You took my statement exactly at the opposite of its
meaning.
I underlined "he was a real author", just because
of the qualities of his writings that are real. I underlined
this because his life could lead to think it was the only
alibi for a certain appraisal among critics and
readers.
Your kind of demo was pure tautology.
E.Borgers
POLAR NOIR
http://www.geocities.com/polarnoir
Kevin Burton Smith <
kvnsmith@thrillingdetective.com> a 飲it :
Ettienne wrote:
> As you may know, Bukowski is an atypical
writer.
> His life is probably something hard-boiled by
itself, but his
> refusal of a normal life and the rest of his
personality is really
> a voluntarily "anti-establishment" statement. Add to
this a
> lifelong alcoholism.
> In my book, the guy is sincere. Maybe not for
everyone's taste,
> but sincere with himself and with his
readers.
> And… he's a real author. No doubt about
it.
What's a "real" author? And is being an alcoholic (or
refusing to lead a normal life) necessarily hard-boiled? Or
just shit-faced, vomit-drenched self-indulgence?
If he had written the very same books, but have lived a
"normal" life
(whatever that is), would he have been any less a
writer?
I mean, how romantic and literary is it, really, to drink
yourself unconscious and crap in your own pants? Shouldn't
the value of what's on the page depend on what's actually on
the page, rather than how it got there?
(I'm not trying to slag Bukowski per se here, but I've never
really bowed down to this People Magazine-style evaluation of
art)
Kevin
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
__________________________________________________ Do
You Yahoo!? En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la
meilleure protection possible contre les messages non
sollicit鳠 http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo!
Mail
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06 Jan 2007 EST