Re: Dylanological question

Malcolm, basically it's `cos he's a bin rummager. He's an opportunist and
nonentity not worth wasting your mind on.
He's in jail for drugs `cos he was dealing them.

z <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I became a dylanolgist after reading the rolling stone Tangled up in
> Bob article by Marc Jacobson in 2001.  Since then I have bought a
> considerable amount of dylan cd's, have gone to 2 concerts, and visit
> boblinks.com, expectingrain, and rec.music.dylan daily to quench my
> daily dylan need.  I have some questions for all you dylanologists.
> Why do many of you refuse to even speak about weberman.  It seems the
> guy who created dylanology would at least get recognized for that!  I
> mean he does have some wacky ideas, but hey, we wouldnt be on this
> board now if it wasnt for him.  And I agree with weberman in that
> dylan did make many people sad when he wasnt commenting on vietnam.
> Who knows maybe weberman is right that dylan has aids!  Who's to say
> he is wrong.  Dylan kept a wife and kid hidden for 15 years!  We
> fanatics didnt even know about that! Yes i do feel weberman went to
> far, and was disrespectful of dylan and his family, but geez the guys
> sitting in jail for ten years for drugs!!  Thats absurd!  He should be
> free.  But lets face it, we all are going a little far.  I mean when
> we have people who know krogsgaards book and listings by heart, or are
> obsessed with the setlists, thats pretty fanatical.  Now, I am a fan
> of Pearl Jam and Spearhead, Phish, and String Cheese Incident, and
> Widespread, Ben Harper and Springsteen.  I post on their websites too,
> and I can tell you with absolute certainty, dylanologists are the most
> fanatical fans around.  I just wanted to ask why you dont at least
> acknowledge weberman.  I mean its sort of like christians ignoring the
> beliefs of chirst.  This post is sure to cause some controversy!  Let
> the debate begin!