/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1190349]

Charles Bukowski; which book would you suggest to read first?

[Anonymous No.1190353]

Bukowski writes boring anecdotal doggerel that only really appeals to white middle-class American males with a fetish for bachelor's poverty and alcoholism.

The thing to start with is obvious - his first published work.

[Anonymous No.1190352]

Any of them I guess, it doesn't really seem to make any difference. The first Bukowski book I picked up was Slouching Towards Nirvana.

[Anonymous No.1190356]

Women

[Anonymous No.1190361]

Read Ham on Rye first. It's his best, and chronologically the first of his series

[Anonymous No.1190365]

thanks for the input so far

[Anonymous No.1190368]

read Hollywood. But only if you's an alcoholic like me.

[Anonymous No.1190370]

>>1190353
You forgot European hipster girls with a drinking problem.

[Anonymous No.1190468]

Factotum.

Unemployed, alcoholic late 20's from a working class family here who can sympathize with his early work. Before the money and wife diluted his relevance.

[Anonymous No.1190514]

Ham on rye
Post office
Factotum
Women
Notes of a Dirty Old Man

[Anonymous No.1190515]

Of the novels, I would start with Post Office.

[Anonymous No.1190526]

>>1190514
You forgot this
and
Tales of ordinary madness.

His short stories are great. Arguably better than any novel he has written (except for Ham On Rye of course.)

[Anonymous No.1190528]

>>1190526

I meant this image

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190614]

>Charles Bukowski; which book would you suggest to read first?

I'd suggest reading something that isn't terrible.

Though, if you're, like, 17-21 years of age, and are just coming off a Kerouac phase or something, then Bukowski might be for you.

[Anonymous No.1190617]

>>1190614
Sup /fit/?

OP, you might try this site: http://www.lib.ru/INPROZ/BUKOWSKI/miscstor.txt

[Anonymous No.1190619]

>>1190614

This is the stereotypical criticism of Bukowski, but it's invalid, I'm afraid. I didn't get into the guy until my mid-twenties. It's very easy to think you're better than Bukowski - the outdated slang, the emphasis on balling women, the physical ugliness, the poverty, the valorisation of violence - but he saved my soul, he certainly saved my life, and he did it by faithfully recording what it feels like to fail, to fall lower than you could ever have feared, to have everything taken from you, to suffer not only without justification but without explanation, and yet to endure, to live, not to become hard, but to understand the vital neccesity of sensitivity, the transcendent meaning of art - and to create. Bukowski had nothing but tough breaks for most of his childhood and young manhood. He turned up Beethoven on the radio and WROTE his way out of grief, wrote until it couldn't hurt him anymore. You don't appreciate him now, and that's fine. One day, when you're big enough to admit how many fights you've lost, how many risks haven't worked out, and how many of your dreams have been shot down by people who didn't even have the wit to be meaningfully cruel - then maybe you'll be ready for him. And he will still, and will always be there, because he WON.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190624]

>>1190619
9/10. Ballin' outta control.

[Anonymous No.1190625]

>>1190619
This read like you were making a case for his biography instead of his poetry. >He turned up Beethoven on the radio and WROTE his way out of grief, wrote until it couldn't hurt him anymore.
Yeah now I just want witness the biopic instead of experiencing his words. Also, I respect your emotion, but that's the trick with raw emotion, isn't it? It's more poignant lived than communicated.

[Anonymous No.1190626]

>>1190624

See what a child you're being? Enjoy the years of your blissful ignorance. Many's the time I've longed to return to that cocoon.

[Anonymous No.1190628]

>>1190625

Read his work. Read his poetry. It's all in there, and I refer to the circumstances of his life because he wrote about life as he experienced it. His work is about that lived experience, and is of lascerating poignancy.

[Anonymous No.1190630]

OP, any volume published during his life is a good start.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190633]

>>1190626
>Not sure if I'm being trolled, or if your nose is seriously this deep in Bukowski's man-taint.

[Anonymous No.1190636]

>>1190633

Like I said, you're not going to get it for a while.

