Pulp (1 Viewer)

I was rereading Pulp two days ago, and then yesterday I got over a comment by Michael Hemmingson who roughly says he felt like Pulp should not have been published in the first place cause it was that bad.
I have read it for something like ten times maybe, and I still enjoy reading it. I mean, this is not really pulpfiction literature and all but still. I find it very imaging of Bukowski, especially in his last period.
I would very much like to hear your thoughts on Pulp, do you think it was that bad ?
I want to say that Pulp is a polarizing book, but really, most Bukowski readers are okay with it or even like it. So it isn't all that polarizing. It's just a handful of fussy assholes named Michael who seem to hate it. But no one has ever heard of them, so their opinions aren't important.
Yes maybe you're right you know. I have found the book in which Hemmingson talks about it and I have ordered it, I'm intrigued. It's a book about Buk and Carver, should be an interesting read, I hope.
In the meantime I think what I really dig about Pulp is all the reflexion, the bukowski like reflexion about life and death, all that ... Plus, this is so like a summary of his own life, it almost sounds like a goodbye you know.
Hi, I'm coming back after having read Hemmingson's Book, where he says Pulp should not have been published, and I have got to tell you it is a big piece of trash. I was hoping to have a good read; he was talking about Bukowski and Carver so the links between them could have been interesting to read but it turned out to be different ... Anyway I have been looking for things or studies done on Pulp, and I ended up with barely nothing, I know Buk is rather disregarged by all the studies and all but almost nothing on Pulp is a mistake right ? I mean the book has a lot to tell ... Or I may not have looked so well I don't know, if you have interesting read, feel free to share !

Users who are viewing this thread