/lit/ - Literature

>>3179798
Hello whoever you are.

>>3077513
This is a trick and I don't time to really argue with anyone right now (and I'm sure someone can tell you my views) but in short: He is lazy bad writing and the people that support him will call him blunt, raw, straightforward, etc and then in the same breath will tell you he is "misunderstood" and call his style not lazy but "just straight-forward" and some other guy around here calls it "minimal". Then they will tell you its the best way to tell a story (this lazy writing), and they'll say how I'm sad sack because I have a higher standard of reading. They will then say "oh you need feels and explantions!!! What a lozer lul" and make themselves look like idiots and then repeat my quote about how Bukowski's humor is dry and like an old florida jew and they will give the age I usually give wrong. Then sometimes a bunch of guys come in and say "Bukowski isn't the best, BUT HE IS STILL GOOD DAMN IT." And then the Bukowski people, once out of room to run, turn into trolls. That's about how it goes every time. So in short, Bukowski is a lazy writer with old jew humor and no amount of apologetics for him will fix it. I just saved us all about an hour or more.