Here is a short clip where Dan Fante (son of John Fante), comments on BUK:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8304726534224990230&q=fante&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8304726534224990230&q=fante&hl=en
Dan Fante on BUK (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ribaij
- Start date
HenryChinaski
Founding member
lol what does he know?
mjp
Founding member
Dan Fante is a good writer. It would be unfair to compare him to his father (or Bukowski), but taken on his own, I like his style.
I don't know how the sons and daughters of people like John Lennon, John Fante or Bob Marley go into the same field. I suppose it must be genetic, because any sensible person would run in the opposite direction just to avoid comparison. Maybe they just can't not do it. Which is good. Unless you're Julian Lennon...
But I digress.
I don't know how the sons and daughters of people like John Lennon, John Fante or Bob Marley go into the same field. I suppose it must be genetic, because any sensible person would run in the opposite direction just to avoid comparison. Maybe they just can't not do it. Which is good. Unless you're Julian Lennon...
But I digress.
bmcg
Founding member
I agree with mjp - in fact I think Dan Fante is a great writer, with very much his own style. In other interviews he has stated that he thought Bukowski was a poet rather than a novelist, or certainly a better poet than novelist.
As for disagreeing with Bukowski's own truth - embellished percentage breakdown, hell, some fans do and all.
As for disagreeing with Bukowski's own truth - embellished percentage breakdown, hell, some fans do and all.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fante's Inferno
It seems that the problem with some writers is that they find it nigh on impossible to compliment the genius of other writers: they don't want to be compared, and I don't blame them. This is true of Dan Fante, true of James Ellroy, and it was true of Bukowski himself. And it wasn't because Bukowski felt that he was so good; it was because he felt that others were so bad. Then it's a matter of taste whether one believes him or not.
And I think this is the way it's supposed to be"”if a writer doesn't believe in the superiority of his own talent, of his own way of laying the words down on a page, or his own emotional honesty, he's going to be constantly comparing himself with every other asshole scribe in the universe and he will not trust himself to write the words down as they are giving to him from his creative source. Words come from somewhere...the invisible realms. You have to believe that your own creative source is unique, as if it's the best that exists"”at least for you"”and believe in it all the way or you end up having no confidence in yourself, and write shit.
Maybe Bukowski wasn't 90 percent honest and 10 percent hyperbole after all... Maybe someday the scholars will find a magic measuring stick to assess such things quantitatively and Bukowski's ratio will turn out to actually be 80/10 or 95/5, and then maybe more of his readers can start to relax or come to realize that he's not for them. In the meantime, it would be refreshing to see more writers learn to acknowledge, if only to themselves, when honest writing comes across their desk"”as what matters and all that matters"”and realize gifted writing when it's there. When for instance, Bukowski writes about his alcoholic nightmares, I'd like someone, maybe Dan Fante, to please tell me where the 10 percent of the falsity or dishonesty of emotion is located in this absolutely vivid and chilling description. In the nouns or the pronouns? It's one thing to be factually dishonest, and it's a different matter to be emotionally dishonest, but I've always felt that Bukowski meant what he said, even if he exaggerated some of the details or gave different accounts of his life experiences. (Such as working in the slaughter house with the blacks.) He was a genius, but other writers have trouble seeing it because they don't see the kind of plot development that comes from endless labor and countless rewrites, like with Hemingway or James Ellroy. And yet, could Hemingway, Ellroy or Fante have ever written, even at the height of their powers, a poem on death as emotionally visceral, deep and honest as "Ignus Fatuus"? Can anyone deny that Bukowski lived through the kind of honest "death in life" he was writing about?
I say these things not because Bukowski's work is beyond question, but to point out those occasions when I feel that the overall greatness of his writing is probably being missed, ignored or discounted. I see too much of a misplaced emphasis on elements of his writing that do not seem important to me at all, or the emotional honesty of his writing is dissed because his writing doesn't appear accurate according to the absolute, literal reality of his life. And then he's downgraded as a fake or a phony, instead of the great artist trying to make it that he was. To hell with that!
