I read it over the course of a day or two in highschool and didn't think much of it. I'm reading it again, and I guess I like it a little better than I did then. Dean Moriarty acts like he's constantly high on cocaine. I have known people who think they're introspective and abstract geniuses when they're high and it annoys me to no end.
On The Road (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ninjerk
- Start date
You won't be the first or last person to realise The Beats were simply hippy drug abusers, who rejected the McCarthyism and Conservative politics of the time. The Beats where really anarchistic in temprament and ultimately diretionless. But who says they had to have a goal!?
What is their legacy? A generation of people who think getting stoned, wearing hippy clothes, hugging trees and being ecological.
The revolutionaries of the past become the conformists of the future.
Look around!
The hedonism of The Beats is
now precisely what is sold to us
in our wild consumer society!
What is their legacy? A generation of people who think getting stoned, wearing hippy clothes, hugging trees and being ecological.
The revolutionaries of the past become the conformists of the future.
Look around!
The hedonism of The Beats is
now precisely what is sold to us
in our wild consumer society!
HenryChinaski
Founding member
I agree with you Olaf, but only to a certain extent. I really don't think Kerouac was much of a stoner. I mean after all, he did die of cirrhosis of the liver. I think Kerouacs writing stands out more than any other member of the beat generation. Of course this is all a matter of opinion and to that I say, think what you want to think but the fact of the matter is, the beats will never be forgotten so they must've accomplished something.
everything is eventually sold. there's always a buyer.
aahhh....don't mind me. I'm just grumpy today.
continue.
Beats, Not Deadbeats
Wow. Yes, wild consummerism never existed before the Beats, especially, let's say, during the 1920s in America, with Babe Ruth and Jack Dempsey. Un-huh. Sorry to differ here, Olaf, but from my own reading of Kerouac and some Ginsberg, I believe that such an assessment is far too sweeping, dismissive and judgmental of the Beats and what they stood for. I myself never felt they lacked direction nor were anarchists, nor particularly political, even during the paranoid McCarthy period and the rabid anti-Communism that seemed to be poisoning the atmosphere of the US during the early 1950s. On the contrary, in their own way they were spiritual seekers driving toward freedom and spontaneity in writing as in life. And Kerouac was one hell of a writer before he took the criticism of his work to heart and drank himself into a coma. (Even so, it was his life to do with as he pleased.)
So, they were the Beats, not the Deadbeats, and a great many of them were productive for years after Kerouac died. I say that counts for something... And any connection with McCarthyism, even against, is not something I've ever associated with the Beats, even though it was going on around them at the time. Zen Buddhism, rather than anarchism, was far more likely the driving force behind the heartbeat of their collective hearts"”and Walt Whitman their hero. They stood for something positive as free spirits, as misunderstood as it might appear to others, and yes, perhaps to their own ruin. But I feel they were for something and not against, and that's worth sparing them from the scrap-heap of rash, cultural damnation. Kerouac put his life on the line for what he espoused, even if he ended up losing it in the process and considered himself a failure. He wasn't. On The Road lives, as it should. It's full of such tremendous 'wild consummerism.' "” Poptop.
Wow. Yes, wild consummerism never existed before the Beats, especially, let's say, during the 1920s in America, with Babe Ruth and Jack Dempsey. Un-huh. Sorry to differ here, Olaf, but from my own reading of Kerouac and some Ginsberg, I believe that such an assessment is far too sweeping, dismissive and judgmental of the Beats and what they stood for. I myself never felt they lacked direction nor were anarchists, nor particularly political, even during the paranoid McCarthy period and the rabid anti-Communism that seemed to be poisoning the atmosphere of the US during the early 1950s. On the contrary, in their own way they were spiritual seekers driving toward freedom and spontaneity in writing as in life. And Kerouac was one hell of a writer before he took the criticism of his work to heart and drank himself into a coma. (Even so, it was his life to do with as he pleased.)
