What's the consensus on Bukowski?

I've never read him myself, but everyone who's ever recommended him to me has been a pseud. His novels are short, though, aren't they? It's still summer, might be worth it to buy one, make yourself a whiskey, and sit one hot, lazy afternoon and see for yourself. If he's good, then you've found a new author; if he's bad, then you've learned a new way how not to write (sometimes reading bad books is more useful than reading good ones).

He's pretty good. I think he's been called dirty realism and thats about what his work is. He gets a lot of hate for some reason which I don't really get, I think the beats in general get a lot of hate.

>>9855259
Worst thing to ever happen to poetry

terrible. terrible. hipsters love this pretentious fuck

>>9855259
Vapid and terrible. Imagine Coelho with a drug addiction

Every undergraduate white dude at a state college goes through a Bukowski phase. Embrace it, but understand how much you'll laugh at it a few years down the road.

Every post so far is right, good and bad.

The one thing I learned from him, you could probably learn from other authors too, but still he taught me something at least.

I think when you read his shit you get a very real sense that he is doing what he wants to do. I like reading him because whatever you want to say about it, he likes his stuff, he has his reasons for liking it, and I really believe him when he says he doesn't care what people think of it.

So anyway -- bee urself!!

>>9855259
Notice how everyone who shits on Bukowski takes issue with his fanbase as opposed to having a specific gripe about his works. As far as his fans being "pseuds"- I know two people IRL who love Bukoswki (both are close friends). The first is extremely intelligent and unpretentious and genuinely enjoys reading. The other has not read widely at all and is a straight up blue collar army vet. Neither of them are even vaguely the posturing or pretentious type. In fact, I find Bukowski's poetry to be remarkably unpretentious. That's like the whole point. Regardless of whether "pseuds" or "hipsters" tend to like him (a phenomenon I have only heard of on /lit/ and cannot confirm), his poetry and prose came from a sincere place and are largely autobiographical. Like, as far as being edgy he's not even that edgy. Is that even a reason he appeals to people?

Being around people who share my literary interests irl makes me feel like a lone Borges swimming in a sea of Bukowskis

He owes a bit to Celine and Henry Miller but lacks their surrealistic flights and he was less adventurous than either of them and led a less interesting life than either of them

I've only read the three that chronicle his life. I get why people hate the sort of douchy types that make it part of their identity like putting quotes on their doors and Shit.
But he's actually pretty good.

Pretentious pseud

>>9855259
that's compo from last of the summer wine

>>9855924
now this is a pseud

>>9855259
There are mediocre lyricists who wrote better poetry than Bukowski

>>9855440
Every postgraduate white dude at an American college goes through a Bukowski hate phase. Embrace it, but understand how much you'll smile at it a few years down the road.

>>9855931
Have you read John Fante? Didn't Bukowski take something from him too? How does he compare?

>>9855931

He cites Fante as a main influence

>>9855914
>Neither of them are even vaguely the posturing or pretentious type
and then here's you...

Can't stand his poetry, but Post Office is still pretty funny.