G
Garret
A story on hackwriters.com Ive read and enjoyed and fiqured you folks would get a kick out of as well: http://www.hackwriters.com/Bukowskisorrows.htm
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
It seems some one or a few here have talked about how Bukowski would still be rejected by most publishers today.
I think it's weird when people refer to him as "Chuck".
I think it's weird when people refer to him as "Chuck".
So she calls him Chuck and states that The Most Beautiful Woman in Town was published by City Lights, circa 1967. Then refers to him as "Buck" in the last line; and yet she states that she has all of his books except for some of the expensive early ones. Hmmm...
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Yeah, I like the idea of the story, but it is utterly ruined for me when the writer acts familiar then calls him by two names that he NEVER went by. It may be petty, but calling him Hank or Buk and I love the article.
Bill
Bill
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
hahahahahahaha! Check out james, right on top of things. Thanks for the laugh and lingering goofy smile.:D
CarversDog
RIP
Buck? What a fucking idiot.
Her "experiment" was no big deal and has been done before in a much more clever manner by Don Novello many, many years ago: he wrote up a movie pitch that was, plot point for plot point, lifted from the classic film Casablanca. All he did was change the title. Every studio he sent the pitch to rejected the story (even Warner Brothers, the studio that produced the original). Novello wrote an article about the experience for, I think, Los Angeles magazine.
Her "experiment" was no big deal and has been done before in a much more clever manner by Don Novello many, many years ago: he wrote up a movie pitch that was, plot point for plot point, lifted from the classic film Casablanca. All he did was change the title. Every studio he sent the pitch to rejected the story (even Warner Brothers, the studio that produced the original). Novello wrote an article about the experience for, I think, Los Angeles magazine.
mjp
Founding member
Chuck and Buck is a great movie, by the way.
The thing about the (old) City Lights books is that they reprinted the weekly newspaper articles, which went pretty much from Bukowski's typewriter to print. They weren't saying, "This is too vulgar," or "Come on, this is just rambling junk, what the fuck?" So a lot of pieces of questionable quality were published. I think if you tried this experiment with some more fully realized shorts the results would be different.
The thing about the (old) City Lights books is that they reprinted the weekly newspaper articles, which went pretty much from Bukowski's typewriter to print. They weren't saying, "This is too vulgar," or "Come on, this is just rambling junk, what the fuck?" So a lot of pieces of questionable quality were published. I think if you tried this experiment with some more fully realized shorts the results would be different.
This must have been back in 1967. :rolleyes:
vodka
Miss Take
it's sort of sad that none of the journals actually recognized the piece.
also, there is something to be said for evolution of popular literature and poetry... and also i mean shit - trying to become a published writer is sort of like trying to become a rock star... the ones who are recognized aren't necessarily the best.
also, there is something to be said for evolution of popular literature and poetry... and also i mean shit - trying to become a published writer is sort of like trying to become a rock star... the ones who are recognized aren't necessarily the best.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Yes, but the ones that do it for the love of doing it and not to become the next Green Day will usually be better and may make it with their dignity intact. If they do not make it, they have to be happy playing in bars to crowds of 15. If they go into it expecting to play to crowds of 75,000 then they will likely become disappointed and will not enjoy the music.
It is the same with writing and publishing for that matter. I do not expect to have my little press bought out by Random House. If I make $5000 a year publishing, I am happy. If I lose $5000 a year, I am happy. It is worth it. As a writer, you have to write for the love of writing and have to be happy if no one but you ever sees your words.
That is how I see it. I have been known to be wrong, of course.
Bill
It is the same with writing and publishing for that matter. I do not expect to have my little press bought out by Random House. If I make $5000 a year publishing, I am happy. If I lose $5000 a year, I am happy. It is worth it. As a writer, you have to write for the love of writing and have to be happy if no one but you ever sees your words.
That is how I see it. I have been known to be wrong, of course.
Bill
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
The same goes for painters, dancers, song writers...
Someone doing it for the money, is asking for a wake up call from a big ben.
chronic
old and in the way
I'll bet that when you make $5000 you're at least a tiny bit happier than when you lose $5000.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
yes, true, but in my case that is because I know that I can afford to make more books. I suppose it would be similar if a painter sold a painting and went out and ought canvasses and paints...
