Pepsi Music Blog
Bob Dylan's Holiday CD: A Very Zimmy Christmas!
By Thu Oct 1, 2009 5:02pm PDT 11 Comments
Speaking of chestnuts and flames, right now there are a lot of Bob Dylan fans who'd like to roast their hero over an open fire. I'm talking about the extremely polarized reaction to Christmas in the Heart, Dylan's Christmas album... which, depending on who you talk to, is either a jolly good lark, a sincere and sentimental take on the holidays, or the ultimate betrayal of a man's art and the end of rock & roll integrity as we knew it.
He's truly made his most controversial record since the born-again years. And I, for one, am happy to see him dividing people again, because what's more rock & roll than doing that? Unless it's doing that by recording fairly faithful renditions of "Here Comes Santa Claus" and "Hark the Herald Angels Sing"? Perhaps you remember the old maxim: "Screw art—let's dance." (It actually read a little bit different from that, but you get the gist.) Well, Dylan's take on the holidays is basically: "Screw art—let's Prancer."
There's no original material; every song is a familiar or semi-famiiliar holiday standard. In other words, don't expect to hear any original Dylan tunes along the lines of "Blowin' in the Blizzard," "Positively 34th Street," "Don't Check Your List Twice, It's All Right," "I Want Yule," "The Lonesome Death of a Christmas Carol," or "Ballad of a Jolly Fat Man." Neither did he put his imagination to work on a less generic album title—like, say, Blitzer on Blitzer, Nog on the Tracks, The Freestyle-Skiin' Bob Dylan, Santa Claus Lane Revisited, The Toyshop Tapes, Slow Horsedrawn-Sleigh Coming, Under the Blood Red Mistletoe, or Elf Portrait. (I'll be here all week, folks.)
No, it's simply called Christmas in the Heart, and the cover art of a pre-modern sleigh, very much in the old-school tradition of Currier and Ives, is a tipoff that the project is both sincerely and nostalgically intended, with no serious attempts at Christmas revisionism—even though, by its very nature, that voice being applied to those songs is going to involve some hefty revision.
His chops are reasonably smooth—and I mean smooth for a long-time smoker now in his 60s—on some of the material, like the single "Must Be Santa" and "Here Comes Santa Claus." But on the quieter hymns and ballads, he's almost purposefully raggedy. There are some apparent first takes that would have sent any other singer in the world back to the studio's break room for an herbal tea time-out, but not our Bob.
Simon Cowell, who once sniffed that Dylan would never make it on Idol, will have no reason to change his mind here, but who cares? You have to assume there's a deliberateness on his part when he's capable of a more palatable vocal reading yet sings a few of these tunes in his most scorched voice. Of course there is a contrast between his intonations and the mellifluousness of the background singers, like Tom Waits on a rough day fronting the Jordainaires. Listening to him sing "I'll Be Home for Christmas," it's hard to imagine the narrator will be headed anywhere other than the VA hospital for the holidays.
But I love the fact that Dylan is being true to both himself and his influences in every regard. The raggedy-ness? That's him, right now. And the controversial slickness of most of the arrangements ? True to the records he heard growing up in the late '50s, even if at times the album sounds squarer than Washington Square. Lead vocals aside, Christmas in the Heart is close to a dead ringer for one of those LPs they used to sell inexpensively or give away at gas stations and supermarkets 40 or 50 years ago. If you're of a certain advanced age, you might even feel weird paying for it in anything other than S&H Green Stamps.
Don't mistake it for a toss-off, in any case; Dylan insiders say his heart really was in it—that he took the project very seriously and did a good deal of recording for it, spontaneous as it might sound. (It's worth a side note to mention that this is the first time he's ever publicly aligned himself with a charitable organization, and his income from it will go directly to Feeding America in the U.S., Crisis UK in England, and the World Food Program in other territories.)

Just for laughs, I'll leave you with a a sample of the immediate responses that samples from the album drew on the most active Dylan fan board, expectingrain.com. Civil war nearly broke out, as you'll see from these message-board excerpts:
* "Can't help it, I'm a sentimental sap and I just love it. The old man's having fun with this and so am I. His legacy is already firmly established and I doubt he worries at all about anything he or anyone else does at this point. I plan on drinking too much spiked eggnog and crankin' it up to10!"
* "It's pure evil in sound form."
* "Oh that poor man! Someone give him a damn lozenge!"
* "I think this is charming. It's homey and folksy like ‘It's a Wonderful Life.' I am looking forward to the album now, having assumed it would be an abortion. And where else are you going to hear Bob sing in Latin?" (That would be the opening verses of "O Come All Ye Faithful," by the way.)
* "This is two great things coming together badly and will undoubtedly go down as the single worst thing he's ever foisted on his fans, and that includes Self Portrait, Knocked Out Loaded, Down in the Groove and his $2600 commemorative harmonica."
* "He effing nailed it good. This will be an album that will bring a beaming smile to your face upon each listen. If it doesn't then you are a little too hyper-pretentious with a mouth full of Botox. Please, please, please remember... it's never, ever effing uncool to like 'fun stuff' just for the fact that it is fun; 'art' shouldn't exclude 'fun' projects."
* "It should've been called Christmas in the Intensive Care Unit."
* "People who are slagging the backing vocals are just out to lunch. It's a straight testament to that mainstream 1950s pop aesthetic (even Johnny Cash used it, or at least submitted to it, on albums like Ballads of the True West). Why is that less valid than any other aesthetic? So that aspect of it, I'm down with. And even if you can't accept that particular sound, as long as you're not bent on taking Bob too seriously you can still enjoy it as cornball fun."
* "Two words: oy vey."
* "Personally, I'm boycotting it and giving the cost of the CD directly to a beggar on the day of its release. I can't, in all conscience, consider buying this piece of rancid throat scrapings."

* "I ADORE the lack of pretense... I don't take this release seriously and it makes me laugh and give me joy to hear it. I won't be trying to dissect or analyze it because it doesn't warrant that, obviously. I think it's hilarious and a lot of fun and so will many of the people I give it to this Christmas."
* "It's kind of like Blind Melon Chitlin wandering onto the set of the Lawrence Welk Show."
To that last one, I respond: Well, exactly! Let's not say that like it's a bad thing, shall we?







Wondering, though, about the track listing comments. Can they really change the set that close to the date the album will go on sale? That seems a pretty tall order and more like a smoke screen on the part of Dylan's reps. Wouldn't you think the CD has been pressed by now?
RB
sense of humor,he just loves to put people on.