Dylan parodies have never appealed to me, because they are based upon brilliance (a Dylan song) but are not written by a master songwriter, so they fail. It's a perversion of Dylan's intent, which is always a serious attempt to create art, to make something new and wonderful in the moment; never to just joke around.
In 1983 he told New Musical Express in an interview, "The purpose of music is to elevate and inspire the spirit." This was his life work, worthy of gigantic respect because he put his whole life into this work and was successful far beyond what anyone else was able to achieve and in spite of what criticism came his way. He totally followed his own path, all the way to a Nobel Prize in Literature.
Read a newspaper review of a Dylan show by a rookie reporter who knows very little about Dylan, sent out by the newsroom to cover the show. The writer goes to the show having no idea of what to expect and finding himself in the presence of inspiring art, maybe for the first time in his life, is moved to experience previously unknown heights of aesthetic perfection. But he's an amateur when it comes to writing, so he's not up to the task of describing what he has experienced with the inadequate writing skills he has developed so far. But he tries the best he can because he has truly been inspired by the art!
It's like a youngster on a good acid trip who is experiencing incredible beauty, but has no words to describe what is happening to him. In the concert review this often comes out in some strange metaphor which attempts to describe Bob's unusual, expressive, unique voice. Well intentioned, but "bullfrog croaking" misses the mark by a mile. Same with parody songs.