Alcoholism - why didn't it destroy Bukowski? (1 Viewer)

Most people who drink excessively or to alcoholi degrees end up at rock bottom, having ruined their relationships, lost a legacy of jobs, and have some many emotional problems as to be swamped by them.

Most end up in A.A. on the 12step programme or in some kind of councelling or dead or mad. Why didn't this happen to Bukowski? How come, like many poets, he didn't die?

I mean, I remember on born into this, one woman said she spent a wonderful affectionate night with bukowski but yet in the book, women, he made it out that the night was horrid and vile and aggressive. So this might be an example of distorting some relationship for the benefit of writing but also perhaps reveals an underlying ability for alcoholics to change the truth to suit themselves.

I'm curious, how did he survive? Do you think because Bukowski had so few 'long lasting' relationships that he didn't ruin them because the were fleating and passing? Or that he simply didn't give a fuck if he ruined relationships because he was a lone soldier and his parents had pretty much disowned from young anyway, so this prepaired him for all rejection?

It remains a wonder but what saved him. Why did he slip on the floor and crack his head? How did he survive all those decades of abuse and still remain intact? I'm sure there may be hundreds of examples of alcoholics surviving. By the end, buk didn't drink or smoke, where di he find the strength for that, through Linda?

I ask these questions out of interest, but also because I recieved an email from a girl I know and she is slandering me saying I'm an alcoholic in denial; and I think, even if I am, she's still as futile as me, for saying that which is obvious as though it was a revelation.

I guess luck had something to do with it. Also his metabolism could perhaps cope with such a lifestyle, the body adapts, some die beause it can;t, some continue on because it can.

It just seems, for all Bukowskis mythologising of alcoholism, it never seemd to penultimately RUIN him. i.e. he woke up in rehab one day, in tears, wishing he could change his life and make it all better? Really interested in this topic, hope you can contribute some thought and understanding.

Cheers.
McGuire.
 
He's not dead?

Doesn't the fact that he did have so few long lasting relationships testify to the fact that he did ruin them at blistering speed?
 
Alcoholism doesn't kill everyone who has it. There are more than "hundreds" of alcoholics who didn't/don't go down in flames. There are millions.

Bukowski was as addicted to writing as he was to drinking. He often worried that without drinking he couldn't write. At the end of his life he found that was not true, but for most of his life he believed it may be. They went hand in hand for him. The writing sustained him. If he hadn't had that maybe he would have died like Jane, alone in a room at an early age.
 
Most people who drink excessively or to alcoholi degrees end up at rock bottom, having ruined their relationships, lost a legacy of jobs, and have some many emotional problems as to be swamped by them..

Those are the average people. The average people shouldn't do a lot of things:

They shouldn't drink
They shouldn't do drugs
They shouldn't have children
They shouldn't drive cars
They shouldn't make financial decisions
They shouldn't do their own taxes
They shouldn't vote
They shouldn't serve on a jury
They shouldn't read (especially anything pertaining to religion)

and on and on and on ....
 
Being a postman is a healthy job. Fresh air, exercise...
Perhaps leading exactly the life you want (and keeping it quite simple) makes you stronger.
 
Everything they sold you
was a lie. Booze is good for you. So are loose woman.
Fast cars. And pizza.

Fucking liars, selling their
spinach and veggies
and jogging.

Ever see a happy jogger? Exactly.

Ever have your sweat swim
into your eye. That shit burns. And hurts.

exercise kills.
Labatts and a pepperoni stick
...that's life.
 
No one can say for sure, but I'd say that it might have been that Bukowski overall was not in conflict with his need for drink: he considered it a godsend when he starting in as a teenage and never had the desire to quit except when he was forced to because of health reasons. He considered it an adjunct to his writing and it liberated his creative muse. On the other hand, I consider it a different matter when one has an addiction and feels shame or guilt over it - an inner resistance - or is suffering from mental conflict, and the mind as well as the alcohol work against the body to tear it down. In that case, the person is at odds with himself and the habit would react differently, more destructively. There's the physical side to an addiction and the mental side. There are many studies on the impact of the mind and emotions on the body"”their healing or destructive power. That's my own take on Bukowski's longevity despite his massive intake of alcohol that most likely would have killed the average person. When there's conflict or inner resistance, get off the addiction if you can. That's why I stopped my use of drugs and cigarettes"”I wasn't the type for it. However, someone like Henry Miller smoked until he died at 88 and was never at odds with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you sure it didn't?