Poptop
It seems that the problem with some writers is that they find it nigh on impossible to compliment the genius of other writers: they don't want to be compared, and I don't blame them. This is true of Dan Fante, true of James Ellroy, and it was true of Bukowski himself. And it wasn't because Bukowski felt that he was so good; it was because he felt that others were so bad. Then it's a matter of taste whether one believes him or not.
And I think this is the way it's supposed to be"”if a writer doesn't believe in the superiority of his own talent, of his own way of laying the words down on a page, or his own emotional honesty, he's going to be constantly comparing himself with every other asshole scribe in the universe and he will not trust himself to write the words down as they are giving to him from his creative source. Words come from somewhere...the invisible realms. You have to believe that your own creative source is unique, as if it's the best that exists"”at least for you"”and believe in it all the way or you end up having no confidence in yourself, and write shit.
Maybe Bukowski wasn't 90 percent honest and 10 percent hyperbole after all... Maybe someday the scholars will find a magic measuring stick to assess such things quantitatively and Bukowski's ratio will turn out to actually be 80/10 or 95/5, and then maybe more of his readers can start to relax or come to realize that he's not for them. In the meantime, it would be refreshing to see more writers learn to acknowledge, if only to themselves, when honest writing comes across their desk"”as what matters and all that matters"”and realize gifted writing when it's there. When for instance, Bukowski writes about his alcoholic nightmares, I'd like someone, maybe Dan Fante, to please tell me where the 10 percent of the falsity or dishonesty of emotion is located in this absolutely vivid and chilling description. In the nouns or the pronouns? It's one thing to be factually dishonest, and it's a different matter to be emotionally dishonest, but I've always felt that Bukowski meant what he said, even if he exaggerated some of the details or gave different accounts of his life experiences. (Such as working in the slaughter house with the blacks.) He was a genius, but other writers have trouble seeing it because they don't see the kind of plot development that comes from endless labor and countless rewrites, like with Hemingway or James Ellroy. And yet, could Hemingway, Ellroy or Fante have ever written, even at the height of their powers, a poem on death as emotionally visceral, deep and honest as "Ignus Fatuus"? Can anyone deny that Bukowski lived through the kind of honest "death in life" he was writing about?
I say these things not because Bukowski's work is beyond question, but to point out those occasions when I feel that the overall greatness of his writing is probably being missed, ignored or discounted. I see too much of a misplaced emphasis on elements of his writing that do not seem important to me at all, or the emotional honesty of his writing is dissed because his writing doesn't appear accurate according to the absolute, literal reality of his life. And then he's downgraded as a fake or a phony, instead of the great artist trying to make it that he was. To hell with that!
Poptop
Last edited by a moderator:
G
grayxray
Our society tends to apply a quantitive measurement to just about everything. Every day I hear, "We need to develop the metrics to evaluate this situation". I believe somebody famous once said that there are two types of numbers, the visible and the invisible. The invisible are the most important. They can kill you faster than the visible numbers and if that were not true then bumble bees would not be able to fly and we would have won in Vietnam (substitute Iraq now).
Scholars may try to evaluate Buks writing on some type of numerical model, but does that scale measure how each one of us feels when we read him? The invisible numbers. How can any scholar measure this? As I have said, and at least some of you have agreed there is no average person, nor is there an ordinary person. We are all different, we are all unique. We are born alone, we die alone and in our comfortable shells many of us live alone. Buks writing impacts each of us differently. Who cares if he was not totally honest, or only 90% honest or 85%? It is what we feel in our heart when we read him that is important. It is the cords that he strikes in each of our individual hearts that count.
When we are piles of dust on the desert, Buk will still be with humanity and that will be good.
In other words Screw the scholars, Screw the other writers!
Just my opinion!
Scholars may try to evaluate Buks writing on some type of numerical model, but does that scale measure how each one of us feels when we read him? The invisible numbers. How can any scholar measure this? As I have said, and at least some of you have agreed there is no average person, nor is there an ordinary person. We are all different, we are all unique. We are born alone, we die alone and in our comfortable shells many of us live alone. Buks writing impacts each of us differently. Who cares if he was not totally honest, or only 90% honest or 85%? It is what we feel in our heart when we read him that is important. It is the cords that he strikes in each of our individual hearts that count.