So, they were the Beats, not the Deadbeats, and a great many of them were productive for years after Kerouac died. I say that counts for something... And any connection with McCarthyism, even against, is not something I've ever associated with the Beats, even though it was going on around them at the time. Zen Buddhism, rather than anarchism, was far more likely the driving force behind the heartbeat of their collective hearts"”and Walt Whitman their hero. They stood for something positive as free spirits, as misunderstood as it might appear to others, and yes, perhaps to their own ruin. But I feel they were for something and not against, and that's worth sparing them from the scrap-heap of rash, cultural damnation. Kerouac put his life on the line for what he espoused, even if he ended up losing it in the process and considered himself a failure. He wasn't. On The Road lives, as it should. It's full of such tremendous 'wild consummerism.' "” Poptop.
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't really get that from On The Road. He drank more whiskey and beer than he smoked pot. What I saw from Dean was more drawing from his erratic behavior than being a "stoner." He was definitely a hedonist, though. Most of the pictures I've seen of Kerouac have him wearing a tucked-in dress shirt and slacks.
On The Road, so far to me, reads like a journal of someone who cared little for politics and race, and cared more to see America in its entirety, instead of the picture-perfect white Protestant American boy (although I guess his being French Canadian might make him more inclined to come from a Catholic upbringing, I don't know).
www.ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=151006
Link to an interesting essay on the beats and Ginsberg particularly.
Link to an interesting essay on the beats and Ginsberg particularly.
I dont believe that Kerouac was a Beat. He chronicled and defined them but having studied him and his work, it seems that they were merely the subject of his work (Eg. Neal Cassady and the gang)- as Bill Burroughs pointed out in a lovely Kerouac doc., Kerouac was completely apolitical and you can definitely see his confusion and resentment- his paranoia of being used for political ends (Eg. Ginsberg and the 'commie-jews').
Remember that "Road" and all of Kerouac's Beat-works were set in the mid to late 40's and were not published until the late 50's. The young people who picked up on their writings are the ones who became the Beats but the age difference alone differed too greatly for Kerouac's peers to really hop on the bandwagon (they were in their mid-thirties)- THAT Beat gen. would be the older brothers of the hippies (which is what happens when you mix dissidence, kicks, Ginsberg/politics and rockandroll).
But a reading of Kerouac's novels, set in the pre-Beat times gives a different picture of events. Check out "Visions of Gerard" or "Dr. Sax", Kerouac was largely a sentimentalist who was writing about "the heart". As far as his drinking self-destruction goes, there are many theories. Reading his letters and those of his contemporaries, the picture is painted that it was largely his overbearing Mother's fault who controlled Kerouac through guilt. She would tear up letters from Ginsberg and sent letters to Burroughs and Allen that if they didnt break off contact with Kerouac, she would call the FBI on them (this being c. 1955 and Jack was in his mid-thirties).
The Beat movement does get thrown into a bunch of other crap. For one it was attacked and slandered through the media and opportunists ('beatniks'). For two, it gets confused with the San Francisco Renaissance. For three, it has nothing to do with environmentalism, religion or anything else that founders of said group went on to embrace- you're right to say that is (at least mildly) nihilistic or was that anarchistic?
ps. I think it is contestable to say that Burroughs or Bukowski were Beat writers. They may have been 'Beats' (or had the title thrust upon them) but they werent Beat writers which makes the world of difference.
Remember that "Road" and all of Kerouac's Beat-works were set in the mid to late 40's and were not published until the late 50's. The young people who picked up on their writings are the ones who became the Beats but the age difference alone differed too greatly for Kerouac's peers to really hop on the bandwagon (they were in their mid-thirties)- THAT Beat gen. would be the older brothers of the hippies (which is what happens when you mix dissidence, kicks, Ginsberg/politics and rockandroll).
But a reading of Kerouac's novels, set in the pre-Beat times gives a different picture of events. Check out "Visions of Gerard" or "Dr. Sax", Kerouac was largely a sentimentalist who was writing about "the heart". As far as his drinking self-destruction goes, there are many theories. Reading his letters and those of his contemporaries, the picture is painted that it was largely his overbearing Mother's fault who controlled Kerouac through guilt. She would tear up letters from Ginsberg and sent letters to Burroughs and Allen that if they didnt break off contact with Kerouac, she would call the FBI on them (this being c. 1955 and Jack was in his mid-thirties).