[Anonymous No.1190640]

>>1190625

> This is the stereotypical criticism of Bukowski, but it's invalid, I'm afraid. I didn't get into the guy until my mid-twenties. It's very easy to think you're better than Bukowski - the outdated slang, the emphasis on balling women, the physical ugliness, the poverty, the valorisation of violence - but he saved my soul, he certainly saved my life, and he did it by faithfully recording what it feels like to fail, to fall lower than you could ever have feared, to have everything taken from you, to suffer not only without justification but without explanation, and yet to endure, to live, not to become hard, but to understand the vital neccesity of sensitivity, the transcendent meaning of art - and to create.

This entire part isn't about the biography, but the work.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190642]

>>1190636
I think I'll continue reading other writers, since I'd rather somebody who can actually write to, like, be the savior for my soul or whatever.

If my soul got saved by the artless, sentimental drivel that Bukowski produced, I'd be more than a little embarrassed.

[Anonymous No.1190644]

I love Bukowski, dearly. He is one of my favourite authors and has such a spirit, it's indescribable.

Start with Ham on Rye, mix in some poetry.

[Anonymous No.1190647]

>>1190642

How is it artless? His entire life was art, and his entire life was his work.

[Anonymous No.1190648]

>>1190642

Like I said, you aren't ready yet. Enjoy.

[Anonymous No.1190651]

>>1190642

How is it artless? His entire life was art, his entire life was his work.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190660]

Alone With Everybody
>Like, we're alone, but with everybody, and yet we're still alone even with everyone here! DEEP.

the flesh covers the bone
and they put a mind
in there and
sometimes a soul,
and the women break
vases against the walls
and the men drink too
much
and nobody finds the
one
but keep
looking
crawling in and out
of beds.
flesh covers
the bone and the
flesh searches
for more than
flesh.
>Shit, this is so deep, like the deepest ocean, and you take that ocean and drill the bottom of it until it's deeper than deep, and that's how fucking deep this is.

there's no chance
at all:
we are all trapped
by a singular
fate.
>Exaliftin'. My mind is being carried to the next dimension. What a lyrical wordsmith.

nobody ever finds
the one.
>It's so heart-wrenchingly true. It's like he's speaking to me, it's like he hears the beating of my heart when he writes.

the city dumps fill
the junkyards fill
the madhouses fill
the hospitals fill
the graveyards fill

nothing else
fills.
>Like, my heart never fills, especially when I read Bukowski, except that Bukowski does fill city dumps and junkyards with old and tired words and ideas, if we want to talk about this in a poetic fashion.

[Anonymous No.1190662]

>>1190660

Thought you were going to read something else? Are you so desperate for everyone to miss the same points as you?

[Anonymous No.1190667]

The term 'poetic fashion' is particularly revealing. You've just started out, and you need everyone to respect the orthodoxies that are cowing you. Later, in your reading and in life, you'll get Bukowski.

[Anonymous No.1190670]

>>1190648
>you aren't ready

Regardless of how good something is or how much you like it, going on in that matter just sounds condescending. When you sit there and say the equivalent of "What's the matter? Too DEEP for you?" it sounds more like you are trying to defend your own shitty taste than actually support something you hold in high esteem.

[Anonymous No.1190676]

>>1190670

No it doesn't sound condescending, you're just trolling. The reason he doesn't get it is as simple as that. I would have said pretty much what he's saying now if I'd read Bukowski before I did. I cannot live his life for him, and that's the only way I could make him get Bukowski. I'm not writing a long essay only to be answered with another gif or further snark, I have more interesting things to do. Bukowski needs no defence from the kind of person who resents those he can't browbeat, which is what this poster is.

[Anonymous No.1190678]

>>1190670

> Tripfag troll with tripcode turned off, scrabbling for a playmate

[Anonymous No.1190680]

>>1190676
I'm not trolling whatsoever. To a third party observer that's exactly what it looks like.

Just so you know, I'm not trying to defend Implying.

[Anonymous No.1190685]

>>1190670

A lot of people can relate to Bukowski and his work. If you don't, well there's nothing wrong with that, there are plenty of other authors out there who you might find suit your tastes, but to try and prove people wrong like this, what do you gain?

Bukowski can be a clumsy writer, he was as drunk as hell when he wrote so it's no surprise. But it's what he captures in there that is so important.

This is one of my favourite poems of his. Have you had anyone dear to you die? If you have and you don't find some part of this touching and true, then I wouldn't hesitate to call you cold.

