The New York Journal of Books just published a nice review:
http://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/storm-living
Most of the snafus in the PBS piece should be gone by now.
I'm very glad to see this new book getting positive reviews, but I do seriously wish that the author of
this overall-positive review had not included such sweeping, inaccurate, stereotypical, and unfortunately-widely-believed, generalizations about Bukowski's work, such as this one:
“Never mind that his art is almost always sexually themed"...
and this one, which is even more off-the-mark:
"Sex is Bukowski’s name for love, and there is nothing gentle about it."
Of course, we all know that Buk wrote about sex; it's an integral part of his work. He wrote, in a very blunt and up-front and honest way, about
all of life, and sex is obviously part of life. Even for committed celibates, such as monks, sex is still part of life, because without it, none of them, and none of any of us, would even be here! :D
However, Buk's art cannot, and should not, be reduced to such patently false statements as that it is "almost always sexually themed." Even more so, it betrays a
serious misunderstanding of his view and experience of, and his writing about, love, to say that "Sex is Bukowski’s name for love, and there is nothing gentle about it." Apparently, this critic has never read any of Buk's great, beautiful, deeply felt, love-and-grief poems for Jane, which are some of my favorites in all of his work...!
