Charles Bukowski: "Don't try."

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:25:11 GMT, jjwebb.TakeThisOut@cruzio.com (Beau Blue) wrote:

 >feardevil420@yahoo.com (Will Dockery) wrote:
 >
  >>From: jjwebb.TakeThisOut@cruzio.com (Beau Blue)
  >>
   >>>*** No, Dale. I'm here, first and formost, to post my poetry.
  >>
   >>> > you might actually start communicating.
  >>
  >>Obviously, I'm communicating something, old son.
 >
 >OK Will,
 >
 >Yes, and that 'something' is complete, loser bullshit.
 >
 >You think nobody here's a
 >match for your prowess at writing
 >and performing? You're such a boob!
 >You're so good at this, how many
 >Pulitzer winners have you shared
 >a stage with? No, Pulitzer nominees.
 >Not winners, just nominees, how many?
 >Too academic for you? How many gold
 >record holders? How many times on
 >stage with men of that calibre?
 >Too corporate for you? OK, how many
 >National Slam winners call you friend
 >and have shared the stage with you? Too
 >rare? OK, how many times at any Slam did
 >you finish in the money? How many
 >times have you performed in a venue with
 >more than 2000 seats? more than 500? 200?
 >That's filled seats. How many?
 >
 >Ask yourself now, what do you do to put
 >pizza on the table? Perform? Write?
 >Know why you don't? Of course you don't.
 >
 >Off the top of my head I could name 30 poets
 >better than Bukowski. Have you even read 30
 >poets? And I know you think you have, but sadly,
 >you are the class example of someone without
 >a comprehending bone in his body.
 >
 >And the depressing part is your pride in your
 >ignorance. Enjoy your delusions, delivery boy.
 >This started with people just wanting you to
 >get better. You spit your ego at 'em. And you
 >think they're the trolls. That makes you a rube.
 >And once again you will not understand.
 >
 >You want to say you're a kick ass performer? Do
 >it in New York, San Fransisco, Chicago or LA or
 >any city of over 500,000. At a major venue, at
 >least 1000 seats. When you got that, then you can
 >issue challenges and make stupid statements about
 >Bukowski.
 >
 > -blue



This is what we used to call a
*good, old-fashioned country ass kickin'*

Nice<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->

j r sherman wrote:
 > In article <40C9D59C.40303.TakeThisOut@citilink.com>, Dale Houstman says...
 >
  >>

  >>
  >>Good song. But I must tell you that the reason Will keeps "embarrassing"
  >>himself is because so many of us keep giving him the only thing he
  >>wants, attention that cannot be otherwise gained.
  >>
  >>dmh
 >
 >
 > i know that Dale, but what if someone said to you: "i think blacks are exactly
 > like apes swinging in the trees, and the reason you don't see that many black
 > people hiking in the mountains is because black people don't want to be reminded
 > of how they used to swing through trees!"
 >
 > now that's really a moronic statement for someone to make, as well you know.
 >
 > well, would you simply let such a comment pass by without at least saying
 > something? of course you wouldn't.

Honestly, it really depends. The above statement - of course - is
racist; Will's is only stupid. But even if Will were pouring on the old
Hitler juice, I wouldn't give him the time of day, because (1) It
wouldn't make any difference to anyone with half a brain already and (2)
It is obvious Will only does what he does for the attention.

 >
 > well, moron-king posted an opinion i think is just as stupid as the above sample
 > statement. and what if someone read that statement, someone perhaps not as
 > versed in poetry as we are, and thought:
 >
 > "yeah, Bukowski could be the greatest poet of the 20th century! i think i'll
 > tell others this same thing!"

Well, that's that. One or two more half-wits won't make much difference
in a world run by quarter-wits. Who's REALLY got time to be out there
patrolling the perimeters of Dumbville?

 >
 > and before you know it we might have hundreds or maybe thousands of people
 > saying this exact same thing.

And it still wouldn't be true, even if Will meant it in the first place.
So? Most people in any age are dumber than a paper crowbar. Not my
problem, if only because my friends are more fascinating by far, and
there are always more intelligent folks to be found, who have - for
instance - taken the time to read for themselves and formed an opinion
not burped forth on a newsgroup by a sunbaked algae. and - as far as I
can see - there are already PLENTY of people who DO think the Buke is
worth purchasing, and probably find him charming as a gift-wrapped
kitten in a snowstorm. So? The only problem HERE is that so much
attention is given to the likes of Tom and Will, whose only fault is
that they require too much attention. Their opinions- as such - don't
mean anything: they are empty signifiers at best. The CONTENT is quite
beside-the-point, and only their presence is irksome. Pretending they
are dead is - frankly - more enjoyable than pretending their statements
are worth noting, pro or con. If the next "KittyMeHungry" or
"TeflonBWarriorCake" is so bollixed as to think the god-awful style of
those two (and their anal worms) is actually hiding an intelligent
intent, well they're lost to the eau de vacuum anywya. So fuck'em.

 >
 > shouldn't smart people, like you and me, do something to prevent the spread of
 > epic stupidity? of course we should. and that is what i'm trying to do. prevent
 > the spread of epic stupidity.

Go ahead, but - as far as the evidence goes - your brand of effort is
non-efficacious. It seems to satisfy you - so more power to you. But I
think one is fooling themselves to think it will lead to any great
benefit beyond personal-pleasure. That's adequate for some of course.

dmh<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->