Credit: Far Out / Bob Dylan

The genre Bob Dylan wasn’t good enough to play: “Too much rock in my blood”

Thu 4 June 2026 18:00, UK

Being considered one of the greatest folk musicians of a generation simply wasn’t enough for Bob Dylan to rest on his laurels so early in his career, and even though he probably knew full well that he’d have still had an extraordinary career had he stuck to his roots, the temptation to explore was too strong to resist.

His transition towards a much more rock-oriented style in 1965 proved to be controversial among the folk purists in his fanbase, but it was evident that he was a natural when it came to making music in this way. The compositions that he was coming out with during this period were far more elaborate than anything else he’d done up until that point, and it seemed as though this embrace of rock and roll had nothing but a net positive effect on how he approached his work.

He would, of course, eventually win over his detractors and become almost universally hailed as an all-time great in both fields, which isn’t something everyone can say. Most who establish themselves as a hero in one area just stick to their lane and be done with it, but for Dylan, his passion and interest in diversifying the work he was producing allowed him to really hone in on making his songs stand out in both regards.

However, while rock seemed to feel like a natural settling place for Dylan, that wasn’t going to necessarily be the case with other genres that he fancied dipping his toes into.

While he would incorporate elements of many other styles into his work throughout his career, even as he moved much later on in life, not all of them were natural enough fits to warrant him going to the extreme of establishing them as primary outlets for his creativity.

In the case of his flirtations with country, it was all just a case of borrowing, and while albums like Nashville Skyline see him try to work in this area over the course of an entire record, he never truly believed that he could insert himself into another world that was dominated by other musicians. Not only was this the case with country, but he appeared to hint that his approach to playing in a blues-influenced style was also limited in scope for the same reasons.

During a 2012 interview with Rolling Stone, his then-most recent album, Tempest, was compared to the work of Muddy Waters, Howlin’ Wolf and Charley Patton, all icons from the world of blues music, but despite these flattering comparisons, Dylan didn’t believe he deserved to be mentioned in the same sentence as them, let alone be referred to as a ‘bluesman’.

“Bluesmen lead lives of great hardship,” Dylan asserted, “and I’ve got too much rock & roll in my blood to call myself a blues singer. Country blues, folk music and rock & roll make up the kind of music that I play.”

While blues was hardly a massive stylistic leap for him, considering it was so strongly associated with a certain way of performing and a different way of life to what he knew, he never felt as though he could truly call himself a bluesman in the same way as his idols. It almost arrives as a mark of respect for what they were able to produce from the real-life experiences they had endured that he chooses not to refer to himself in this manner, and while he’s certainly offered just as much to the world of music as they did, he’s wise enough to acknowledge that they’re more deserving of the title than he is in that field.