Discussion of Whether Bob Dylan Deserves The Nobel Prize for Literature

In 2016, Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Bob Dylan is a lyricist, and the honor was in the acknowledgment of his commitments to writing through his songwriting. Dylan's success is a discussion because — other Nobel in Literature victors are fiction essayists, artists, and true to life authors — he is named a songwriter. Some will contend against his work, as others will feel that he meets the formation of a unique Nobel Prize essentially for being Bob Dylan, anyway, which condition is correct?

The main question that needs to be answered is: are songs 'literature?' 'Literature' is a term that changes and has changed, and the variant likewise uses is not quite the same as the conventional definition. A definition that positively suits tunes and the works are composed. Thusly, Bob Dylan's works effectively qualify for the Nobel Prize. Some might say that music is more of a lowbrow compared to fiction essayists which may be true; The primary goal should not regard the form, but the execution. One of the melodies he composed, was 'Blowin' in the Wind'. This melody was written in 1962, when the Vietnam War had not yet begun, yet was utilized, two or three years, as a dissent tune against the war. 'Blowin' in the Wind' begins by, “How many roads must a man walk down Before you call him a man? Yes, 'n' how many seas must a white dove sail Before she sleeps in the sand?”. He poses a principal couple of inquiries so he can place the last question, the one that has to do with war. The last question is an inquiry that assaults the legislature and the appropriate response remains the equivalent. With this tune, Bob Dylan needs the administration to understand that they are acting insane. With facetious inquiries, he attempts to send his message, his call for the opportunity, to the president and his adherents. He addresses all human conduct. He executes this message effectively since it was current, it was ministerial and it was not what was usually else on the radio, which at the time was overwhelmed by profoundly created pop melodies.

An expression comes up again and again when you set out to find out about how the Nobel boards decide: the best advantage to humankind. There are a few different ways of deciphering this. One is to state that the work is of the highest caliber has truly changed the lives of those contacted by it. The other is to state that the work has had the biggest effect on the vast majority. Out of all the potential nominees, Bob Dylan has for sure made the largest world impact. “If poverty was to be sold three cents today, I can't buy it”. You might say that Ngugi wa Thiong’o is a writer of greater quality (which is true), but it is not as strong a quantitative argument for him. The thing is, if we look at it both ways, 'greatest benefit' being quantitative OR qualitative, Dylan wins either way because he has both. What can be argued is Ngugi wa Thiong’o work is the work of a Gikuyu poet and therefore an important voice in the context of current events; but, you can't argue that he's touched the same number of people like Dylan. The thing is, on the off chance that we take a gander at it two different ways, 'most noteworthy advantage' being quantitative OR subjective, Dylan wins either way since he has both. What can be contended is Ngugi wa Thiong'o work is crafted by a Gikuyu artist and hence a significant voice with regards to recent developments; at the same time, you can't contend that he's contacted the indistinguishable number of individuals as Dylan. 

In conclusion, with all the information presented evidently, — it stands — Bob Dylan should have won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2016.