When we are piles of dust on the desert, Buk will still be with humanity and that will be good.
In other words Screw the scholars, Screw the other writers!
Just my opinion!
Last edited by a moderator:
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Hi,
Dan Fante is a great writer. I like his novels better than his poems, but they are both very good. His novels are not like Bukowski or John Fante. They are only like Dan Fante. I was very happy to have published a poem and a short story of his.
There have been rumors for a while now that he is developing the book "Mooch" into a movie and that Dannny DeVito is involved (as a proiducer maybe). If so, fopr good or bad, it will get his nam eout there.
A true talent and great guy.
Bill
Dan Fante is a great writer. I like his novels better than his poems, but they are both very good. His novels are not like Bukowski or John Fante. They are only like Dan Fante. I was very happy to have published a poem and a short story of his.
There have been rumors for a while now that he is developing the book "Mooch" into a movie and that Dannny DeVito is involved (as a proiducer maybe). If so, fopr good or bad, it will get his nam eout there.
A true talent and great guy.
Bill
mjp
Founding member
There's a great book by Charles Seife called, Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, that is about the changes that have taken place since ancient mathematicians adopted the use of zero, which is the ultimate invisible number.
There was a tremendous amount of resistance to zero (much of it, probably not surprisingly, from religious leaders), and early proponents were ridiculed and dismissed as lunatics and enemies of the status quo.
And we think we live in interesting times...
bmcg
Founding member
Hi Bill
Can you let me know if the poem is still available from your good self.
Thanks!
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Hi,
It was published in Bottle #1. That is sold out. Let me see if I can locate a copy from an overrun....
Bill
It was published in Bottle #1. That is sold out. Let me see if I can locate a copy from an overrun....
Bill
the only good poet
One retreat after another without peace.
mjp
Founding member
It goes back quite a way, but it wasn't universally accepted until much more recent times. Early adopters were in India, and the Mayan's also had a representation of zero, but the concept confounded the Greeks and Romans who wondered how something could be nothing. ;)
Anyway, that's a very shorthand version, it's really an interesting book. It's more about ideas, ignorance and fear or the unknown than mathematics.
the only good poet
One retreat after another without peace.
mjp:
that book is fucking great.
also, I like bukowski.
that is all.
that book is fucking great.
also, I like bukowski.
that is all.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
All I know is that it was published by Beat Scene and printed by Sean Lynch at Ten Point Design....
Mine should be arriving in the mail soon...
'Bill
Mine should be arriving in the mail soon...
'Bill
Hi everyone.
The Supermarket came around after a chat with Kevin Ring at Beat Scene and a guy called Joe McMeekin at Queens Bookshop in Belfast. I have been planning and building a Press for 3/4 years and wanted to interpret some quality work - graphically along with letterpress. Kevin asked Dan for something unpublished and we lucked-out with a really nice piece.
The resulting broadsides are mixed media and are more raw prints rather than fine print. We thought the subject matter warranted it. The interest in them has knocked me out.
The hand pressed element is on an 1830 Albion Letterpress. One impression every 3/4 minutes - so it was a real labour. I love the poem - got really attached to it. I hope the graphic interpretation does it justice.
Hope that fills you guys in a little bit better...
Sean.
The Supermarket came around after a chat with Kevin Ring at Beat Scene and a guy called Joe McMeekin at Queens Bookshop in Belfast. I have been planning and building a Press for 3/4 years and wanted to interpret some quality work - graphically along with letterpress. Kevin asked Dan for something unpublished and we lucked-out with a really nice piece.
The resulting broadsides are mixed media and are more raw prints rather than fine print. We thought the subject matter warranted it. The interest in them has knocked me out.
The hand pressed element is on an 1830 Albion Letterpress. One impression every 3/4 minutes - so it was a real labour. I love the poem - got really attached to it. I hope the graphic interpretation does it justice.
Hope that fills you guys in a little bit better...
Sean.