For Jane

225 days under grass
and you know more than I.
they have long taken your blood,
you are a dry stick in a basket.
is this how it works?
in this room
the hours of love
still make shadows.

when you left
you took almost
everything.
I kneel in the nights
before tigers
that will not let me be.

what you were
will not happen again.
the tigers have found me
and I do not care.

[Anonymous No.1190689]

>>1190685
I'm not saying I dislike Bukowski. In fact, I don't have a problem with him. I just wish you or whoever it is would stop saying "You don't get it yet" over and over again.

[Anonymous No.1190694]

>>1190680

I can't help it being true. To understand what Bukowski's doing, you need - well, I've already explained.

[Anonymous No.1190698]

>>1190685

Wow, I hadn't read that one yet.

[Anonymous No.1190702]

>>1190689

If someone keeps saying the same thing, I will give the same answer, especially if it's the only true one.

[Anonymous No.1190705]

>>1190689

No, I'm not the one saying you don't get it yet. Who knows though, maybe in a few years you will get it, or perhaps his style will always turn you off. Maybe only certain types of people can relate to him, people who have expreienced certain things, been raised a certain way. . . I don't know, but I'm not about to discredit you just because you don't like him. You are saying a few inflammatory remarks though, which is probably why you're being spoken to in the way you are. If you want to critique him, do it with a cool head and some respect for the people who like him, because I know that often the people who like him, love him (which means we are perhaps not so open to criticism), and I can't think of another author who holds such a bond with his audience. This is probably his greatest legacy, that such a personality should have such devotion from so many who he never knew and indeed often wrote that he would never like to meet.

[Anonymous No.1190706]

>>1190705
I just said have no problems with Bukowski. Thanks for the lecture though.

[Anonymous No.1190710]

>>1190705
Implying seems to have given up; the person you're addressing just thought I shouldn't keep saying 'you don't get it yet', but as I explained, there's nothing else I can say, really. I could write a long essay, but who would it be for? A guy who does sarcastic greentext replies. He's just mildly pissed that other people aren't ashamed to say they like Bukowski, possibly because it's important to him that he's the kind of person who doesn't - who knows? I've said my piece.

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1190716]

Well, if the niggers, spics and women get away with peddling their shitty degenerated values as 'poetry' I don't see why homeless, crusty, disgusting old misogynists couldn't.

sage for not poetry

[Anonymous No.1190717]

>>1190710

Well, in any case, I'm just glad to have a Bukowski thread on here. He doesn't get talked about a lot on this board except for the odd sarcastic remark, it's nice to see a few supporters of his work.

[Anonymous No.1190722]

>>1190716

I thought you were dead. Oh well. . .

[Anonymous No.1190724]

>>1190717

It's great to see Bukowski being discussed, to be sure.

[Anonymous No.1190729]

It's really hard to get his older poetry works, most of his books are out of print except for his novels. Even the internet hasn't got much in the way of Bukowski. Or Fante for that matter. (btw I don't include shitty txt documents as ebooks)

[Anonymous No.1190736]

A lot of the earlier stuff goes for ridiculous prices. His first collection will cost you several grand.

I was under the impression Fante was reasonably available now?

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190739]

I don't have a problem with people who like Bukowski. I have a problem with the fact that people actually like Bukowski. To me he's on the same sort of plane as Stephenie Meyer. Basically, writers who can't actually write, yet still manage to have a significantly large following.

I'm not interested in the fact that Bukowski worked hard, had a tough childhood, etc. That doesn't make his writing "good." 50 Cent lived in the projects and got shot multiple times, and his hardships in youth sure as fuck don't make his music any better. In Da Club is still a terrible fucking song.

But In Da Club is catchy, simple, accessible, not at all unlike Bukowski's writing. And I'm listening to In Da Club now, and it is indeed catchy, and it's bearable as long as you don't think about it.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190740]

>>1190739
There is remarkable power in simplicity, and there's just as much power in familiarity. And Bukowski writes about these familiar, common, simple emotions, and I think that it's easy for anyone to get hooked, and the guy is really spreading a pretty big fucking net. But when I read, I am interested in both the emotions the text produces and the text itself.

It's undeniable that Bukowski can make a person consider his own humanity. But do I need Bukowski to remind me of my humanity? No, I don't. I am aware of myself, aware of my shortcomings and failures, and I don't need Charles Bukowski to "wake me up." I don't need Bukowski to put drop me in a new cognitive realm.

