Barbara Fry wrote poetry too

Rekrab

Usually wrong.
Over 1000 posts
Now that would make a cool photo book. Snapshots of a bunch of poets and editors (from this Forum, naturally ... we're an exclusive club, right?), in their trash strewn rides. What does that remind me of?
 

bospress.net

www.bospress.net
Billions served
I can;t publish this one. Someone else has to take on this one!

I'll contribute a couple photos and will buy a copy, though!


Bill
 

mjp

Your Host
Moderator
Founding member
Billions served
Nah, only one famous picture would come out of it and there would be arguments over who really took it for the next 30 years...
 
Are you more into 20th century-existentialism (Sartre, Camus) or 19th century (Nietzsche, Kirkegaard) ?

Basically, I'm what was called a 'slacker' in the early 90s.

That's because Plato has claimed, one should do - and ONLY this - what one can do BEST.
Don't get me started on Plato... I probably have more beef with him than I do with Sounes. Oh, and I do 19th century Existentialism, and have a strange knack for cryptic Germans... Actually, the first thing I've ever read by Bukowski was a collection of poetry called "Love is a Dog from Hell." Sometimes I'll blow some money at the bookstore by closing my eyes and randomly selecting something. That happened to be it (this must have been about a year or two ago...) I really enjoyed it... but simply haven't read enough of his massive amount of work in order to declare him one of my favorites. Right now I'm focusing on the biographers. You're right, soon I'll be picking up Post Office.

Well, I don't even have a car to fuck up. Now that is bum, haha. I'm glad for it... it's one less thing to worry about.

My family isn't fond of the forum, generally speaking, as the method for purveying personal information about our history. They prefer that I would do so academically, which I understand... that's why it's become an academic project. However, Rekrab is right. I seem to be stepping on everyone's toes by digging in the past. It makes people uncomfortable. For now, I must work within their respected limits; ultimately, my allegiance is to the people I love. But I do hate being told not to do something... that really irks me. I'd be happy to keep this thread going, though, and post any relevant material I find about my grandmother and Bukowski (the corrections will have to come later, when all of my relations are content).

Even I can't find her poetry. That's why I was so grateful to see the one posted above. We have some of her art work, but I don't know where her poems, journals, or letters are. It will take a little time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mjp

Your Host
Moderator
Founding member
Billions served
My family isn't fond of the forum, generally speaking, as the method for purveying personal information about our history.
As you have made abundantly clear. No need to repeat it again. The third time is the charm. We get it.

So write it up in some academic journal somewhere where it will be read by your family and about a dozen other people and be done with it. Problem solved. History repaired!

The only problem is, millions of people have read Bukowski's descriptions of your grandmother in his books, the biographies, etc., and they will not ever see your important and serious dissertation.

This is all so comical anyway, the overzealous and paranoid "protection" of a figure of such minor importance. I know, everyone loves their grandmother, and to you she is a maverick and a genius. So is everyone else's grandmother. If yours hadn't briefly married Bukowski, no one outside your family would know her name.

So tell your disapproving, tightass family to lighten up. They aren't protecting the honor of the Queen of England here.

Besides, if the story is ever published anywhere, it will end up here in one form or another. Where people can actually see it. I would think that's what you would want. Instead you are pissing all over your best outlet for the truth.
 
Whoa mjp. You seem to be awfully irritated about finding out the truth about someone completely unimportant to you. For now I'll just talk about what you guys really want to hear- her involvement with Bukowski. Why are you shitting yourself about the rest if, evidently, it only matters to me?

It's not entirely about protecting my grandmother's honor, either (if it were about that, then I obviously would have complete ignorance of what Bukowski wrote). It's more complicated than that. It's about something else, something which I wouldn't expect others to understand, because it is our own issue. Do not assume. It's not your place to tell them to lighten up, because you simply don't know.

As far as academia is concerned... it takes more time. It's not instant gratification. I need that time in order to work it out with them.
 

Purple Stickpin

Billions served
A note on things; and it really is not important whether I (or any of us, from my position) ever learn what you might have to say or not. I've found, that at the end of it all, what one should have allegiance to is truth. If you prefer to have allegiance to family, that's fine, and ultimately, it's your choice.

My experience has also taught me that doing so typically shows little or no allegiance to truth.

You've unexpectedly been genetically linked to someone who was closely linked to a writer many hold dear. And that's your lot, and no one else's, to do with as you see best.
 
Thanks, Purple.

I believe the truth will come in time (a relatively short time), and I believe I can do so in a manner that doesn't alienate the people I care for. It would be utterly selfish of me to act now, against everyone's wishes, when I've only begun to talk with them about this. But you're right- the truth is often more painful. Since it does, really, only matter for us, it would somewhat destroy the point if not even my family cares for the pursuit.
 

Socratease

Over 100 posts
I believe the truth will come in time (a relatively short time), and I believe I can do so in a manner that doesn't alienate the people I care for.
Good luck with that as I think they are conflicting aims. When you get two or more different versions of an event, which are you going to take as correct -- not wishing to alienate any of the 'witnesses'?
 
None of us are in disagreement about the events. I'm afraid that's not the issue. Regardless, thanks for the advice. We're a small, tight knit bunch and most of us are dead. There really aren't a whole lot of available opposing accounts- and I don't even have an acquaintance with anyone who gave up the info. to the biographers. Probably long distant relatives-which would explain the half-truths.
 
