The senseless, tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by John Martin’s Black Sparrow Press

roni

roni

jddougher said:
[...] What I'm missing from your analysis is the perspective of Martin himself--or perhaps the perspective of Ecco. I would like to see all sides presented objectively, [...]
Click to expand...
fair enough.

Here's what John Martin has written to me about the case back in 2011, when I've asked him.
(I don't quote the entire thing, but these are the main points.)
" [...] nothing was ever published, prior to Hank's death, without his approval. And that the final poems in the last Black Sparrow books, and in the subsequent Ecco Press books, had all been edited by me, and approved by Hank, prior to his death.
[...] There are certainly typescript drafts of many of these poems still floating around. If these early drafts differ from later published versions, so be it. That is the natural result of the process I have explained above.
[...] Frankly I cannot see that there is any controversy here. I should add that the usual author/editor relationship is a private COLLABORATION. It involves a continual back-and-forth discussion between the author and the editor. [...] I would also like to add that the author/editor relationship is both private and personal, and is not usually shared with curious third parties. [...] "
Click to expand...
There's a short article by me on the subject in German language HERE. Maybe an English translation will follow if there's any demand.

B.t.w.:
Today's Mr. Martin's birthday.
I'll drink to it tonight.
 
Pogue Mahone

Pogue Mahone

Officials say drugs may have played a part
But I wouldn't lay any of the blame for the posthumous clusterfuck at Linda's door. Is it her job to compare the finished books to manuscripts? I don't think it is.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you on this one MJP. Unless Linda was so detached from his work by the time he died (and afterwards), I can’t imagine the same thing that occurred to you would not have occurred to her after reading a few posthumous poems. She didn’t need to actually compare anything to sense something was amiss.

And I guess the only reason I point to her is because she was the only one who had any real power to prevent it from continuing. It could have been stopped at some point if she had the interest to do something about it. Instead, a lot more edited books got printed.

But maybe she had read and lived enough Bukowski in his lifetime and didn’t have the stomach or interest for it after some point. Maybe she didn’t even bother to read the posthumous poems.
 
mjp

mjp

Founding member
My point is - and this doesn't only apply to writers - just because you were married to someone doesn't make you qualified to "oversee" their posthumous career. Nor does it mean you'd necessarily have any interest in doing so. The rights to creative work (usually) go to immediate family on an artists death, but those rights don't magically make those heirs experts in their dead relative's field. So holding them to any standard isn't reasonable.

I'll say this, esart and I spoke to Linda in Pasadena when The Continual Condition was published, and here was her comment to us on the book: she held it up and looked at the cover and said, "Isn't it adorable!" Nothing about what was inside. And that's pretty consistent with every conversation we've ever had with her, individually or separately (whether she was imbibing or not, and whether we were having a pleasant conversation or she was screaming at me - just saying).

I can't say I have any insight into her interest in the work other than the interaction I've had with her, so take that as anecdotal.
 
Pogue Mahone

Pogue Mahone

Officials say drugs may have played a part
Thanks MJP. That provides a nice bit of perspective. We agree who is ultimately responsible. It's not fair of me to point fingets at anyone else.
 
Bukfan

Bukfan

"The law is wrong; I am right"
There's a short article by me on the subject in German language HERE. Maybe an English translation will follow if there's any demand.
Click to expand...

I sure would'nt mind an English translation and I'll bet I'm not the only one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
esart

esart

esart.com
Founding member
mjp said:
My point is - and this doesn't only apply to writers - just because you were married to someone doesn't make you qualified to "oversee" their posthumous career. Nor does it mean you'd necessarily have any interest in doing so. The rights to creative work (usually) go to immediate family on an artists death, but those rights don't magically make those heirs experts in their dead relative's field. So holding them to any standard isn't reasonable.
Click to expand...

Actually, if he didn't have a will - a will that was executed with a lawyer and all that - the state decides all that shit, even his house, even if they are married. It's just most likely that it will all go to the spouse. But I understand your point about her not being qualified or having rights to oversee the posthumous career. That's just redonkulous. But she is considered immediate family by the way, as far as achieving creative rights. My guess is that he did not have a will and the state divided those rights up between Linda and his daughter. ?Maybe?
 
mjp

mjp

Founding member
@roni, that video is great. Even if I didn't understand most of it. You made an engaging presentation there, which is sure to get across to more people than a dry, boring recital. Nice work.

