Bukowski IQ? (1 Viewer)

Olaf

Olaf

Yet again I seek more trivia detial on Bukowski....any ideas what sort of IQ Bukowski had...it's not wildly important but I think it could shed some light on why he wrote as he did and why he continued to write in that manner throughout all his books.

I'm curious. I guess the only evidence would be in highschool records or educational psychologists, if he ever saw one.

There are many forms of intelligence.
And intelligence isn't necessary intelligent.

Any thought's on this>?
 
Terrible question...

I don't know anything about mathematics but I do play chess on a higher level professor Arpad Elo called average club-chess-level (1600 points).

I don't know anything about history, science and hunderds other examples.

General speaking, my iq must be very low, never did a test though.

I don't believe in something like an iq or intelligence.

instinct, intuition might be another subject. Oh well, a small yawn is hard to resist right now.
 
I don't think it's a terrible question. I'm just curious to know if there is any information on the subject.

I don't believe in something like an iq or intelligence.

Haha, that is the stupidiest reponse I've ever read! Brillant!

Sure, measuring someones IQ is open to debate, and IQ is certianly not the defining characteristic of a huamn being.

I.Q. attempts to measure - Verbal Scale, Performance Scale, Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organisation, Working Memory, Processing Speed, Word Reading, Spelling, Sentence Reading, as well as, Vocabulary, Similarities, Arithmetic, Digit Span, Information, Comprehension, Letter-Number Sequencing, Picture Completion, Digit-Symbol Coding, Matrix Reasoning, Picture Arrangement, Symbol Search.

I'm just interested in how writers differ. For example Bukowski writes in a very simply clear-cut matter of fact linear narrative style. Whereas, Ellroy, writes in grandiose complex plot and narrative multilinear style. Now, putting aside whether one likes or dislikes either of these writers...I would be interested to know the comparative IQ and how that impacted upon how they approached writing.

this is probably very dull
I guess it might be interesting
question for an educational psychologist
or psychology of literature question.

Anyway,
I'm off to kill geeks!
 
Olaf said:
....any ideas what sort of IQ Bukowski had...it's not wildly important but I think it could shed some light on why he wrote as he did and why he continued to write in that manner throughout all his books.
Click to expand...

are you implying that because he wrote in a relatively simple style he might have had a relatively low IQ?
 
No. I'm not. I know it would be easy to assume so. But, I'm not. I'm genuinely interested in the trivia and if there is any information on his IQ. And the impact this might have had on his (and anyone's approach) to writing.

Even if he had a low IQ - it wouldn't matter - if anything it would add another dimension to him. But I guess all in all - I'm asking a very pedantic almost anal question.

My comparison with Ellroy was intentional - though they where born 18 years apart - they both lived for the most part in California - and they both lived with hardship of varying degrees and endured alcoholism, drug abuse, destitution, and the struggle to be creators of their own destiny, to some extent.

Yet they are VERY different people and writers...and I guess...I wonder if IQ has anything to do with this marked difference...

Obviously, I don't think having a High IQ implies your always a better writer, nor does having a low IQ imply you are a terrible writer. IQ has very little impact on this I think. But I'm just curious about this damn IQ thing today.

In fact, I know a lot of self-confessed Idiots who are infinitely more fascinating than dry tedious hair splitting academics. But I'm neither anti-intellectual or uncle-idiot. It's all intriuging.

'you sophisticates
who lay back and
make statements of explanation,
I have seen the red rose burning
and this means more.'
- Bukowski
 
I should know the answer to this and have a detailed analysis but alas I have a low IQ.

Actually, it's an interesting question and I remember reading somewhere that artists, in general, have a somewhat high IQ but not extremly high, I guess if you get a too high IQ you become a scientist or an internet web moderator.
 
slimedog said:
...I guess if you get a too high IQ you become a scientist or an internet web moderator.
Click to expand...
Well, the scientist bit may be right, but the moderator part is way off base. Clearly, idiots and masochists are more suited to moderating forums.

Do masochists have high IQ's, that's the real question here.
 
Lou Reed was a masochist once and as far as we know has a high IQ. But then he wasn't masochist enough to become a web moderator. Maybe this makes the high IQ. On the other hand - becoming a willing victim in becoming a moderator of high quality has something heroic. And here we go with Jesus, who HAD something heroic AND masochistic in letting himself get nailed to a tree. But we don't know anything about his IQ. Does a son of God have something like an IQ at all? Is it allowed to ask such a question at all? And what does this mean for the IQ of moderators or the IQ of the Best poet ever?
 
Was it Nieztsche who said that Jesus was probably an Idiot or at least would be judged so by many?