Bill
Bill
vodka
Miss Take
today i see a clash between people who write very safe university style poetry following very particular university style guidelines and those who attend the bukowski school of how to write poetry and then emulate his style as closely as possible and usually badly.
this clash can often be seen in regard to university press journals vs. independent (alternative) journals.
the problem is, barely anyone is doing their own thing.
some are.
i just purchased a book this morning, in fact, by a writer who has succeeded in finding his own style and voice and is goddamned intelligent too.
i'm really looking forward to reading it.
so there's hope, huh?
there's hope for poetry in this world yet. ;)
this clash can often be seen in regard to university press journals vs. independent (alternative) journals.
the problem is, barely anyone is doing their own thing.
some are.
i just purchased a book this morning, in fact, by a writer who has succeeded in finding his own style and voice and is goddamned intelligent too.
i'm really looking forward to reading it.
so there's hope, huh?
there's hope for poetry in this world yet. ;)
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
Who is the poet?
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
i bet that i know who it is.
Good point,
there is also an unsual preoccupation for people to write poems about The Iliad, this really gets on my goat.
mjp
Founding member
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
Somehow I thought it was the thin man. sorry
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
Is the Last of the V8 Interceptors part of that persona?;)
number6horse
okyoutwopixiesoutyougo
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
mjp
Founding member
Relatively speaking, you know.
A better test
I would have chanced it that most publishers hadn't read "The Most Beautiful Woman in Town" and sent it in rather than one of Bukowski's lesser efforts. TMBWIT is one of his most evocative stories. You read about the woman and you want to be the one to be with her, possibly save her from herself. It's incredible. And I would imagine that only the most heartless son-of-a-bitch of an untalented editor could have possibly failed to respond favorably. Such a test might have been more rewarding and brought a higher rate of favorable results. Still, I enjoyed the article and I would guess that many of our past finest writers might have truly suffered to find acceptance in today's literary marketplace. It would have been a hoot if Bukowski had somehow been accepted in Marie Claire or Readers Digest! He thought he was tough, but I would have liked to see him step into a bar in true macho fashion after that! ("It's rent money, baby.") I would have also loved seeing him as a social commentator on Fox Gnus. Now that's what I would call Fair and Balanced.
Poptop
I would have chanced it that most publishers hadn't read "The Most Beautiful Woman in Town" and sent it in rather than one of Bukowski's lesser efforts. TMBWIT is one of his most evocative stories. You read about the woman and you want to be the one to be with her, possibly save her from herself. It's incredible. And I would imagine that only the most heartless son-of-a-bitch of an untalented editor could have possibly failed to respond favorably. Such a test might have been more rewarding and brought a higher rate of favorable results. Still, I enjoyed the article and I would guess that many of our past finest writers might have truly suffered to find acceptance in today's literary marketplace. It would have been a hoot if Bukowski had somehow been accepted in Marie Claire or Readers Digest! He thought he was tough, but I would have liked to see him step into a bar in true macho fashion after that! ("It's rent money, baby.") I would have also loved seeing him as a social commentator on Fox Gnus. Now that's what I would call Fair and Balanced.
Poptop
Rekrab
Usually wrong.
For most editiors, it's not what you send them, it's "who" you are. The greatest story or poem on earth won't fly with many of these people. They don't look at the work objectively. It's all about reputation and connections. That's been the case forever. That's not sour grapes speaking, it's reality. Many editors do not even read the work sent them, beyond maybe the first sentence or two. They look at the name and then shove it back into the envelop.
mjp
Founding member
Speaking of Grapes - ;) - in the mid 90's I would send poems to Jack Grapes who published ONTHEBUS. His rejection form was an "invitation" to attend his "writing workshop" ($$$). Maybe I needed it, but I never took him up on it.
As I remember "The Oxford American" never accepted Bukowski poems, even though he kept sending them almost to the end. He mentions Marc Smirnoff (editor) as 'very kind' writer of rejection letters.
