Should Bob Dylan win the Nobel Prize for Literature?

I say: Yes. In some ways, sure, we can say that he's not really or not primarily a "writer," that there some innate difference between being a songwriter and a writer of poems (a poet). Dylan's works are not often read and for the most part, though there are many beautiful and imaginative passages, are hard to appreciate aside from or apart from the music and the musical performance - it's all of a piece. And yet, on a more basic level, at its essence, as wise critic Leslie Fiedler used to put it, literature does two things: tells a story or sings a song. That's it. By that definition, Dylan's work is not at the periphery of literature but at its heart. His songs will be heard and loved for as long as there is a civilization on this planet - I'm sure of that. His songs have moved and inspired and puzzled and troubled and provoked millions of people for many years and will for many years to come. He has influenced the thinking of thousands of musicians and thousands of other artists as well, helped us to see and understand our world in new and different ways. He's written about the great and vast issues of politics and love and war and racism, about spiritual issues such as grace and salvation and devotion and most of all about love in all of its peculiar manifestations. What more can we ask of any artist? The Nobel committee has made in the past honored performers (wasn't there some actor named Po or something from Italy honored within the past 20 years?) as well as more traditional writers, and they have overlooked far too many great writers - the list is long and shameful (most recent tragic occurrence was the snubbing of Updike). Dylan would be a great choice - and, next year, Philip Roth.