On Friday, July 27, 2007 at 1:02:51 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> "baloney" wrote
> > On Jul 24, 2:56 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
> >
> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
> > >
> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
> candid moment, or a confused one.
> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
> appeal.
> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
> Opinion.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

> In my opinion he was.
> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
> ----
> 230th Chorus
> Love's multitudinous boneyard
> of decay,
> The spilled milk of heroes,
> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
> by dust storm,
> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
> Murder victims admitted to this life,
> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
> -Jack Kerouac
> ----
> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
> it or leave it.
> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
> anything else, am I right?
> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
> did, achieve:
> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
> > influenced by Buk.
> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
> "Spectre".
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Doc's thoughts on Charles Bukowski, in case any here have missed it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Zod wrote:

> On Friday, July 27, 2007 at 1:02:51 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> "baloney" wrote
>> > On Jul 24, 2:56 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
>> >
>> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
>> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
>> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
>> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
>> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
>> > >
>> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
>> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
>> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
>> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
>> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
>> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
>> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
>> candid moment, or a confused one.
>> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
>> appeal.
>> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
>> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
>> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
>> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
>> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
>> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
>> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
>> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
>> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
>> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
>> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
>> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
>> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
>> Opinion.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

> Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

>> In my opinion he was.
>> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
>> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
>> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
>> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
>> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
>> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
>> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
>> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
>> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
>> ----
>> 230th Chorus
>> Love's multitudinous boneyard
>> of decay,
>> The spilled milk of heroes,
>> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
>> by dust storm,
>> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
>> Murder victims admitted to this life,
>> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
>> -Jack Kerouac
>> ----
>> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
>> it or leave it.
>> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
>> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
>> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
>> anything else, am I right?
>> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
>> did, achieve:
>> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
>> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
>> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
>> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
>> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
>> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
>> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
>> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
>> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
>> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
>> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
>> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
>> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
>> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
>> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
>> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
>> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
>> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
>> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
>> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
>> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
>> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
>> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
>> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
>> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
>> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
>> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
>> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
>> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
>> > influenced by Buk.
>> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
>> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
>> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
>> "Spectre".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Doc's thoughts on Charles Bukowski, in case any here have missed it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks again for reading and commenting, Zod.

🙂

Zod wrote:

> Will Dockery wrote:
>> "baloney" wrote
>> > Will Dockery wrote:

>
> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
>> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
>> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
>> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
>> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
>> > >
>> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
>> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
>> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
>> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
>> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
>> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
>> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
>> candid moment, or a confused one.
>> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
>> appeal.
>> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
>> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
>> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
>> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
>> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
>> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
>> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
>> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
>> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
>> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
>> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
>> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
>> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
>> Opinion.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

> Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

>> In my opinion he was.
>> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
>> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
>> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
>> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
>> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
>> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
>> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
>> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
>> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
>> ----
>> 230th Chorus
>> Love's multitudinous boneyard
>> of decay,
>> The spilled milk of heroes,
>> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
>> by dust storm,
>> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
>> Murder victims admitted to this life,
>> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
>> -Jack Kerouac
>> ----
>> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
>> it or leave it.
>> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
>> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
>> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
>> anything else, am I right?
>> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
>> did, achieve:
>> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
>> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
>> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
>> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
>> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
>> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
>> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
>> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
>> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
>> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
>> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
>> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
>> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
>> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
>> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
>> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
>> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
>> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
>> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
>> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
>> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
>> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
>> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
>> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
>> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
>> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
>> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
>> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
>> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
>> > influenced by Buk.
>> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
>> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
>> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
>> "Spectre".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Doc's thoughts on Charles Bukowski, in case any here have missed it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks again, Zod.

Will Dockery wrote:

> Zod wrote:

>> Will Dockery wrote:
>>> "baloney" wrote
>>> > Will Dockery wrote:

>>
>> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
>>> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
>>> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
>>> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
>>> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
>>> > >
>>> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
>>> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
>>> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
>>> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
>>> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
>>> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
>>> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
>>> candid moment, or a confused one.
>>> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
>>> appeal.
>>> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
>>> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
>>> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
>>> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
>>> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
>>> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
>>> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
>>> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
>>> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
>>> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
>>> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
>>> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
>>> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
>>> Opinion.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

>> Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

>>> In my opinion he was.
>>> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
>>> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
>>> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
>>> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
>>> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
>>> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
>>> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
>>> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
>>> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
>>> ----
>>> 230th Chorus
>>> Love's multitudinous boneyard
>>> of decay,
>>> The spilled milk of heroes,
>>> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
>>> by dust storm,
>>> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
>>> Murder victims admitted to this life,
>>> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
>>> -Jack Kerouac
>>> ----
>>> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
>>> it or leave it.
>>> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
>>> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
>>> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
>>> anything else, am I right?
>>> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
>>> did, achieve:
>>> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
>>> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
>>> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
>>> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
>>> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
>>> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
>>> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
>>> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
>>> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
>>> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
>>> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
>>> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
>>> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
>>> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
>>> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
>>> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
>>> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
>>> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
>>> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
>>> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
>>> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
>>> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
>>> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
>>> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
>>> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
>>> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
>>> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
>>> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
>>> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
>>> > influenced by Buk.
>>> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
>>> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
>>> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
>>> "Spectre".
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> Doc's thoughts on Charles Bukowski, in case any here have missed it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Thanks again, Zod.

Good day to you...!

General Zod wrote:
> Will Dockery wrote:

>> Zod wrote:

>>> Will Dockery wrote:
>>>> "baloney" wrote
>>>> > Will Dockery wrote:

>>>
>>> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
>>>> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
>>>> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
>>>> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
>>>> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
>>>> > >
>>>> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
>>>> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
>>>> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
>>>> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
>>>> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
>>>> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
>>>> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
>>>> candid moment, or a confused one.
>>>> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
>>>> appeal.
>>>> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
>>>> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
>>>> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
>>>> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
>>>> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
>>>> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
>>>> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
>>>> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
>>>> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
>>>> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
>>>> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
>>>> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
>>>> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
>>>> Opinion.
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>> More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>>> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

>>> Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

>>>> In my opinion he was.
>>>> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
>>>> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
>>>> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
>>>> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
>>>> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
>>>> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
>>>> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
>>>> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
>>>> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
>>>> ----
>>>> 230th Chorus
>>>> Love's multitudinous boneyard
>>>> of decay,
>>>> The spilled milk of heroes,
>>>> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
>>>> by dust storm,
>>>> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
>>>> Murder victims admitted to this life,
>>>> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
>>>> -Jack Kerouac
>>>> ----
>>>> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
>>>> it or leave it.
>>>> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
>>>> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
>>>> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
>>>> anything else, am I right?
>>>> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
>>>> did, achieve:
>>>> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
>>>> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
>>>> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
>>>> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
>>>> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
>>>> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
>>>> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
>>>> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
>>>> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
>>>> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
>>>> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
>>>> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
>>>> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
>>>> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
>>>> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
>>>> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
>>>> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
>>>> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
>>>> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
>>>> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
>>>> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
>>>> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
>>>> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
>>>> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
>>>> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
>>>> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
>>>> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
>>>> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
>>>> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
>>>> > influenced by Buk.
>>>> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
>>>> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
>>>> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
>>>> "Spectre".
>
> Good day to you...!

Good morning Zod, hope you and Mike are doing well.

🙂

Zod wrote:

> Will Dockery wrote:
>> "baloney" wrote
>> > On Jul 24, 2:56 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
>
>> > > It probably goes without saying that Buk's one of my favorites, though
>> > > his name hasn't come up much lately (the last time was prbably when I
>> > > compared Chuck's "shock" style to Buk)... Dale Houstman gave me a very
>> > > memorable paperback book blurb quote when he wrote that I was "...a
>> > > better poet than Bukowski..." or something similar.
>> > >
>> > It doesn't surprise me that you'd like Buk and Houstman wouldn't.
>> Well, the common dislike of Bukowski here is pretty interesting, in light of
>> the firestorm of reaction here recently to another "poet" who has much more
>> in common with Buk than Vera or Pandora, the
>> chopped-up-confessional-prose-verse, the "fucken" plain speaking language,
>> the /punch-line/ zinger at the end... Houstman, in a candid moment, might
>> call Bukowski's poetry "shit", as he would others using the style... in a
>> candid moment, or a confused one.
>> > I like Buk in small doses; he's not my favorite, but there is a certain
>> appeal.
>> Well, like Blue's poem about Bukowski, and the flood of Buk-wannabes,
>> sometimes the navel-gazings laced with "fuckens" and all that are
>> interesting and amusing, and liven up a poetry reading since there's usually
>> always a punk or two to jump up with that and scare the manager of the joint
>> (I remember a few years ago when a host was forced by the managment to
>> unplug the mic of Joseph Garcia when he went on and on with a poem about
>> "fucking the wide vagina of the universe" or something like that in cosmic,
>> sloppy detail... miss old Joe...) but my real favorites are the ones (like
>> Houstman, Rimbaud, Ginsberg and... yeah, again, Kerouac) who also include
>> the brilliant flashing chains of images with the gritty facts of passing out
>> and waking up in the gutter... as I wrote a couple of weeks ago in a post
>> that seems to have been passed over (since it got no responses):
>> > >I can't agree with that since Kerouac is a quite brilliant poet, in my
>> Opinion.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> More Doc on Bukowski and Kerouac ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>> > really? how so? how was Kerouac a "brilliant" poet?