Hah. Well, what I meant was that... we are not a big family (Those who could have promised more progeny died- I don't even have first cousins), so there really aren't a bunch of personalities or opinions to satisfy. Amongst ourselves, we aren't fighting about what the truth is, but about what to do with it.
 
I'd like to go all in, but for now I've got to check.

And, in response to some other comments...

I really have no idea whether or not she was a genius or a great poet. Your guess is as good as mine. She was kind of a Maverick, though (a word I've come to hate ever since Palin said it a trillion times). She was strange from the moment she was born... but you're right- she would be unknown if she hadn't been associated with Bukowski. As unknown as the rest of us, participating under screen names in a forum dedicated to someone else's greatness.
 
Soune's biography does seem to have the most detailed, and accurate, account of her so far. It just misses the mark in a couple of places... whether he is approachable or correctable in the end, I suppose... doesn't necessarily matter. As many of you have reported, he doesn't take well to criticism. If there is published counter-evidence, then that will be enough to satisfy me. Like I mentioned previously, I would like to discuss the truth here, but if and when the time is right. Please don't take offense to that. I'm straddling a thin line here. What I'd really like to know is where Soune's got his information from. That's the creepy part.

Out of curiosity, what have you all tried to correct previously?
 

Socratease

Over 100 posts
Also, In Soune's "Bukowski in Pictures," there are pics of her and B. together.
Actually, just noticed that there are 2 photos of her in the copy I just bought of Locked in the Arms of Crazy Life -- one in Texas in 1954, and onother with Buk in December 1956.
 
Whad'ya know, I just looked over it. Can't believe I missed that one. In my edition, both pics say (courtesy of Leah Belle Wilson). She's my great, great aunt- also liked to paint. She gifted me one of her water colors a while back. I've only met her once, but it makes sense that she has some of these pictures. Hmmm. She must be who Sounes got most of the info. from.
 

Socratease

Over 100 posts
She must be who Sounes got most of the info. from.
Sounes reports in his source notes for chapter 3: "Details of Bukowski's relationship with Barbara Frye is [sic] based on interviews and correspondence with Barbara's relations: Tom Frye (28 Oct, 1996); Sunny Thomas (3 Dec, 1996) and Leah Belle Wilson (19 Oct, 1996 / 2 Jan & 21 Feb, 1997). I referred to my interviews with Pamela Miller (25 June & 6 July, 1997), whom Bukowski spoke to about his divorce."

In his preface, Sounes says: "I also refrained from discussing my sources in the text, because I didn't want to interrupt the flow of the story. (There are fulsome source notes at the end.)"

Fulsome, eh? In my dictionary fulsome means 'unpleasantly and excessively suave or ingratiating in manner or speech'
 

cirerita

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
I talked to Leah B. Wilson and Tom Fry to corroborate Sounes' assertions, but they were not very interested in either Barbara or Charlie Bukowski. As a matter of fact, the resentment towards Barbara seems evident, but it is not clear why that's the case.

SOunes got all the Harlequin publishing chronology wrong. Well, to be fair he simply bought Bukowski's side of the story. Miles is much more accurate in that sense, though no evidence is provided.
 

Rekrab

Usually wrong.
Over 1000 posts
HV: mjp is dead right. No one reads the academic journals except a few scholars. If you want to set the record straight, publish in the journals, but copy it all here. People actually read this forum.
 

roni

Billions served
As [...] truth.
mjp! Behave!

[...] like to discuss the truth here, but if and when the time is right.[...]
That's alright with me. I see, there are problems with other members of your family you can't simply ignore on that matter.

After you've been here awhile and know the place better, you'll be able to convince your family with good arguments to post information here.

As mjp and others have said, THIS is the no 1 resource on Bukowski worldwide.
Many contributing members here ARE academics and scholars. The quality of their contributions isn't any worse than any dissertation you may find somewhere and the audience is far bigger than any printed academic work could have.
Trust me, THIS is the place for research and for publication of the fruits of research.
 
Thanks to cirerita and socratease for the sources. I've just been collecting massive volumes of information and organizing, and brainstorming... without much attn. to detail as of yet. Very helpful.

Also, thanks to mjp and others for providing contact to Sounes. One less thing on the list.


So tell your disapproving, tightass family to lighten up. They aren't protecting the honor of the Queen of England here.

Besides, if the story is ever published anywhere, it will end up here in one form or another. Where people can actually see it. I would think that's what you would want. Instead you are pissing all over your best outlet for the truth.
Well, It was never my intention to piss on the forum. Of course I believe everyone here to be informed. If I had doubts about the credibility of the cite, I would have left long ago. I've been trying to participate as much as I can, and hope to continue to do so... provided that, in turn, I don't feel repeatedly compelled to defend against declarations similar to the one above. Highly unnecessary and unproductive-on top of having absolutely zilch to do with Bukowski- and it will probably bring out the worst in me; I'd really rather have a pleasant experience here. I won't publish anything without the consent of my family, either (provided that it's even good enough to publish). So this is not about the intellectual superiority of either method- journals or the forum. Ideally, I'd like to use both... but ultimately, it's about respecting and communicating with the people I care for, while simultaneously accomplishing these corrections.
 

mjp

Your Host
Moderator
Founding member
Billions served
Whoa mjp. You seem to be awfully irritated about finding out the truth about someone completely unimportant to you.
I told you why I was irritated, do you have comprehension issues? We didn't build this resource for you to denigrate (or "piss all over" as I said previously), and you have continually done so by pointing out that your family doesn't care for it.

Does that answer your question?

I don't care who you are. If you come in here and talk shit about this site, you will have a problem with me.
 
Top