mjp
Founding member
I guess that makes sense. If you believe that Bukowski only wrote 48 or 49 poems a year that were worth collecting.
There were 12 poetry collections published by Black Sparrow during Bukowski's lifetime. 1,311 poems over 27 years. So when you do that math, what Martin is saying (because the notion that the posthumous poems were all previously rejected could have only come from Martin) is that Bukowski wrote less than 50 poems every year - about one a week - that were worth collecting.
Before you say, "That sounds about right," consider what that would mean. It would mean - wouldn't it? - that there aren't any "substandard" poems in any collection published during Bukowski's lifetime. It was all the cream of the crop, the best of the best.
Is there anyone who wants to make that claim? I don't.
Isn't a more logical assumption that far from rejecting two-thirds (or more) of Bukowski's work as substandard, Martin was concerned that publishing too many collections would dilute the market? In fact, didn't he say just that? And didn't Bukowski complain about it?
I don't believe that the idea that all of the posthumous poetry was originally rejected as substandard adds up. Especially when you read many of the posthumously published poems in their original form. It just looks like more revisionist history produced by Martin to justify what he did.
There were 12 poetry collections published by Black Sparrow during Bukowski's lifetime. 1,311 poems over 27 years. So when you do that math, what Martin is saying (because the notion that the posthumous poems were all previously rejected could have only come from Martin) is that Bukowski wrote less than 50 poems every year - about one a week - that were worth collecting.
Before you say, "That sounds about right," consider what that would mean. It would mean - wouldn't it? - that there aren't any "substandard" poems in any collection published during Bukowski's lifetime. It was all the cream of the crop, the best of the best.
Is there anyone who wants to make that claim? I don't.
Isn't a more logical assumption that far from rejecting two-thirds (or more) of Bukowski's work as substandard, Martin was concerned that publishing too many collections would dilute the market? In fact, didn't he say just that? And didn't Bukowski complain about it?
I don't believe that the idea that all of the posthumous poetry was originally rejected as substandard adds up. Especially when you read many of the posthumously published poems in their original form. It just looks like more revisionist history produced by Martin to justify what he did.
I don't think there are enough recorded poems to draw any conclusion from what Martin did with them.if you look at the poems on Bukowski recordings, a very high percentage of them NEVER appeared in BSP books (until he was dead).