Granted theres no way to know what he could have created just like we will never know what Keith Richards could have produced. Or insert functioning addict here.
We have what we have with the addiction playing a significant role in what is.
I'm reminded of a comedian who's name I have forgotten who said Morrison man that guy rocked-fuck Jim-pay homage to Van. He's been kicking it for 40 years.
Buk sustained yes and I love the work as I do Keith's solo work. That doesn't prevent me from asking and what if.....Them again the same could be said of any disease.
 
It nearly killed him in the fifties! After that, he was balancing on the edge, I think, but luckily he made it.
 
New here, so my .02 may not mean much, but to Bukowski alcohol seems to have served as a bridge from 'thinking as a reader' to 'thinking as a writer.' "It's the stuff," he said. It was his muse. And your muse helps create, not destroy.
 
In the past, I have done all those things - except have children - and I continue to do most of them with perfect competence.

Doesn't that make me average ?
Not if you've done them with perfect competence; that makes you above average. Pour yourself a drink. You deserve it! ;)
 
Buk was not the one who delivered the mail on his bicycle, breathing fresh air and whistling cheerfully along the way; he worked at the sorting office.
He did deliver mail, sweetheart. For almost four years before moving to the clerk job.

Shhhh...hush now. When you aren't sure of something, just shhhh...

And this is America honey, postal carriers don't ride around on bikes with baguettes in the baskets, adjusting their berets, puffing on Gitanes and taking three hour lunch breaks.
 
I am genetically predisposed for lung cancer and emphysema. I am also a heavy smoker and have had bronchitis 3 times in the past 2 years My Grandmother died at 62 from aggressive lung and bone cancer. Her sister, my great-aunt is a violent alcoholic and heavy smoker - she is in her early 50's, and thus far has no health problems. Her boyfriend, around the same age, drinks just as much as she does, and is set to die in 2 years from Hep C. My mother is a completely functional alcoholic, cleans her house, tends my younger brother, cooks. Though she is at high-risk for developing cirrhosis. My living grandfather, who has been smoking longer than my late grandmother, and is older than she would have been, has asbestos in his emphysema-ridden, COPD hindered lungs, but no lung cancer. He was also a heavy drinker/alcoholic for more than half his life. His liver is fine. Though half his intestines are removed and he has a B-12 deficiency. My father, also genetically predisposed to lung cancer and emphysema, has been smoking heavily for more than half his life, and also indulges most often in cannibis, has no diagnostically-proven illness, but it has been said that his lungs are "unhealthy". Otherwise he is perfectly fine, aging normally and mostly-healthy.

As Lewis Black will tell you - "what is good for one person, may kill the person sitting next to you... The oldest man in the Bronx was once asked what his diet consisted of. He said 3 gallons of Thunderbird wine a week, and pork fried in fatback, because bacon was too lean. If he had went to a doctor, the doctor would have said, 'WHAT ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY? YOU'RE GONNA FUCKING DIE!' The man would have changed his diet and he'da been dead in a week."

Alcohol and drugs were my muse. Though I had to quit, for love and health. It awarded me a lasting ulcer and reoccurring ovarian cysts. I believe I have a few screws loose, yes. And they say crazy people have a higher endurance than the sane... the reason I mention this is because I do believe to some extent that Buk was crazy. I can't find much evidence in literature of him being truly happy... but I must say from what I can gather, he lived his life his way, answering to no one. That must be good for the soul.
 
God is dead.

Maybe that's the answer. The grim-reaper died and then obviously couldn't collect Buk. I don't know about you, but I've seen some living dead that weren't birthed from Rob Zombie...

But then that raises the question, who collected him in 1994?!
 
