“A Complete Unknown”: An Experience of Time Travel and Personal Challenge

Last week, Peggy and I saw “A Complete Unknown.” It’s that Bob Dylan biopic that everyone’s talking about. Timothee Chalamet deserves an Oscar for his portrayal of Bob Dylan. He captures the man’s spirit – creative, charismatic, moody, mysterious, unpredictable, and quietly headstrong. He even manages to embody Dylan’s distinctive voice, along with his guitar playing and singing style.

I also loved Ed Norton’s saintly Pete Seeger, and Monica Barbaro as the beautiful Joan Baez. However, Elle Fanning’s depiction of Suze Rotolo (fictionalized as Sylvie Russo in the film) was perhaps most moving of all. Her wordless expressions of vulnerability, love, understated jealousy, and disappointment in the face of Dylan’s other love interests were perceptive, touching and sad.   

But for me, the film conveyed much more than accurate information about an iconic artist and celebrity. It represented a kind of time travel to an era of deep personal challenge. It made me review my personal experiences of Bob Dylan. It was one of those wonderful trips down memory lane.    

I mean, as someone roughly Dylan’s age (he’s 83; I’m 84), the film evoked treasured memories of a Golden Age promise and hope and of an incomparable artist who helped define it like no other.

And then even more importantly for me as one concerned with spiritual growth, freedom, and autonomy, I found the film insightful, instructive and encouraging.

Let me start with a few snapshot memories and then move on to the lessons of “A Complete Unknown.”

Time Travel  

My first awareness of Bob Dylan dawned in around 1961 when I was studying for the Catholic priesthood. I was finishing my philosophy degree at St. Columban’s Major Seminary in Milton Massachusetts. That was during the folk music revival that set the scene for the emergence of Dylan along with Baez, Peter Paul and Mary, The Kingston Trio, The Brothers Four and so many other groups and artists. The revival had all of us learning to play the guitar and singing “Blowin’ in the Wind.”

Anyway, I was in the seminary’s community room one evening watching one of the many folk music shows of the time on our group’s 21-inch black and white TV.  Maybe it was “Hootenanny; I don’t remember. But suddenly there appeared on screen this skinny kid with a harp rack around his neck (the first time I saw one). His voice and demeanor were like nothing I had seen before. I don’t remember his song, but his voice was unforgettable – unpretentious, and raspy. He mumbled the words in a way that made them almost unintelligible. I had never heard anything like that. Of course, it was Bob Dylan.

That summer I was visiting my brother who said, “Hey Mike, you’ve got to hear this.” He then played for me in its entirety his 33 1/3 vinyl recording of “The Free-Wheelin’ Boy Dylan.” This time I listened to the words and marveled at their strange, captivating beauty along with Dylan’s unique vocalization. I remember hearing for the first time “Girl from the North Country,” “Oxford Town,” “A Hard Rain’s Gonna Fall,” “Masters of War,” and “Talking World War III Blues.” It was then that I realized for the first time what an important artist Bob Dylan is.

My assessment was confirmed, I remember, by a Time Magazine story that appeared shortly afterwards. It said that Bob Dylan was perhaps the greatest American poet of the 20th century – a judgment definitively reiterated years later (2016) when he received the Nobel Prize in literature.

I was hooked – a Bob Dylan fan for life. And this even though (like Pete Seeger) I was disappointed by Dylan’s electrification and somehow even more so by his Jesus period. At the time, Dylan’s going electric appeared to be a sellout. It also signaled the end of the folk era I came to treasure so dearly. I was sad about that.

As for the Jesus period (1978-’81), it too signified a selling out of sorts. And as a Catholic theologian, I’m not sure why I saw it that way. Maybe it too seemed a normalization of someone I admired as creatively offbeat. Nevertheless, I’ve since come to appreciate the artistry, beauty, and sheer rock genius of that phase of Dylan’s life too.  “Saved” along with “You Gotta Serve Somebody” are prime examples of all that. (See for yourself. Play the video at the top of this blog entry.)

Then, two years ago during an extended stay in Granada Spain, I formed a friendship with an Italian Bob Dylan scholar, Francesco Adreani. Like me he had integrated himself into a group of cave-dwelling street musicians. Cesco (as we called him) shared a 40-page essay he’d written called “Tutte Le Strade Portano a Desolation Row” (All Roads Lead to Desolation Row.”) It was a marvelous read. It connected Dylan with Tarot and astrology as well as with the author’s personal experiences. I remember spending my last Granada afternoon with my brilliant friend in the Alhambra garden smoking weed and discussing “Desolation Row” stanza by stanza.

