Bob Dylan Nobel Prize & Johnny Cash in The New Yorker

[Achebe]

Ignorance is bliss.

Does explain your current state of mind, doesn't it?  

Moving back to the topic, and away from fake hippie prophets, it is interesting to note that Dylan was awarded the Nobel for 'new poetic expressions', whatever that means. 
Todd, the Nobel is for poetry as well as prose, surely. A number of poets have won the Nobel.
But not songwriting, i.e if songs are to be considered, it would be the lyrics alone (not that Dylan's songs were great in the music department either...)

you know, afaik much of ancient greek poetry (the dramas and lyric poetry especially, but perhaps also the epics), and ginsberg once thought (once, since now he's passed) blake's songs of innocence and of experience were literal songs, first (not to mention all of the poems and epics that survive for thr most part only in oral tradition, which is usually sung or cantillated, ie spoke-sung). only relatively recently is this trend of dividing songs and poetry -- all those Psalms and ballads would not even be read by most of their audience! -- and even then, it's more a symbol of either cultural elitism or misapplied commercialization than anything else. ie, you seem to be playing into the lie, dude.

Thank you. I'm not playing into any lie. You are missing the point here.

Yes, lyrics were originally meant to be a sung to a lyre. 
Epic poetry was meant to be recited.
Quranic surahs are 'sung' - eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WvHMNuhH3Y
Ghazals are commonly set to music.
Benjamin Britten's War Requiem was, as far as I know, arranged on Wilfred Owen's poems.

The point is not that poems can't be songs. They can and have always been, sung along to.

However, the examples above are those of works that can stand on their own, i.e. as songs without the music.
A ghalib Ghazal is top notch whether heard with or without the music.
You don't need music to read Blake
You can read Milton in your head

The Nobel for literature is for literature, not music. If the combined effect of the music and the writing is more than the sum of its parts, fantastic.
It's hard for you to write something like 'The Sick Rose', but not 'Tambourine Man'.

---

your languid locks :/ yep maybe that is why you are a shit poet, because you have no taste or concept of poetry. just saying. i won't add the obligatory laughing man emoticon. . . you know, it's like "i don;t really have to say anything intelligent, i'll jjust pretend i've said stated a universal truth. Dylan got the nobel prize for literature, i/m sure you know what's best though. they should have you on the panel of judges.

Aha - I didn't see this cute little footnote below earlier. You think I'm a shit poet - good for you.
Moving on to your point about the panel of judges - a silly attempt to shut down debate, if somewhat predictable - "Allah is stronger than Zeus because my daddy says so!!". 
No laughing man this time - you're being a bad boy.

you are a fool. it is funny. everyone point and laugh. it will make you feel better. you have not made any argument other than   'i don't like Dylan'. if you want to debate it, i'll be happy to. not tonight, though. i have no time for intellectually annihilating you right now. i have girls to fuck and whisky and morphine to mix. but, tomorrow.

just a ps. i don;t think Dylan is the greatest thing since sliced bred, nor even the best lyricist. . . but your ridicule of him is telling. it tells me you haven't got a fucking clue. and if you want me to continuously shred your shit poems apart as an indication of how you haven't a fucking clue what you're talking about. . . carry on.

benzos kicking in good night.

I have given you examples of bad writing from your grand panjandrum of poetry, Dylan, and invited you to show me how they were not shite. In response, you took your knickers off and ran down Oxford Street.
You haven't shredded my poems, shit or otherwise (you're welcome to carry on in that endeavour). Though I admire your choice of verb. 
Good night. Don't get your panties in a knot