I'm before the computer age - (food for thought)
- Thread starter Angus
- Start date
HenryChinaski
Founding member
lol would a seventy one year old person really spend time posting in these forums, if so thats dedication. LOL
HenryChinaski
Founding member
this is true.
I'm 59 but I find it mildly amusing that folks interested in Bukowski, who must picture him as an older guy (at least, that's when he became most famous), would find it unusual that a 71-year old would be interested in this old fart. Actually, I find it interesting that young people would be interested in Bukowski. He certainly isn't the typical fellow that appeals to younger people today, so that must mean that the folks on this Forum are most 'unusual.'
:)
:)
mjp
Founding member
Well, I wouldn't argue with you there. I'm not so young though. Maybe I should display the ages in the member list so we can get a feel...but I'd think it's not all young people.Quigley said:
You make a good point though, it is odd that a lot of younger people dig Bukowski. But I guess you could say the same thing about young people reading nineteenth century philosophers in the 1950's and 60's.
Alienation and disillusionment are things most young people can identify with.
Yeah, I certainly agree... I was first exposed to Bukowski by my nephew. He was reading "Ham on Rye," and I asked him about the book. He was 16. I'm pretty familar with literature and poetry and I'd heard Bukowski's name before, kind of associated with the Beats, but never read him. (Like many have said here, I think when I went to college... '65 to '76, Bukowski was not part of the standard curriculum ... just like Robinson Jeffers hasn't been totally embraced by Academia).
My nephew really liked the book and said his friends, who were all into punk music, were reading him. Hummm... then I saw "Barfly" recently for the first time and it all kinda meshed and I started looking at Bukowski more seriously. I have a couple books and some DVD's coming from Amazon so I guess I'm kinda on my way.
But this forum has really helped. Unlike many forums I've been involved in our the years, it isn't open warfare here and constant swearing. I have nothing at all against swearing but when it's 90% of the content of a post, it's pretty meaningless. People here seem very knowledgeable and supportive.... it's quite refreshing!
One thing I'm interested in, for decades now, is anarchism. And I find, based on knowing very little about Bukowski (and could be totally wrong), there seems to be some interesting parallels between Bukowski's view of society and anarchism... granted, this is really stretching the boundaries here and I could be totally off-base, but it's one direction I'm interested in. Thanks...
My nephew really liked the book and said his friends, who were all into punk music, were reading him. Hummm... then I saw "Barfly" recently for the first time and it all kinda meshed and I started looking at Bukowski more seriously. I have a couple books and some DVD's coming from Amazon so I guess I'm kinda on my way.
But this forum has really helped. Unlike many forums I've been involved in our the years, it isn't open warfare here and constant swearing. I have nothing at all against swearing but when it's 90% of the content of a post, it's pretty meaningless. People here seem very knowledgeable and supportive.... it's quite refreshing!
One thing I'm interested in, for decades now, is anarchism. And I find, based on knowing very little about Bukowski (and could be totally wrong), there seems to be some interesting parallels between Bukowski's view of society and anarchism... granted, this is really stretching the boundaries here and I could be totally off-base, but it's one direction I'm interested in. Thanks...
cirerita
Founding member
B always claimed to be apolitical and it's really hard to find a piece -poetry or fiction- where he discusses seriously any contemporary political situation. He mentions them here and there, but he never elaborates on that.
There's this really interesting interview conducted by his close friend John Thomas in 1967 -it was republished in Sunlight Here I Am, you better order that one as well- where B criticizes very harshly all the fads of the time: LSD trips, demonstrations of any kind, "spiritual" lifestyle and so on. A good read which will help you to get a better insight of Bukowski true feelings.
But, then again, Bukowski used to play the Chinaski-tough man-I don't-give-a -shit persona and many things were purposely exaggerated!
There's this really interesting interview conducted by his close friend John Thomas in 1967 -it was republished in Sunlight Here I Am, you better order that one as well- where B criticizes very harshly all the fads of the time: LSD trips, demonstrations of any kind, "spiritual" lifestyle and so on. A good read which will help you to get a better insight of Bukowski true feelings.
But, then again, Bukowski used to play the Chinaski-tough man-I don't-give-a -shit persona and many things were purposely exaggerated!
mjp
Founding member
Your point is well taken Quigley, and I think it is unavoidable that we'll run into issues as the forum grows, but the base is strong, and the tone is established. We won't let it degenerate at the hands of a few knuckleheads.
