Did Bruce want to have it both ways or just have feelings that just didn’t fit entirely into one end of the spectrum or the other? Always seemed to me he did have the 60s counterculture thing, but also a strong underlying love of country and its people. He was frustrated, but hopeful. Clearly there is an affinity for Americans and dissatisfaction with how as a country we have failed so many of our countrymen.

Rather than take it or leave it, when it comes to America, I think he may have wanted to take it, but improve it. If anything, the complexity of his message was stripped away by both sides who wanted to “claim” him for their side. ...

I chalk up his “serve at the behest…” comment as one of those artist things. Every artist tells you they don’t want to get into spelling it out for you too specifically because it then moves you away from what they put out. Defining it more specifically — or defending it — adds meaning they may not feel comfortable adding. ...

Now my head hurts.

For the record, I like some of Bruce’s stuff, but think his fans take him and his work a bit too seriously at times. But that’s what happens with popular people/things. Liberals have the Kennedys, conservatives have Reagan, there’s the Kiss Army and Streisand fans.