You should have embedded it in your post, you humble bastard. So I took the liberty of doing that for you.
 
jordan

jordan

lothario speedwagon
the gall to say something like "the author/editor relationship is personal and private" - and therefore above reproach, it woud seem - is just mind-bending.
 
miyavi

miyavi

"Die meisten, die auf dem Gebiet geforscht haben, brauchten immer wieder mal eine Pause und psychatrische Behandlungen um den Schock zu verkraften!"

That statement isn't an exaggeration at all. With every new example of these forgeries, incredible anger rises in me. It really hurts!
 
zobraks

zobraks

Moderator
Hey, Roni, that was one hell of a performance art piece!

P.S. You look like and talk very much like one my old friends. :)
 
roni

roni

Thanks to you all my friends for these kudos!
Makes me feel good.
Let's see how much attention it'll grab.
 
Ponder

Ponder

"So fuck Doubleday Doran"
RIP
And I am always at your service, Roni. You know, that is if I would have . . .
 
mjp

mjp

Founding member
mjp said:
Martin's junior college creative writing class idiocy.
Click to expand...
You know, I am going through a lot of mid-70s manuscripts line by line for a project, and comparing them to the posthumous books where necessary, and I just have to say, it might be worse than I thought, and I thought it was pretty bad (as my endlessly monotonous posts on the matter have proven).

For anyone who doubts or questions or is withholding judgement waiting for some sort of proof or explanation: the undeniable fact is the situation is fucked, and those posthumous books are dumbed-down, defiled, idiot garbage, created by a cruel, destructive idiot masquerading as an "editor."

Any arguments and defense of - or apology for - Martin have absolutely no validity. He is a butcher and a literary criminal. That will be his final legacy when all of the boot-lickers and apologists are buried and forgotten.

Destroying books or art from within is worse (and more effective) than throwing them onto a bonfire.

Oh wait, have I said all of this before?
 
Skygazer

Skygazer

And in the end...
mjp said:
Any arguments and defense of - or apology for - Martin have absolutely no validity. He is a butcher and a literary criminal. That will be his final legacy when all of the boot-lickers and apologists are buried and forgotten.
Click to expand...
Outwith the publishers is anyone defending John Martin? It's interesting to read roni's post with Martin's defense of the situation in the letter of 2011, in which he refers to the relationship between editor/author as one of collaboration, which begs the question by which means of collaboration is he referring to since Bukowski's death - nightly visitations in dreams??

I don't agree with trashing the whole of the posthumous work as a knee jerk reaction, where there is clear evidence of changes, yes and this forum and yourself can take credit for that. But you can't second guess what has and hasn't been changed based on odds or percentages, as far as I can see there is no obvious pattern to the poems he chose to "edit" they seem quite arbitrary, based on personal whim.

Calling it rape/ butcher/literary criminal is I suppose accurate in the sense that it is definitely non-consensual act, but sometimes tabloid style hyperbole can be counter productive to what you want to achieve and gives your opponents fodder for dismissing the validity of your argument.
 
mjp

mjp

Founding member
Skygazer said:
I don't agree with trashing the whole of the posthumous work as a knee jerk reaction...
Click to expand...
It isn't a knee jerk reaction, it's based on analysis over several years and a thousand poems. You don't have to believe it or accept it. You believing it or not doesn't change or fix anything.

When virtually all the manuscripts we have for a given book (much more than half in some cases) are changed for the worse, contending that you can't draw a conclusion from that because we don't have every manuscript is ridiculous. Again, that's not the way it works. It's not the way statistics work, or science or electing politicians or anything else. There is no "proof" of anything if you take that approach.

"Stay away from those spiders, they have poisonous venom."
"They do? How do you know? Have you tested all of them?"

Skygazer said:
Calling it rape/ butcher/literary criminal is I suppose accurate
Click to expand...
You forgot the period that ends the sentence there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top