Again I'm not trying to be elitist here. (So many people become terrified when IQ is mentioned as though it was some Holy Testimony as infallible as The Bible or The Constitution).

I don't think I.Q. tests where all the rage when Bukowski was at school or when he was examined for the Army...but what do I know...I'm off to light farts in the dark...
 
So far, this is my favorite post in all of Buk.net forum. Only the where (were) spoils it!

Thanks Olaf.

Grammer nazi
 
Olaf said:
So many people become terrified when IQ is mentioned
Click to expand...

This isn't the point. It's simply that there're so many different IQ-tests to test different 'sorts' of IQ and for different ages. So it's useless to ask for 'The' IQ of a person. Says nothing.
 
IQ isn't useless and it doesn't 'say nothing'....(It doesn't speak, actually.)

I mean just go get a test done by an educational psychologist or something and see that the questiosn are actually make a lot of sense. It's not some bizzare quack science. It makes a lot of sense.

The Intelligence Quotient looks at this mechanism: The ratio of tested mental age to chronological age, usually expressed as a quotient multiplied by 100.


Einstein said: 'I'm not smarter than other people I just stay with the problem longer.'

So in terms of narrative perhaps 'Ellroy had the disposition intellectually to construct complex narratives and stay with the writing problem longer...'

Whereas Bukowski wrote as a kind of cathartic wake-up call but not to construct complex narratives.

Anyway, once again, I've gone off on a million spilt paths with this thread...but I think at an issue it's fucking intriguing...I often think about it...40/50 year olds with the mental out look of young teenagers (seen here in Glasgow all too often) and teenagers who are like Grandparents (seen all to often in Glasgow) and then the Angels who's age and mental intelligence is as balanced almost as perfectly as the buddha.

Ok, I'll shut up now...

p.s. roc, my grammar can be quite horrific, for this I make no apology, nor will my IQ.
 
I don't believe in something like an iq or intelligence.

Haha, that is the stupidiest reponse I've ever read! Brillant!


And why is that?
 
ROC said:
:)
Oh, and you misspelled Nietzsche.
:D
Click to expand...


I did indeed - I'm glad you paid attention! Clearly I wasn't when I wrote 'Hier Nietzsche' down. Must be a bout of Dyslexia.


Ponder said:
I don't believe in something like an iq or intelligence.

Haha, that is the stupidiest reponse I've ever read! Brillant!

And why is that?
Click to expand...

'I don't believe in intelligence' isn't a particularly intelligent thing to say, that's all!

I mean apply that statement to yourself:- You don't believe you have the capacity for intelligence? Obviously you do! But you see how silly the statement can come across. Anyway...fuck IQ...I'm sorry I mentioned it...:confused:
 
A high IQ doesnt make you knowledgeable, it just helps you figure things out and comprehend more. Of course the greatness of Western knowledge is how simplistic we can pair down high-brow concepts: Einstein's Special Relativity can be explained using simple division.
Knowing how terrible I am with math and logic problems, I'd assume that I have a medium to low IQ. Knowing people who have large IQ's, they're clueless to a lot and in the end, I end up teaching them a lot of things that range from history-philosophy-literature, etc. It's not really the size of your IQ, it's what you do with it.
Judging from what I know about Buk (which is admittedly minimal), it seems like he had an average IQ but had an above average EQ (emotional intelligence). The way which he empathizes with people (more through his writing than in his drunken escapades) is just incredible. That's why his work is so poignant (to me), he really knew what it was like for the human race.
 
Intelligent, in my opinion, is as vague a description as "charming." There are so many forms of intelligence and people who are brilliant in one subject often can't do something, maybe mechanically say, in another category. Look at the genuises in History who weren't capable of living a happy life.

And I've never heard Lou Reed was a masochist.
 
I think your very personal answer to your question, olaf, can be found in the bukowskiTapes.
...besides all of them, there is one particular scene, where he discusses the issue of "science" and "intelligence" and confronts us with the conclusion that they are indifferent and therefore dumb.

More or less he states that you have to put yourself IN the issue,thing,whatever you are judging or else you just get information about the simple outer form of something.

So i think you can assume that he didnt even want to be "intelligent", in his common meaning(yeah, well except for horseraces), but was much more for "empathy" or EQ, as the path to wisdom.
Hey, he even says that "truth" is not important, thats as "unscientific" as it gets.

anyhow, its the tragedy of the leaves:

~"I shaved carefully with an old razor
the man who had once been young and
said to have genius;"

C.Bukowski
 
slimedog said:
Intelligent, in my opinion, is as vague a description as "charming." There are so many forms of intelligence and people who are brilliant in one subject often can't do something, maybe mechanically say, in another category. Look at the genuises in History who weren't capable of living a happy life.