> Doc's thoughts on the poetry of Jack Kerouac, below:

>> In my opinion he was.
>> His poems, even more than the other writings, were intended to be flowing
>> blasts of image and thought, conciously modeled after the feeling evoked by
>> a free jazz saxophonist, and that he made it work, most notably in his
>> masterpiece "Mexico City Blues" was pretty brilliant.
>> Here's an example from MCB (and an aside to Baloney, if you're reading this,
>> [Which I don't know if you did or not]
>> I think you might see why I relate Dale Housman's poetry to Beat poems such
>> as this, as well as the example of William Burroughs I gave earlier), that
>> shows the flow of image on image in Kerouac's brilliant poetry:
>> ----
>> 230th Chorus
>> Love's multitudinous boneyard
>> of decay,
>> The spilled milk of heroes,
>> Destruction of silk kerchiefs
>> by dust storm,
>> Caress of heroes blindfolded to posts,
>> Murder victims admitted to this life,
>> Skeletons bartering fingers and joints.
>> -Jack Kerouac
>> ----
>> That's it, my non-expert opinion on why Kerouac was a "brilliant" poet, take
>> it or leave it.
>> In fact, how about you follow your own "rules" and explain for a few
>> paragraphs how Kerouac's poetry was /not/ "brilliant"?
>> Nope, you'll no doubt just jeer at "Will Dockery" and manage to avoid
>> anything else, am I right?
>> Here's Kerouac's "mission statement" on what his poetry was intended, and
>> did, achieve:
>> "I want to be considered a jazz poet blowing a long blues in an
>> afternoon jam session on Sunday. I take 242 choruses; my ideas vary
>> and sometimes roll from chorus to chorus or from halfway through a
>> chorus to halfway into the next." -Jack Kerouac
>> And, sorry, pal, but here's an expert opinion cut-n-paste that supports my
>> opinion that Kerouac's poetry is indeed "brilliant":
>> "Kerouac is being popularized as an icon of culture - my regret is that
>> sight of him as an artist will be lost.. We'll know his name and some work
>> considered typical. But we'll miss one of the finest, brightest sensoriums
>> that has graced verse with intelligence and intellect. [...] Kerouac is best
>> known for his novel "On the Road", but his masterpiece is "Mexico City
>> Blues", a religious poem startling in its majesty and comedy and gentleness
>> and vision. [...] Kerouac is known worldwide as a novelist. He is sometimes
>> also known as the writer of haiku-type poems or intermediate-length poems on
>> the subject of Rimbaud or Budhism. But Kerouac is little known as the author
>> of several major poems which he considered to be blues works. These books
>> include the unpublished Washington D.C. Blues, San Francisco Blues, and
>> Berkeley Blues. They range in style from Dos Passos-like descriptive verse
>> to poetrylike journals. Outstanding in all modern poetry is the epic- length
>> Mexico City Blues. [...] The rules of Mexico City Blues were that they
>> should be written on the pages of a pocket notebook such as Kerouac nearly
>> always carried. Each page of the notebook would be a chorus. Eventually, in
>> the developing structure of the poem, each line becomes a complete, and
>> whole, independent image. [...] A further rule of Mexico City Blues was that
>> it must all be spontaneous - all a risk - a free, inspired, or noninspired,
>> flowing statement, liberated from judgements about its value. It was done
>> for itself - as an organism lives for itself." -Michael McClure
>> Urm, well, that's where I'm at, or hoping to /get to/.
>> > In case you haven't noticed, Earl Nelson's work is highly
>> > influenced by Buk.
>> This is the "Ghost of C Earl Nelson", who had a flurry of posts here a week
>> or so ago? I read through some of that, and I guess you're right... as far
>> as that sort of thing goes, I guess I prefer Chuck's "Perfect Angel" or....
>> "Spectre".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Doc's thoughts on Charles Bukowski, in case any here have missed it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Good evening, thanks again.

🙂