I don't want to try to enforce any rules as far as speech and behavior are concerned - I curse in my everyday language, so it'll crop up here and there. But again, anything out of line will be nipped in the bud. I want everyone to feel welcome. No intimidation or extraneous crap fouling up the mix.
I don't want to try to enforce any rules as far as speech and behavior are concerned - I curse in my everyday language, so it'll crop up here and there. But again, anything out of line will be nipped in the bud. I want everyone to feel welcome. No intimidation or extraneous crap fouling up the mix.
G
gonesean
knuckleheads,.... it reminds me of some guy back east. The west is the best.
cirerita said:
Thank you for your interesting and informative response. I appreciate that Bukowski was not overtly political. I picked up the following quote off an anarchist site, and while it's hardly a political rant, I still found it interesting and I wondered if, by chance, you'd ever seen this quote (and as we all know, not everything on a web site is necessarily true! For all I know, this quote could be fabricated!):
"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting."
Thanks again... :)
mjp said:
That's very encouraging... I hope I didn't leave the impression that I have a quirk about swearing, I really don't. I just have a quirk about folks who attack other posters personally, with endless profanity, simply for expressing their ideas. (I must be suffering from a little Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from the last political forum I was involved in! Sorry...).
:eek:
cirerita
Founding member
that quote might be from Bukowski, but I can't confirm you that.
Anyway, when you know Bukowski's work pretty well and you also know the whole deal about his -Chinaski- persona, then you'll know for sure that comment is not political at all. He enjoyed saying things like that, sometimes just for the sake of it, with no subtle or insightful meaning whatsoever.
Let's say that quote is from an interview; quite probably the interviewer firmly believed in Democracy and B just was finding a way to question the interviewer's apparently rooted beliefs.
Anyway, when you know Bukowski's work pretty well and you also know the whole deal about his -Chinaski- persona, then you'll know for sure that comment is not political at all. He enjoyed saying things like that, sometimes just for the sake of it, with no subtle or insightful meaning whatsoever.
Let's say that quote is from an interview; quite probably the interviewer firmly believed in Democracy and B just was finding a way to question the interviewer's apparently rooted beliefs.
I would agree for the most part that Buk was apolitical, but sometimes he lets one slip...
http://www.bukowski.net/poems/the_riots.php
http://www.bukowski.net/poems/the_riots.php
mjp
Founding member
And that's exactly why I put that one up. Heh.
Funny that he wrote that for a small lit mag when he turned down the Los Angeles Times request for something on the riots. The printed his letter declining to write something for them, but I don't have it anymore.
Also, Quigley, that quote isn't familiar to me either. But as cirerita pointed out, that doesn't mean he didn't say it.
Funny that he wrote that for a small lit mag when he turned down the Los Angeles Times request for something on the riots. The printed his letter declining to write something for them, but I don't have it anymore.
Also, Quigley, that quote isn't familiar to me either. But as cirerita pointed out, that doesn't mean he didn't say it.
hoochmonkey9 said:
Thanks for the link... from my point of view, this is very political, and kinda supports the idea that Bukowski had no love for government in general. I realize I'm focusing on one of the smallest elements of Bukowski's universe here and I'm certainly not trying to transform his true persona into some politically-driven radical.
Thanks again....
mjp
Founding member
In some ways, working hard and being uncompromising in your vision and belief in yourself is radical. It isn't politically radical, but it's socially radical. It alienates some people and separates you from much of society. So in that way, Bukowski was indeed a radical.
Or it could just be the cold medicine talking. ;)
Or it could just be the cold medicine talking. ;)
Very interesting point. From my limited exposure to Bukowski, it seems like in his worldview the individual is ideally unconstrained and uncontrolled by external authorities.
I guess a world where the individual is the measure of all things, not soceity, not the State, and not even the particular culture you find yourself in. (I assume you'll stop me when I'm completely off-base here... but I think there is some element of an anarchist worldveiw here).
Thanks...
I guess a world where the individual is the measure of all things, not soceity, not the State, and not even the particular culture you find yourself in. (I assume you'll stop me when I'm completely off-base here... but I think there is some element of an anarchist worldveiw here).
Thanks...