Maybe Iām missing something, but I never understood the appeal of macho, abusive, self-destructive, solipsistic, childishly offensive Bukowski.
This one was open to interpretation.
I wonder, following that description of B, exactly what you might need to find in order to understand his appeal?
If that question isnāt rhetorical, itās still tough to answer, because itās sort of like being asked to prove a negative. Not my job.
It was made more tongue in cheek than anything, and maybe even some tone-policing, frankly. But it strikes me that if you find a writer to be all the things you mention (macho, abusive, self-destructive, solipsistic, childishly offensive), then why lead with āmaybe Iām missing somethingā? Doesnāt strike me that thereās anything you might find, or even want to find, in Bukowskiās writing to like. [e.g. Maybe Iām missing something, but I donāt know why people like that blowhard, warmonger, homophobic tyrant Dick Cheney.]
Why the hell did I write that in the first place? Donāt know. Iām a somewhat fan of his, I like that he did pretty much what he wanted and didnāt hide it or who he became (as opposed to HST, who became a sort of caricature of his own writing). Someone on GoodReads posted that he was a āfabulous assholeā and that seems about right.
As for the Big Mouth stripāI prefer what I see in my head to Moriartyās interpretation, but the dancing buildings and bearded guy in the third panel struck me as a Grateful Dead poster that never got made.
Okay, fair enough. I wrote āMaybe Iām missing somethingā because I see him recād by a lot of people I generally respect and appreciate recs from. It was also an invitation of sorts to explain what others think Iām missing, so thanks for your explanation, even though it doesnāt make me any more inclined to try reading him again. 
I did watch both movies based on him and his work, and once again found little of sustaining value that emerged above and beyond the apparent attributes that I attributed to his work above. I do appreciate artists who live on their own terms, rejecting absurd societal norms and expectations and so on, but not when they do so in such abusive terms. Be against something bad, but also be for something good, sez I.
I hear that and kinda figured thatās what was going on. I think I started reading his stuff because he published a lot of books through independent/small publishers, and those books tended to be carried by the places I shop for books (and they were usually cheap too). And as Iāve just moved, only two or three days ago I was putting Shakespeare never did this onto my bookshelfāmaybe Iāll go reread it to see what his work does for me now, and if itās anything worthwhile Iāll certainly mention it.
Tanget: Although Iāve read a lot through my life, it bothers me that I canāt immediately recall the words of writers I really liked, save a few exceptions. I think thatās why I [sometimes] envy hard-core religious types because they have their religious book and will read and reread it down to the last period, ostensibly gaining an exceptionally deep understanding of the text. Maybe scarcity in reading material is a good thing?
Interesting tangent. For me, I donāt worry as much as I used to about that kind of instant recall, now that All The Words are right at hand on my smartphone.
Do you stick to any particular genre of writer, or are you an omnivorous reader?
Novels, mostly, āliteraryā ones, but sometimes others considered less so. Digging Daniel Woodrell these days.
I believe Iāve got a copy of Winterās Bone on the unread shelfā¦I just started the John Dos Passos āAmericanā trilogy, but it hasnāt caught quite yet so Iām cautiously nosing around for something else (as in other than the other two books Iām reading right now).
Thereās a nice description of his work in his Wikipedia article as a ādetailed depiction of a certain taboo male fantasy: the uninhibited bachelor, slobby, anti-social, and utterly freeā. This tends to dovetail with my experience of the Bukowski fan as someone who is trying to break free of their own restrictive neuroses and see him as an id with legs.
I think Iāve read five of his now, and Winterās Bone struck me as by far the best, both the story and the writing. Hope you like it.
The appeal? Itās the same appeal that drew me to underground comics and punk rock. Art is not always pretty. ha
I get it, though, how Bukowski is not for everyone. The first time I read anything of his, when I was a teenager, I was horrified. Well, then again, I was horrified by MAD magazine as a little kid. And now Iām a cartoonistā¦
Ha ha!
Maybe try reading Last Night of the Earth Poems? The older, mellower, wiser Bukowski, thatās my favourite.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