The Beat movement does get thrown into a bunch of other crap. For one it was attacked and slandered through the media and opportunists ('beatniks'). For two, it gets confused with the San Francisco Renaissance. For three, it has nothing to do with environmentalism, religion or anything else that founders of said group went on to embrace- you're right to say that is (at least mildly) nihilistic or was that anarchistic?
ps. I think it is contestable to say that Burroughs or Bukowski were Beat writers. They may have been 'Beats' (or had the title thrust upon them) but they werent Beat writers which makes the world of difference.
ROC
It is what it is
Without addressing the many interesting points raised in the threads above, I would just like to add that a friend of mine (noticing my book collection) loaned me his copy of On The Road.
He insisted that if a like Hemingway, Bukowski et al, that I would love OTR.
I read the first dozen or so pages and could not go on.... I found it utterly boring - what I consider to be just plain bad writing.
I came back to it a few days later thinking I should give it another chance - maybe I was not in the right mood - how could it be so bad if everyone else raves about it?
I found more to dislike as I read on - after the first quarter of the book I gave it back with a polite 'thanks'.
Was this Kerouacs best work?
If so, he has to one of histories most over-rated writers.
Damn.
He insisted that if a like Hemingway, Bukowski et al, that I would love OTR.
I read the first dozen or so pages and could not go on.... I found it utterly boring - what I consider to be just plain bad writing.
I came back to it a few days later thinking I should give it another chance - maybe I was not in the right mood - how could it be so bad if everyone else raves about it?
I found more to dislike as I read on - after the first quarter of the book I gave it back with a polite 'thanks'.
Was this Kerouacs best work?
If so, he has to one of histories most over-rated writers.
Damn.
On The Road is probably the most well known of Jack's work, but certainly isn't his best. I still recommend reading On The Road to you though, if I remember correctly (gazing over my shelf I can't seem to find my copy) it's broken into 3 or 4 section, with the first being my least favorite.
If you don't want to trudge through On The Road though, you could always pick up Dharma Bums. I'm reading it again currently, and it's my favorite of his work.
But if you want to talk about a writer being over rated, lets look at Ginsburg. Howl was horrible.
If you don't want to trudge through On The Road though, you could always pick up Dharma Bums. I'm reading it again currently, and it's my favorite of his work.
But if you want to talk about a writer being over rated, lets look at Ginsburg. Howl was horrible.
ROC
It is what it is
Thanks... but no thanks.
One may not be able to judge a book by its cover but I don't think I'm being unfair by judging Kerouacs OTR by its first 50 or so pages.
Even if the book gets better, it shows an amazing lack of skill and/or foresight placing your weakest material in the first section of the book.
And shit, time spent reading a book that I know I don't like is time not spent reading new books (or old books I love).
And Howl....yes.
The first two lines really grab you... they make a promise that Ginsberg just can't keep. The rest is so much smoke... and dated. If you are going to use language, it's probably a good idea not to use 'new' words that will just end up either reading lame or incomprehensible with age.
And while we're bagging Bukowskis contemporaries - Robert Creeley.
Try finishing any of his poems without your eyes losing focus and drifting to another part of the page. What a bore!
One may not be able to judge a book by its cover but I don't think I'm being unfair by judging Kerouacs OTR by its first 50 or so pages.
Even if the book gets better, it shows an amazing lack of skill and/or foresight placing your weakest material in the first section of the book.
And shit, time spent reading a book that I know I don't like is time not spent reading new books (or old books I love).
And Howl....yes.
The first two lines really grab you... they make a promise that Ginsberg just can't keep. The rest is so much smoke... and dated. If you are going to use language, it's probably a good idea not to use 'new' words that will just end up either reading lame or incomprehensible with age.
And while we're bagging Bukowskis contemporaries - Robert Creeley.
Try finishing any of his poems without your eyes losing focus and drifting to another part of the page. What a bore!
the only good poet
One retreat after another without peace.
"i demand that the human race ceases multiplying its kind
and bows out.
i demand it."
that's close to a line in a kerouac poem i remember. that's pretty good. kerouac wld agree.
so wld bukowski.
and bows out.
i demand it."
that's close to a line in a kerouac poem i remember. that's pretty good. kerouac wld agree.
so wld bukowski.