Finally (still in Granada) there was an unforgettable Dylan moment I shared with my sweet 15-year-old  granddaughter. It happened that towards the end of our shared year in Spain, Bob Dylan gave a concert in the Alhambra. And my daughter made it possible for her daughter and me to attend. Talk about unforgettable! My granddaughter said I was smiling from ear to ear during the entire event.

As for Dylan that night . . .. No guitar, no harmonica, only piano. Not a word addressed to the audience except something like “Isn’t this a wonderful place to be?” But then song after wonderful song delivered in Dylan’s inimitable way – still raspy with words almost unintelligible. (Afterwards, Cesco asked me what I thought of “Every Grain of Sand.” And I had no response because I didn’t realize Dylan had sung it.) But what an unforgettable experience with my granddaughter and Bob Dylan!

Moral of the Story

Yes, Bob Dylan was an important part of my life.

Yet there’s so much more to say about his impact on the most formative span of my 84 years (my 20s and 30s). Along with Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Joan Baez and the others, he gave language to the hope so many of us experienced during the 1960s and early ‘70s.

That was the time of the Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Liberation, the Native American Freedom Drive, Prisoners’ Rights demonstrations, and Gay Liberation. It was a time of the Second Vatican Council (1962-’65) and hopeful reform in the Catholic Church where I had just been ordained a priest. It was an era of awakening, protest, resistance, and great literature and music. How I miss all of that. How I long for its revival. It was all absolutely formative.

In that context, Bob Dylan helped an entire generation find our voices. Unlike Joan Baez with her quasi-operatic tone and range, his singing voice was ordinary to mediocre to poor. But it was his and he made no apologies for it. It was revolutionary. It was meaningful. And in the end, it was beautiful.

If Bob Dylan could sing like that, anyone could. In fact, soon everyone was singing like that. I’m talking about masters like John Prine and Bruce Springsteen. I’m talking about guitar hacks like me. Bob Dylan encouraged (i.e. gave courage to) us all to discern what was blowin’ in the wind in times that were truly a-changin’.

But Timothee Chalamet’s Dylan is far more even than that. He speaks to our very processes of becoming who we really are. In “A Complete Unknown,” Dylan comes across as a kind of mystic whose authenticity, autonomy, and creativity meant more to him than anyone’s stultifying but seductive adulation. It meant more than the approval of rightfully sanctified pillars of the folk music establishment like Seegar, Baez, and even Woody Guthrie.

All of this was epitomized in the film’s climax at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival, when by going electric, Dylan offended so many of those who fawned over him along with everyone who mattered in his musical world. But he was ahead of his time. He recognized that (as his later Oscar winning song put it) “Things Have Changed.” The folk revival was over. It was time to move on.

And move on he did.

However, his transition was not just the expression of one artist’s commitment to his own creative daimon.

It was a statement about life itself. Change is inevitable, it says, though most find it uncomfortable and resist it mightily. The matrix of public expectation is claustrophobic and takes great courage to escape. It requires endurance in the face of slings and arrows often launched even by pillars of the community, family members, experts, and loved ones.

None of us should forget that.    

With all that in mind, don’t miss “A Complete Unknown.” It’s a great movie that recalls an unforgettable era. It’s a teachable moment too.

Like Bishop Budde, Jesus’ Wokeness Infuriated His Neighbors

Readings for the Third Sunday in Ordinary Time: Nehemiah 8:2-4a, 5-6, 8-10; Psalm 19: 8,9, 10, 15; I Corinthians 12: 12-14, 27; Luke 1: 1-4, 4: 14-21

Last Tuesday Episcopal Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde infuriated Donald Trump and JD Vance at Trump’s inaugural prayer service at the National Cathedral in Washington. She did so by echoing in her sermon the Spirit of Yeshua of Nazareth whom this Sunday’s Gospel reading depicts as delivering his own inaugural address to his former neighbors in his hometown of Nazareth.

Bishop Budde’s words asked Mr. Trump “in the name of our God” to “have mercy” on LGBTQ people and immigrants targeted by his policies. Her words chimed with those of her Master who in his programmatic words proclaimed his work as directed towards outsiders – the poor, the blind, the imprisoned, oppressed, and indebted.

Evidently, Messrs. Trump and Vance prefer their version of God and a Jesus who puts America first. They seem to consider Americans (and Zionists) as somehow “chosen” by a God who joins them in despising those with non-binary sexual orientations. Instead of welcoming strangers (as Bishop Budde put it in tune with oft-repeated biblical injunctions) their God would build walls and evict them from our midst.

