I'm going to enjoy going through life thinking Barbara was just a nymph who thought she was a good poet. It's quite all right with me.
Yes, but only because you said "please." I am a sucker for good manners, as you have no doubt gathered from our exchanges here.Are you OK with that mjp? Can we move on now, please?
You're fighting a non-existent battle. No one has much in the way of "perceptions," because honestly, Bukowski wrote very little about Barbara Frye. Compared to say, Jane Cooney, Linda King or Pam Miller, women he wrote hundreds of poems and stories about.It's fine with me, too, if you don't care about changing your perceptions.
All we could talk about is what is in the biographies. We don't know anything else, you do. So any conversations would be rather one-sided.What I would be interested in talking about, here, is her life with Bukowski.
"...you can take your rich aunts and uncles"The Day I Kicked a Bankroll Out the Window."
That was the poem that made W. Corrington say that Bukowski's poetry was "the spoken voice nailed to paper." I can't blame him. I mean, Corrington.
Sounes writes: "Like most of the women in Bukowski's life, Barbara became the subjects of many poems and works of prose... but little he wrote about her matched up with reality" (38).No one has much in the way of "perceptions," because honestly, Bukowski wrote very little about Barbara Frye. Compared to say, Jane Cooney, Linda King or Pam Miller, women he wrote hundreds of poems and stories about.
All we could talk about is what is in the biographies. We don't know anything else, you do. So any conversations would be rather one-sided.
Well, it's no secret that Buk hated anything that he perceived as pretence and phoniness in others, but he also abhorred being dominated and controlled. I get the feeling that Barbara tried to exercise some form of financial control over him -- that is, she wore the trousers. She had a tiger by the tail, that's for sure.Come to think of it, there are comments in biographies about her social-climbing tendencies, and this as one of the reasons for Bukowski's growing emotional distance from her towards the end of their marriage.
Yes, there's a ton of stuff to sift through and bear in mind that a lot of the early poetry did not survive, although that may not apply to the period of direct interest to your research.It's difficult for a newcomer to Bukowski's library to sift through everything and try to make sense of it all (especially in such a short amount of time). Anyway, the earliest poems are probably where I'll have the best shot of finding more. Ideas? Hints? Leave it be as a lost cause?
Bukowski read the galley proof of my biographical essay on him THE KING OF SAN PEDRO and made a few corrections and changes by hand. He deleted a reference to an early relationship. I would have to check the marked up proof, but I think it was Barbara Frye that he scratched out. If I get a chance, I'll look for it and let you know who he deleted. Either a wife or a live-in girl friend, early 1950s-ish.The only perception one can draw from the virtual omission of Barbara Frye from his history is that Bukowski preferred not to dwell on that chapter of his life. Over the years he seemed to go out of his way to minimize and trivialize the marriage.
You are in a unique position to explain why that might be.
How great it is to have you two here. By a professors' suggestion, I was about to go digging around the UCSB archives.cirerita;72869 said:The Fry correspondence to Bukowski available at UCSB is not related to her death at all. There are a few postcards she sent him when she was in Alaska. My powers of observation must be pretty shitty because I just can't see the Indian connection in those postcards.HV: I just noticed in Sounes' source notes for chapter 14, regarding the events surrounding the death of Barbara Frye, he says, inter alia, "I also referred to Barbara Frye's unpublished correspondence with Bukowski held at UCSB". Have you seen that material yet?
Fascinating.Bukowski read the galley proof of my biographical essay on him THE KING OF SAN PEDRO and made a few corrections and changes by hand. He deleted a reference to an early relationship. I would have to check the marked up proof, but I think it was Barbara Frye that he scratched out. If I get a chance, I'll look for it and let you know who he deleted. Either a wife or a live-in girl friend, early 1950s-ish.
There is everything; Hope, despair, joy, anger, pity, envy, etc, etc. I don't think that I look at Bukowski as someone that wrote about bitterness.Correct me if I'm wrong, but I sense more bitterness than anything else in his writing. I do have some theories, but I still need to read more of Bukowski's side of the story before I blurt anything out (if there is much more).
Who are the Human Vultures?
Uh oh. It's also come to my attn. that the name might have cause some misunderstanding. It's not referential to the forum. This whole thing started when I was writing a series of vignettes about the women in my family. Human Vultures... ironically... is taken from that. Again, though, I just come off as an asshole. Sorry.Those other people. You know.
there's the poem, Sundays Kill More Men Than Bombs, in the collection, The Roominghouse Madgrigals, where he mentions your granmother. i seem to recall another poem in Burning in Water, Drowning in Flame where she is mentioned.the earliest poems are probably where I'll have the best shot of finding more. Ideas? Hints? Leave it be as a lost cause?
Hmm, compare? I don't know how to compare it. I think his novels, as most of his other writing, has good continuity. Personally, I love "Post Office". There are some very funny parts in that book where I have laughed out loud no matter how many times I have read it.Currently reading Post Office. As his first novel, how do you think it compares to his other works?
Indeed they are. I've been trying to quit... and supposedly these are the "anti-smoke" ashtrays... but honestly, they make me laugh more than they convince me to stop. In the end, the horrible economy and cigarette taxes are the most convincing methods.i believe those are lungs.