And I've never heard Lou Reed was a masochist.
Click to expand...

Living where I do and working with/living around the people I have is proof enough that there are people without intelligence (unintelligent actually). Some people aren't "charming" or "cunning" or anything; they're just dumb.

EDIT: Olaf, it seems you've conditioned the forumgoers to give you a somewhat negative response. Funny :P
 
the dumbest of them often think that they are exceedingly clever.

and the clever of them often think that they are exceedingly dumb.

And intelligence isn't necessarily intelligent
And intelligence isn't necessarily intelligent
And I can't spell decadent often
And I can't spell decadent often

My emotional intelligence is a cry baby!
My emotional intelligence is a pillow soaked in tears!
My emotional intelligence is frigid: wears a chastity belt!

My emotional intelligence cannot feel for itself
and seeks to numb it's dumbness by getting
a degree in educational psychology...

IQ isn't that important
the muse may have more
to offer...and emotion too...
in fact - definitely!
(i hear you cry)
 
I wouldn't be too eager to lump every doodle or dash or flummery as
BUKOWSKI

My emotional intelligence cannot feel for itself
and seeks to numb it's dumbness by getting
a degree in educational psychology...

This stands by itself. It made me laugh and it makes sense.

Anyway...about that IQ thing...
 
IQ tests are too difficult a means to measure the intelligence of a person. I think his work is an accurate enough indicator of how brilliant Bukowski was. His writings are a clear display intelligence especially in the form of his poetry. Though he may not have ever applied himself in other fields displaying his brain power in the areas one considers an average measurement of intelligence (i.e. IQ test), I have no doubt that he had the ability to exceed the norm in most fields.
 
Would he even bother to go through the effort of an IQ-test. If he had to of some reason, would he bother to make his best? He probably wouldn`t try. Intelligently enough.
 
Olaf,good quaterbacking,I don't know much about IQ,but mr.B lived life and that speaks volumes to me,a true artist he created the world he wanted to live in and lived it.anyway... I am sure if he took a IQ test daily it would change daily,thus is art and life.
 
My guess, based on display of technique in the early poems and some things he said (like he read medical books for amusement), is that his IQ was high. In person, he seemed like one smart mother -- cagey as hell, tuned in, aware, conscious. Don't let the simple style fool you into thinking him average in any way -- he was highly exceptional.
 
On the dvd ,which comes with the latest yearbook from the german Bukowski society, there's a clip with Linda King who says a couple of times that Buk was very intelligent. - Well, she's no IQ expert but she did live with Buk for a long time...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought! Not beeing very intelligent myself, I guess (but rather educated), that an advanced writingtechnique is an result of education rather than a measurement of intelligens. And - is it easier to write simple?(I'm asking as I'm no writer at all). Is the substance and content of Bukowskis texts simple - I wouldnt think so. As rekrab said: tuned in, aware and conscious. I know a lot of educated people who are close to idiots in comparison to Bukowski, incapable as they are to se through the life and culture they live in.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think it was so much that he knew sophisticated literary technique as that he knew how to use it in a subversive manner, and when not to use it, when to deviate from "good writing," lapse into gratuitous surrealism or easy conversation after some high formal lines. He just showed a lot of smarts in how he handled things. Later he dropped all that and just went for the pure simple line. Is that harder to do? Not really. It's just the smart thing to do.
 
Olaf said:
Was it Nieztsche who said that Jesus was probably an Idiot or at least would be judged so by many?

Again I'm not trying to be elitist here. (So many people become terrified when IQ is mentioned as though it was some Holy Testimony as infallible as The Bible or The Constitution).

I don't think I.Q. tests where all the rage when Bukowski was at school or when he was examined for the Army...but what do I know...I'm off to light farts in the dark...
Click to expand...

That was Dostoyevsky...and his novel "The Idiot" is the culmination of that philosophy. It's about a horribly good-natured and selfless person stuck in Russian society. It's a good read, but long.
 
Actually, I couldn't care less for Buk's IQ. What does it really matter? Maybe it was 110, maybe it was 130. So what? I like his writings regardless. He could be sub-normal for all I care...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Aficionado37
Bukowski Merchandise
Replies
8
Views
3K
Purple Stickpin
Purple Stickpin
saabguy
Bukowski Weekend
Replies
7
Views
2K
Purple Stickpin
Purple Stickpin
MrBungle
Bukowski Disappearance
Replies
3
Views
2K
MrBungle
MrBungle
esart
Young Bukowski
Replies
1
Views
2K
zobraks
zobraks
PhillyDave
Bukowski Tavern
Replies
2
Views
1K
PhillyDave
PhillyDave

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top