I haven't read any Bukowski for many years, and I don't think I read Woman. I enjoyed his short stories a lot. A year or two ago I made an effort to read Kerouac and some of the other Beats I hadn't read when I should have, back in the 1960s; It was "OK". I liked Ginsberg's beatnik era poetry. I've tried Henry Miller several times and just don't like his stuff. Burroughs was not too bad. A reviewer said, "Bukowski is a disgraceful role model for any aspiring writer but he writes with extraordinary candor and conviction." Maybe not all that disgraceful, but he'd be a difficult act to top.

When I read him, the internet was in the future we now occupy. Just fished this poem out.

we are always asked
to understand the other person's
viewpoint
no matter how
out-dated
foolish or
obnoxious.

one is asked
to view
their total error
their life-waste
with
kindliness,
especially if they are
aged.

but age is the total of
our doing.
they have aged
badly
because they have
lived
out of focus,
they have refused to
see.

not their fault?

whose fault?
mine?

I am asked to hide
my viewpoint
from them
for fear of their
fear.

age is no crime

but the shame
of a deliberately
wasted
life

among so many
deliberately
wasted
lives

is. — Charles Bukowski

POLITICS IS LIKE TRYING TO SCREW A CAT IN THE ASS

"Dear Mr. Bukowski:

Why don't you ever write about politics or world affairs?"

M.K.

"Dear M.K.:

What for? Like, what's new? --- everybody knows the bacon is burning."

I think that if Adolph Hitler were around now he would pretty much enjoy the present scene.

what's there to say about politics and world affairs? the Berlin Crisis, the Cuban crisis, spy planes, spy ships, Vietnam, Korea, lost H-bombs, riots in American cities, starvation in India, purge in Red China? are there good guys and bad guys? some that always lie, some that never lie? are there good governments and bad governments? no, there are only bad governments and worse governments. will there be a flash of light and heat that rips us apart one night while we are screwing or crapping or reading the comic strips or pasting blue-chip stamps into a book? instant death is nothing new, nor is mass instant death new. but we've improved the product; we've had these centuries of knowledge and culture and discovery to work with; the libraries are fat and crawling and overcrowded with books; great paintings sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars; medical science is transplanting the human heart; you can't tell a madman from a sane one upon the streets, and suddenly we find our lives, again, in the hands of the idiots. the bombs may never drop; the bombs might drop. eeney, meeney, miney, mo

now if you'll forgive me, dear readers, I'll get back to the whores and the horses and the booze, while there's time. if these contain death, then, to me, it seems far less offensive to be responsible for your own death than the other kind which is brough to you fringed with phrases of Freedom and Democracy and Humanity and/or any of all that Bullshit. — Charles Bukowski

Wow, great quotes. I've read lots of Buk, but neither of those. He was prolific. Ginsberg has powerful moments and is a fascinating character. Kerouac is great at times. It's been awhile, but I remember Desolation Angels being especially good, maybe because it's so dark and angsty. For me Henry Miller is great at times. Tropic of Cancer is uneven but hilarious and liberating. The later stuff is a bit complacement and longwinded. I gave away The Rosy Crucifixion. It has its moments, but it didn't have the inspired feel of Cancer or Black Spring. Burroughs was a great brutally simple stylist. I think mostly of Junkie and Naked Lunch. But I loved all these guys for getting away from 'literature.' Theirs was the stuff of life as I lived it myself, or close enough.

A reviewer said, "Bukowski is a disgraceful role model for any aspiring writer but he writes with extraordinary candor and conviction." Maybe not all that disgraceful, but he'd be a difficult act to top. — Bitter Crank

It's easy to imagine drunks with typewriters who think they're the next Bukowski. I imagine them missing the style and focusing instead on bad boy persona. He found the right place in the music of his time. What an aspiring writer might do is to try to be to Bukowski what Bukowski was to Fante. Their styles are more or less the same, but the first person narrator changes in his character from Fante to Bukowski (an update or variation of the writerly masculinity, which is to say the hero.)

Shouldn't, for example, their writing make you realise things about your life (i.e. about yourself), that you hadn't realise before? — Πετροκότσυφας

Most certainly. When I read Ham On Rye, it reminded me of my school days in a small town. His school was different. His difficult father was difficult in a different way. But he brought my kind of experience into the written medium skillfully. Mumblecore is something like the film version of this. The feel and acting is naturalistic. The plots involve love affairs, jobs, the pain and glory of just living modern life. No billionaires with high-tech gadgets wage midnight wars on the mob.

This is by no means the only kind of writing worth reading. But as I young man I wanted to be a writer and a truth teller. These autobiographical writers seemed to have the same goal. They wanted to ennoble their own lives without escapism. Punk rock comes to mind. They and their friends were the stars. They wanted to live and do rocknroll, not just be passive consumers of fame's mystique. But, again, this is just one approach. I will admit that I no longer have the patience to bother with Finnegans Wake. (Ulysses is great. )

What do you exactly mean by saying: "They wanted to ennoble their own lives without escapism."? — Πετροκότσυφας

They didn't have to be Batman or Mick Jagger to live noble lives. They could do ordinary things with style and awareness. Bukowski wrote somewhere that bars were ruined by TVs. The people at the bar used to entertain one another. Kerouac often describes hanging out with a group of interesting friends. They'd get high or go listen to jazz or go out the woods or drive across the country. It didn't cost a million dollars or involve shooting a machine gun at cardboard villains (the bad guys in Death Wish).
This is the escapism: sensational plots. Heroes have super powers or great wealth or fame.

Whereas the writing I'm praising was about awareness, being turned on, being courageous enough to live differently --mostly within the laws we all assent to. Any of these ideals can and have been parodied. Grunge can become a $200 sweater for rich kids, etc. Things tend to become commodified. And I never liked the Buddhism of the Beats. But including it was realistic. Young people eat that kind of thing up. That's probably why Bukowski has aged so well for me. No additives. Just sex-love, death-aging, and art/style. Or rather that kind of primary coloration of themes. The stuff that doesn't stop mattering.

They didn't have to be Batman or Mick Jagger to live noble lives. — dog

Mick Jagger lives a noble life?

Bukowski wrote somewhere that bars were ruined by TVs. — dog

I'll drink to that. Video killed the bar stool star, too, I guess. Good bars don't have TVs, or music so loud you can't hear anyone talk. That's not accidental--when people can't hear anyone (can't hear themselves think, practically) they buy/drink more booze. I always thought the reason to go to a bar was to talk and/or get laid, certainly not to watch television.

Mick Jagger lives a noble life? — Bitter Crank

'Heroic' might be a better word. I think he was (at his peak) one of the great artists in one of the greatest art forms. He also brought a feminine energy into the mainstream image of masculine cool. He was surely part of the sexual revolution. I'm sure there have been plenty of homophobes out there who managed somehow to ignore the pansexual charge of Mick's persona. (Pansexual is just a more likable word than bisexual. All these categories/boxes are little lame, but I guess they get the job done.)