
 110     <p>Eyolf</p>
 111   </blockquote>
 112 </div>
 113 </body>
 114 </html>