No. I'm an atheist myself. I was just for some reason or another taking a page from Nietzsche's book.

Upon further review of your short post... that could be taken differently. I've seen many people die without ever having lived.
 
He did deliver mail, sweetheart. For almost four years before moving to the clerk job.

Oh yes, if you haven't read about Buk's adventures delivering mail, you're missing out!

I actually knew he had delivered mail. What I didn't know is that he had done it during "almost four years". I thought it was a minor period compared to the one he spent sorting mail ; that's why I voluntarily reduced the post office era to his clerk job. I admit I shouldn't have done this on a forum which fauna knows Buk's chronology by heart. :p

And this is America honey, postal carriers don't ride around on bikes with baguettes in the baskets, adjusting their berets, puffing on Gitanes and taking three hour lunch breaks.
This is the time one needs to get through a baguette.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But if one took three hour lunch breaks, in reality, they wouldn't be eating baguette, they'd probably be begging PB&J sandwiches, if this proved to be consistent behavior. But as Buk will tell you in Factotum, don't worry about anything, go in expecting to be fired, the nerves then go out the window. Take a 5 or 6 hour liquid-lunch brake, hit Santa Anita, become a bookie, become Mr. Big Time Horse Player.
 
...the same could be said of any disease.
Do you really think alcoholism is a disease? Like cancer or genital herpes?

It can be an addiction, and it's a genetic predisposition, for sure (hi dad!), but something inside me always goes, "Wha?!" when people call it a disease. Whatever technical classification it might fall under, you can always put down the bottle and the "disease" stops immediately. Try that with genital herpes or Proteus syndrome.

I'm not saying that the urge to drink goes away when you put down the bottle, but the cause of most of the problems caused by drinking certainly do.

And what it art, anyway?

;)
 
Do you really think alcoholism is a disease? Like cancer or genital herpes?

It can be an addiction, and it's a genetic predisposition, for sure (hi dad!), but something inside me always goes, "Wha?!" when people call it a disease. Whatever technical classification it might fall under, you can always put down the bottle and the "disease" stops immediately. Try that with genital herpes or Proteus syndrome.

I'm not saying that the urge to drink goes away when you put down the bottle, but the cause of most of the problems caused by drinking certainly do.

And what it art, anyway?

;)

It's a lot easier for some people to put down that bottle though. Disease/condition/whatever you want to call it, but I'd wager most true alcoholics are desperately unhappy and most 'normal' people couldn't even be an alcoholic even if they wanted to be.
 
It's a lot easier for some people to put down that bottle though.
True, I'll give you that.

But that is where I think most addicts (not differentiating between addictions here) show their real underlying problem, and that is not a chemical problem, it's immaturity.

Before you laugh yourself unconscious, think about every addict you've ever known. Most of them have a lot of common traits; they need attention, need to be catered to, rescued, they will do whatever the hell they want to do whenever the hell they want to do it, their world is themselves and it doesn't go out beyond that. Just like an average two year old.

Just an observation. It doesn't apply to every addict, but it sure applies to a lot of them.
 
I think it might be a physical / genetic pre-condition as well in many cases. Especially when it comes to drink. There's incidences of people who've never drunk until later life but killed themselves with the sauce anyway. Quite a famous example is the mother of George Best, the soccer player (who also drank himself to death). I know what you're saying about using the word 'disease' although I have heard doctors using that to describe it as well. It's certainly an abnormal pre-disposition that some people seem to have. I suppose you could argue a lot of problems / personality traits etc. are too though ;)
 
Buk was not the one who delivered the mail on his bicycle, breathing fresh air and whistling cheerfully along the way ; he worked at the sorting office.
ever read post office? bukowski did delivered the mail, but not on his bicycle (hell, did he even have one?). he was delivering mail while driving a car through a hard rain and then the engine stopped working.
 
I tried to be a drunk but I failed at it. Even a good smoker. I couldn't be. I think the problem is I am very self-conscious and that is a bad disease. Much worse than any addiction. You can't prefer one to another. Bukowski is certainly right. Truly any achievement, being something, is all about endurance. There is no secret.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top