Author Topic: Charles Bukowski  (Read 3005 times)

Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2008, 12:20:18 AM »
Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig bump.

Apologies if this is against etiquette. I very recently discovered the fellow, I started with Post Office (amazing) then Factotum (a continuation), now on Women. It seems slightly better written, but already is sliding into "then I wrecked this bird" teritory. Still enjoyable. I've consciously saved Ham On Rye for last after enjoying his earlier work so much. My sister (gawd bless her) got me The Most Beautiful Woman In Town collection at crimbo. Surely the title story is the best thing he put his name to? Just wonderful, a lot of the rest is very good - a lot very isn't.

Anyway - canvasing for opinion really, how do people get along with him? How do the people who were picking up his books in this thread feel about him now, etc?

To quote Modest Mouse; "woke up this morning and it seemed to me that every night turns out to be a little more like Bukowski, and yeah, I know he's a pretty good read - but God who'd wanna be, God who'd wanna be such an asshole?"

Identity Crisis Ahoy!

  • Threadshitter
    • http://www.livejournal.com/~uglyredsun
Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2008, 06:43:29 AM »
Unreadable bullshit heralded misguidedly, and pretentiously, as readable awesomeness.

Identity Crisis Ahoy!

  • Threadshitter
    • http://www.livejournal.com/~uglyredsun
Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2008, 06:43:41 AM »
He's good at coloring-in though.

Famous Mortimer

  • War - it's fantastic!
    • International Syndicate of Cult Film Critics
Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2008, 11:14:34 AM »
Unreadable bullshit heralded misguidedly, and pretentiously, as readable awesomeness.
I respectfully disagree. "Post Office" is a very readable book - the content may not be to your taste, but calling it "unreadable" is a strange way of insulting it.

Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2008, 01:38:11 PM »
Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig bump.

Apologies if this is against etiquette. I very recently discovered the fellow, I started with Post Office (amazing) then Factotum (a continuation), now on Women. It seems slightly better written, but already is sliding into "then I wrecked this bird" teritory. Still enjoyable. I've consciously saved Ham On Rye for last after enjoying his earlier work so much. My sister (gawd bless her) got me The Most Beautiful Woman In Town collection at crimbo. Surely the title story is the best thing he put his name to? Just wonderful, a lot of the rest is very good - a lot very isn't.

Anyway - canvasing for opinion really, how do people get along with him? How do the people who were picking up his books in this thread feel about him now, etc?

To quote Modest Mouse; "woke up this morning and it seemed to me that every night turns out to be a little more like Bukowski, and yeah, I know he's a pretty good read - but God who'd wanna be, God who'd wanna be such an asshole?"


I would visit
http://bukowski.net

an extremely insightful, obsessive and interesting place for all things Buk.

I would also recommend Howard Sounes' Buk Biog for further reading

Personally speaking the guy was quite influential on my writing purely for the 'Fuck it, I can do this' attitude I picked up from his words. It's also refreshing to read a writer who was far from perfect

Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2008, 01:17:44 PM »
Unreadable bullshit heralded misguidedly, and pretentiously, as readable awesomeness.

This is a very strange way to criticise him - you may not like it, but you'd have to be a moron to think it wasn't readable. Have you read any other books?

wherearethespoons

  • account closed
Re: Charles Bukowski
« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2008, 03:31:31 PM »
It depends what you consider unreadable though because I think chick lit is a piece of piss to read but simply consider it unreadable because of themes, structures, characters etc.

Or maybe I'm talking bollocks.