To me, Charles Bukowski is totally one-note as fuck. I'd rather read Denis Johnson. You look at Jesus' Son, and you're get to see humanity on display in a big way. But you also see the author, because the words and the ideas are complex and beautiful, and you are then also aware of the downright incredible things that humanity is capable of, and you might be pretty fucking inspired.

When I read, I love, love, love to see the author's mind at work. When I read Bukowski, I see an bitter, self-centered old man dicking around on a typewriter, and not really doing much else beyond that.

[Anonymous No.1190746]

>>1190740

Yes, you don't get it yet.

[Anonymous No.1190752]

>>1190740

And no, you don't understand what it means to fail if you can still talk of 'my shortcomings and failures' in that way, and to say you have a problem with people liking Bukowski confirms my diagnosis - you MIND that people like something you've worked hard to put beneath you. The living poet I most esteem is J. H. Prynne, most of the work I value most is Modernist in inspiration. My enthusiasm for Bukowski is not an example of someone being suckered, and I think you're insulting a lot of people's discernment because you're too immature to know better.

[Anonymous No.1190755]

>>1190740

Bukowski isn't one note. I suspect your problem is a social-class thing.

[Anonymous No.1190758]

Denis Johnson gives you desperate subject-matter as a literary property, all dressed up for the doll-house. You can see why Chuck Palahniuk digs him. Bukowski gives you desperate subject-matter as lived experience, forced into art by the determination to be heard.

[Anonymous No.1190762]

>>1190758

Word; heroin is hipper than hooch.

[Anonymous No.1190768]

> mfw Denis Johnson fan calls Bukowski "one note"

Jesus' Son is 12-stepper garbage from a physical coward.

[Anonymous No.1190775]

Bukowski doesn't give you a style you can abstract - ie. pilfer, plagiarize, rip off - from its source. If I was an empty vessel, I guess that'd make me pretty mad too.

>>1190762
It may even be as simple as that.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190776]

>>1190752
It's amazing that you know me better than I know myself, after reading a few lines of text on the internet.

>My enthusiasm for Bukowski is not an example of someone being suckered, and I think you're insulting a lot of people's discernment because you're too immature to know better.

I think you're too immature to understand that you are not the same as every other fan of Bukowski, if you catch my drift. If we're going to judge people based entirely on tiny portions of information, I believe that you are a terribly self-important person, and easily threatened as you are generally insecure with your personal beliefs.

[Anonymous No.1190783]

>>1190776

You don't get it yet. Projecting will do you no good; you're not going to troll anyone here. You've openly admitted that it bothers you that other people like a writer who you've decided they shouldn't. You can't come back from an admission like that to calling other people 'insecure'.

[Anonymous No.1190785]

>>1190776

> mfw when tripfag calls people "insecure"

[Anonymous No.1190789]

I knew hipsters would lose interest in Buk when they noticed that working-class people like him. Carry on boys.

[Implying !!OwMMiDsuHLo No.1190800]

>>1190785
Because posting anonymous insults on the internet is the epitome of bravery, yes?

>>1190783
Listen, if liking Bukowski would change my life, while also turning me into a snide and reactive little shit, I think I'd rather go on with disliking Bukowski, if that's okay with you.

[Anonymous No.1190820]

>>1190800

Haven't you been paying attention? I said, many posts ago, 'Like I said, you aren't ready yet. Enjoy'. You've been showing yourself unable to move on ever since. You're the snide and reactive one. You're the one who's unable to withstand the idea that people DON'T CARE if you think your taste superior to theirs, because they know what you're missing.

The problem is, you're a hipster. You want me to try and argue you into liking Bukowski so you can parrot what I say afterwards. Unfortunately, I don't care. You don't get him yet, fine. There are many other writers. Enjoy.

[Anonymous No.1190844]

>>1190800

> implying implying is my name lol

[Anonymous No.1191046]

[Anonymous No.1191096]

>>1191046

Good post. I always liked it when he gave opinions on authors, whether or not I agreed with him is another matter of course.

[Anonymous No.1192439]

bumping a good thread

[Anonymous No.1192448]

I like some Bukowski now and then.

Can be used as a nice palate cleanser after reading something like The Kindly Ones or most any Camus.

Old Buk got the memo as to what it was about, and he was never shy about letting everyone know that fact.