Dear chaps, I think you are out of ...focus. Do you really think that dear old Bob can, or in fact should, win with the lyrics he has been providing? I mean, yes, he may have been the top song writer back in the sixties and (half-hearted to admit) seventies, but they are only fine lyrics, hardly poems. They work best only with the accompanying of music, which, in it's own right is a bit rough, to make a unique mixture of (almost) authentic work of art. Some might add that the obvious lack of serious competitors for best lyrics, has made Bob's songs, sort of an one-eyed person amongst the blind, but comparing lyrics to actual poems and competing with works of literature, surely is a bit over our heads.
But as old Bob used to say, things have changed, and since the literature world goes through a similarly distasteful phase (the last 3-4 Nobel prizes were not "strong" enough) he might have a better chance of getting it. Mind you, I do believe that even great prizes as the Nobel prize, have a meaning that eludes us. I mean what is the use of giving the price to an already famous and rich person, whose work is more popular than any previous prize holder. So unless the purpose of the prize is other than to bring to the attention of the wider public the works of a man, (and secondarily to honor him/her), there is no reason of giving it to dear Bob. I still can't imagine why they gave Henry Kissinger the Nobel peace prize!!!
After all they gave him the Oscar and I think he has won the occasional Grammy, not that any of them has any particular value or meaning. They give them away so easily the last couple of decades. I have come to believe that any person attending regularly these ceremonies will eventually end up with one award.