Ginsberg seems to be a love him or hate him kinda guy. Me, I've always been partial to Ginsberg- I read Howl like it was less a poem and more of a speech. For me, Ginsberg went through stages. When it was good, he was a phenomenal poet, when it was bad, he called it "psychedelia". Although I consider all his work to be damn fine, he does get dismissed a lot. Is it because of the overt-homosexuality? People like Jack who wrote about hetro heroes, while Bill Burroughs butched it up but Ginsberg was always "that faaag"- could the persona be the problem?
Anyhow, my favorite Ginsberg poem is "The Ballad of the Skeletons", if you havent read it, please do, it is quite striking:
Anyhow, my favorite Ginsberg poem is "The Ballad of the Skeletons", if you havent read it, please do, it is quite striking:
I think you're right on target with Kerouac, and I found both books thoroughly liberating. They still are with the right readers, especially young readers who aren't already set in their ways or too comfortable with themselves.
Jack seized mad adventure by the throat and didn't let go until he'd had his fill. Then he put the words down with an aliveness that still burns like a flame. I found incredible beauty of language, and he knew the difference between a comma, semi-colon and period. Much of the language was a combination of prose and poetry"”exceedingly rare to find in any form of literature.
I can forgive the unevenness of some of his writing, because these kinds of books could only have been written in America by an American"”because of the cultural landscape in the country at the time"”and his numerous passages show just how effective the American-English language can be when pushing it to the utmost limits of poetic image and metaphor.
Henry Miller pushed the language to the limit too, and not that it matters, but I find it of interest that Miller praised Kerouac's writings, though he thought some of it was uneven too. Nevertheless, I think these are two classic works and, as far as I'm concerned, they shall remain well-deserved classic works in the body of American literature as a whole.
On The Road was badly needed in the 1950s during the period of political McCarthyism and the "Leave It To Beaver" TV mentality that made the decade feel like one was living in a nut house: everything seem to appear normal on the surface, but underneath there was a sick sense of being trapped inside an artificial family life. Much of that suppressed energy finally exploded outwardly during the politically turbulent 1960s. In the meantime, Jack's writing got his readers moving again and broke many of them out of their conventional 9-to-5 existence.
"”Poptop.
Sorry that I'm unaware of Kerouac's specific physical ailment other than he seemed hell-bent on drinking himself into an early death. He even appeared on the William F. Buckley show after being deep in his cups (inebriated). This segment is shown on the "Whatever Happened To Keroauc" DVD"”a fascinating look into his life. Whatever happened, is right. I think he may have self-destructed because of the consequences of his own writing"”some of the public's reaction to it"”and I can't think of a single other writer of influence doing that. Suiciding over personal issues"”yes; but not because the writer's feelings were mortally hurt from the public's misunderstanding of the writings. I think that happened. (Maybe others have more examples.) In Hemingway's case, I think he may have blown his brains to the wall partly because he no longer cared for the process of writing, or his own writing, or he may have felt burnt-out; but not because the public didn't like it. They mostly did, though I can't say that he was for me. (Then later on Hemingway's wife blows her brains out with a shotgun too. Like writer like wife, I guess.) "”Poptop.
"Kerouac died in St. Petersburg,
Florida, at the age of forty-seven
from an internal hemorrhage
caused by his chronic alcoholism."
"”Wikipedia
....
"I'm all for alcohol...."
"”Bukowski Tapes
....
Bukowski recovered from his internal
hemorrahaging because I believed
that he wanted to live; Kerouac never
recovered because I believe that he
wanted to die. "”Poptop
Last edited by a moderator:
"you got a little worked up there buddy."
yes i know, spoken like a true stoner/appreciator of the beats. haha.
HenryChinaski
Founding member
now that i think about this, this book is shit.
I believe Bukowski recovered,(besides the fact he seemed indestructible), because he was young. I'm guessing later twenties? Kerouac's later age makes a difference I think. Also, if you read Satori in Paris by Kerouac he's basically living on wine with no food, all his calories taken up by alcohol. I don't think Bukowski was doing this at least in his forties and onward. Buk always had his hard boiled eggs at least;)
HenryChinaski
Founding member
ummm yeah, pretty much.
lets compare the beats to love. they burn away like a fog. they burned away, with the first daylight of reality.
Similar threads
