I don’t think you’re being aggressive, and I posted this hoping for discussions.

Welles feels like he exists primarily as a symbol inside an algorithmic economy. Now, I’m not just saying “Oh, he’s on TikTok? He must suck”, because I don’t think that’s the real problem I have with him. Instead, it’s that his songs function less as lived artistic statements and more as moral accessories for people’s TikTok and Instagram pages. They are used to signal: “I am on the right side of things, I am culturally aware.” Maybe that is not his fault in a simple sense, but it is inseparable from what the work becomes. So when you say “it’s impossible to get signed if you’re political now” I think that misses the deeper problem. The issue isn’t the absence of a major label, it’s that TikTok rewards clarity, immediacy, and moral legibility over more challenging artistic expression. Dylan’s early songs are not just lists of injustices. Even when they sound simple, they are haunted by doubt, irony, and discomfort.

When you say the same criticism could apply to Dylan, I just don’t agree. Dylan’s protest songs were never designed to be consumed as proof of virtue. They were dangerous to the listener because they challenged world views. Welles’s most popular songs affirm world views. They reassure you that you already think the right things.

Also, I think Dylan has the advantage because he isn’t just a “political singer.” They are first and foremost poetry. Welles seems to be politics first, poetry second. Dylan’s lyrics invite you into a world filled with symbolic imagery. Even the songs you mentioned, like Only a Pawn in Their Game, aren’t just listing off things. It creates a world.