Ironically, the Trump/Vance position is not far from that articulated by Ezra, Israel’s 6th century BCE priest and scribe who invented the concept of a genocidal Israel as God’s chosen one. (You can read a summary of Ezra’s words immediately below.)

So, predictably, Mr. Trump and his followers (like Yeshua’s contemporaries rejecting him) wasted no time in vilifying Bishop Budde.

Instead, she deserves our admiration and imitation as a woman of vast integrity and courage. Let me show you what I mean.

Today’s Readings

Nehemiah 8:2-4a, 5-6, 8-10

Following the Jews’ return from the Babylonian exile (586-538), the Jewish priest and scribe, Ezra rewrote the Hebrew’s largely oral traditions that eventually became their Bible. He unified those narratives about mysterious beings called “Elohim.”  These were human or perhaps extraterrestrial “Powerful Ones,” some good-willed, some malevolent, who had never been universally considered divine. In Hebrew oral tradition, they had variously been called by names such as “Elohim,” “El,” “El Shaddai,” “Ruach,” Baal, and Yahweh. Ezra unified and rewrote those traditions as if all of them were about Israel’s now “divine” Powerful One (Yahweh). The tales included divinely authorized genocides of Palestinians (identified in biblical texts as Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites, Geshurites, Maacaathites, and Philistines). All of them had lived in the “Holy Land” long before the arrival of the ex-slave invaders from Egypt who ruthlessly decimated their numbers in the name of their Powerful One. In Nehemiah chapter 8, Ezra is depicted as spending half a day reading his conflated narrative [now called “The Law” (Torah)] to Israel’s “men, women, and those children old enough to understand.” The new narrative brings everyone to tears as a nationalistic and exclusive consciousness dawns that Yahweh-God had chosen them as his special people.

Psalm 19: 8,9, 10, 15

Despite the genocides, the people praised Yahweh’s words as simple, perfect, refreshing, trustworthy, wise, illuminating, pure, eternal, true, and completely just. They identified Ezra’s words as Spirit and Life.

I Corinthians 12: 12-14, 27  

Yeshua, however, never called his Heavenly Father “Yahweh.” Instead, he (and his principal prophet Paul) understood God as a Divine Parent, the Creator of all things, the “One in whom we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Yeshua (and Paul) rejected the idea of “Special People” in favor of all humanity as comprising One Human Body. For both men, no part of that Body (even the least presentable) was better or more important than any other. For Paul and Yeshua, Jews and non-Jews were the same. So were slaves and free persons. In fact, for Yeshua’s followers, those the world considers less honorable should be treated “with greater propriety.”

Luke 1: 1-4, 4: 14-21

In the first sermon of his public life, Yeshua addressed his former neighbors. He was asked to read from the scroll of the prophet Isaiah (a contemporary of Ezra) who dissented from genocides and mistreatment of captives. Here’s what Yeshua read:

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring glad tidings to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord.

Rolling up the scroll, he handed it back to the attendant and sat down,
and the eyes of all in the synagogue looked intently at him.
He said to them,
“Today this Scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing.”

When his neighbors heard his words, they wanted to kill him. Who did he think he was?! Everyone knows God favors the rich, not the poor. Just look at the Great Ones’ gaudy lifestyles and possessions. And those people in prison deserved to be there. Once freed, they’d threaten us all. And besides, the blind were sightless because of some sin they or their parents had committed. They deserved their lot in life. As for “the oppressed . . . There are no “victims.” Everyone knows that. Victimology is a hoax. Who did this Yeshua think he was?! Let’s kill him.

Conclusion

Yes, Yeshua, like Bishop Budde confronted his contemporaries to champion the One in whom we live and move and have our being.” For Yeshua that Divine One considers all humankind a single indivisible body. For him this meant incorporating those his world wanted to amputate as outsiders, invaders, criminals, and as official enemies like Samaritans, tax collectors, street walkers, the poor, imprisoned, the sightless, oppressed and indebted.

In Yeshua’s spirit, Bishop Budde urges incorporation of immigrants, LGBT outcasts, and official enemies such as the Palestinians, Russians, Chinese, Iranians, North Koreans, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, Cubans, Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, Somalis, Sudanese, Libyans, etc. etc. None of them is our enemy. All of them, she says with Yeshua and Paul, are closer to us than our brothers and sisters. They are parts of our own bodies. None can be amputated.

Such universalism, such wakefulness always infuriates those who would divide and rule over us. It angers as well ordinary people (like Yeshua’s neighbors) who have been brainwashed into accepting prevailing nationalistic understandings of the Bible’s often genocidal “God.”

Today’s readings call us to wake up! Bishop Budde’s got it right. Trump and Vance are heretics.