Clearly The Greatest, but "The Best?"
(This was drafted before Mr. Mod’s recent Scarface thread. I didn’t send it since I was concerned that it might be less than well defined. I doubt it could be as misinterpreted as Scarface, but who knows. An RTHer grasp should exceed his reach…)
[audio:https://www.rocktownhall.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2-01-Tell-Me-Momma.mp3|titles=Bob Dylan & The Hawks, “Tell Me Momma” – Manchester Trade Hall – May 1966]I was thinking about and discussing with Townsman geo the topic of 1966 & prior Dylan and post-1966 Dylan. Now, there are varying opinions of how great post-1966 Dylan is (and that will be the gist of a future thread), but I think it’s generally agreed that 1966 & prior Dylan is clearly the Best Dylan. Or if someone wants to disagree about “clearly the best” than perhaps we should say the “consensus best.”
This got me to thinking about other artists. Do any other artists have such a “clearly the best” portion of their career? The clearest other example I can think of comes from outside rock. There’s Columbia-era Sinatra, there’s Capitol-era Sinatra, and there’s Reprise-era Sinatra—and you’ll find little disagreement that Capitol-era Sinatra is the best.
The Beatles are often broken down into Revolver & prior and Sgt. Pepper & after, but is there a consensus on which era is greater? Others?
Let’s narrow things down a little though. An artist’s non– “consensus best” period has to still be noteworthy (so if you want to opine on Brian Jones Stones vs. Mick Taylor Stones, that’s fine but not pre- and post- Tattoo You). And death can’t be a demarcation (eg, pre- and post- death of Jimi Hendrix).
Loading ...
