The Beats

[thefairestmonth]

Hello everyone! I am a new member who has recently begun studying beat poetry. I would like to have a few new, different, and intelligent perspectives on some of Jack "The Beat King" Kerouac's poems. Any input regarding the poems would be greatly appreciated. I am mainly interested in imagery, tone, style, symbol, and theme. These poems are very interesting and complex, and I look forward to some great opinions on them.

Thanks!



“Desolation Blues - 11th Chorus”

Jack Kerouac

And if you don't like the tone
of my poems
You can go jump in the lake.
I have been empowered
to lay my hand
On your shoulder
and remind you
That you are utterly free,
Free as empty space.
You dont have to be famous,
dont have to be perfect,
Dont have to work,
dont have to marry,
Dont have to carry burdens,
dont have to gnaw & kneel,
the taste
of rain-
Why kneel?
Dont even have to sit,
Gozomeen,
Like an endless rock camp
go ahead & blow,
Explode & go,
I wont say nothin,
neither this rock,
And my outhouse doesnt care,
And I got no body

[Sweets America]

Hello everyone! I am a new member who has recently begun studying beat poetry. I would like to have a few new, different, and intelligent perspectives on some of Jack "The Beat King" Kerouac's poems. Any input regarding the poems would be greatly appreciated. I am mainly interested in imagery, tone, style, symbol, and theme. These poems are very interesting and complex, and I look forward to some great opinions on them.

Thanks!



“Desolation Blues - 11th Chorus”

Jack Kerouac

And if you don't like the tone
of my poems
You can go jump in the lake.
I have been empowered
to lay my hand
On your shoulder
and remind you
That you are utterly free,
Free as empty space.
You dont have to be famous,
dont have to be perfect,
Dont have to work,
dont have to marry,
Dont have to carry burdens,
dont have to gnaw & kneel,
the taste
of rain-
Why kneel?
Dont even have to sit,
Gozomeen,
Like an endless rock camp
go ahead & blow,
Explode & go,
I wont say nothin,
neither this rock,
And my outhouse doesnt care,
And I got no body

I love this! I don't know enough about the Beats to tell you more as I'm just starting to get interested in them, especially in Kerouac, but I love what this poem says. This freedom. But I thought the part about the taste of rain and why kneel were part of a separate haiku? I'm sure I've seen that before.

[thefairestmonth]

As far as I can tell, that haiku was removed from this poem. Any other input?

[JBI]

The Beats for the most part are more important in the development of counter-culture than they are as poets. Generally I find Ginsberg et al to be somewhat mediocre. In terms of poetry, they did very little beyond ranting about the politics of their own time. Basically it feels like a long protest song yelling at the government. In this day and age, I feel we have enough of that, there really is no point listening to theirs.

As Oscar Wilde put it, "All bad poetry is sincere." All I can say is that the Beat poets were very sincere.

[Sweets America]

The Beats for the most part are more important in the development of counter-culture than they are as poets. Generally I find Ginsberg et al to be somewhat mediocre. In terms of poetry, they did very little beyond ranting about the politics of their own time. Basically it feels like a long protest song yelling at the government. In this day and age, I feel we have enough of that, there really is no point listening to theirs.

As Oscar Wilde put it, "All bad poetry is sincere." All I can say is that the Beat poets were very sincere.

As far as I know, Kerouac didn't really care about politics, at least in the first part of his life. Moreover, I don't see how they wrote ONLY about politics. Plus it was not in their intention to bring a counter-culture, they did not want to create a movement, it was only about themselves. I don't see where Kerouac yelled at the government, it was more about freedom, romance, travelling, experience and sensation. It was about guilt and escaping, and maybe self-destruction.
Saying that there is no point in reading their works might be going too far, in my opinion. But oh well, to each their own sensibility.
I'm not sure you've really tried to understand what it was all about. I'm not sure I understand either but at least I don't pretend to do so with quick and condescending remarks.

[blazeofglory]

A beautiful poem to read this one is.

[Dharmabeat]

I'm not a huge literature aficionado, and I think that's why the works of the Beat generation appeal to me so much.

I sometimes look at poetry or classic novels and I can't understand the author's attitudes without being told. That may be because I am just an inexperienced reader or whatever, but I don't have that problem with the Beat stuff - it sort of just grabs me. Since I picked up On the Road I've took a lot bigger interest into reading because the book drew me in so much. This is why I think Beat generation writing is important in my opinion, and definitely shouldn't be ruled out.

Also there is little pretense or political meaning to the works in my opinion, it's just the ramblings of a few guys that were enjoying life in the 40s/50s.

[stlukesguild]

Actually I agree with JBI 100%.:nod:

[Dharmabeat]

Yeah, I guess everyone has an opinion :)

[jikan myshkin]

The Beats for the most part are more important in the development of counter-culture than they are as poets. Generally I find Ginsberg et al to be somewhat mediocre. In terms of poetry, they did very little beyond ranting about the politics of their own time. Basically it feels like a long protest song yelling at the government. In this day and age, I feel we have enough of that, there really is no point listening to theirs.

As Oscar Wilde put it, "All bad poetry is sincere." All I can say is that the Beat poets were very sincere.

the majority of the beat writers were simply awful, cashing in on the sublime briilaince of ginsberg, kerouac, burroughs et al. i love how varied the writing styles are, kerouac who use vertulay every style he could try, burroughs revolusionised writing and by proxy film making, even if his subject matter is of little interest to me, and howl changed america with tje censorship court hearing. and of course you have to acknowledge thier impact on the likes of cohen, reed, dylan, ian curtis, JG ballard etc. a legacy to be proud of

[_Shannon_]

The Beats for the most part are more important in the development of counter-culture than they are as poets. Generally I find Ginsberg et al to be somewhat mediocre. In terms of poetry, they did very little beyond ranting about the politics of their own time. Basically it feels like a long protest song yelling at the government. In this day and age, I feel we have enough of that, there really is no point listening to theirs.

As Oscar Wilde put it, "All bad poetry is sincere." All I can say is that the Beat poets were very sincere.
Hmmm- Have you read Gary Snyder? Or Robert Creeley? Or Frank O'Hara? Or Denise Levertov? Or Robert Duncan? Many poets who are indentified in part with the Beats are not just spewing politics- but rather are darn fine poets. Sometimes even Charles Olson gets chucked in with the Beats....:rolleyes:

If you blow off any poet identified as a Beat poet, you are missing some of the very best late 20th Century American poetry out there.

Personally I find Kerouac's poetry meh and unimportant as a body of work, I seriously dislike the poety of Ginsberg and Corso which left in it's wake the use of poetry to launch personal political views - which still stains poetry today. However, to dismiss all who are at some point or another affiliated with the Beats is a huge mistake in my opnion.

[Page Sniffer]

Sorry for the double tap post... Moderator please delete this one if you like. Somethings not letting me delete this from my end. Thanks...

[Page Sniffer]

I love the Beats for thinking outside the box and challenging the standards of conformity. I feel the yearning for freedom, the chase of it, and the frustration and celebration in the movement. I think it celebrates the autonomy of an individuals creativity, it works for some, others not. I've read lots of reviews condemning the Beats for trashing poetry. I wonder though, how can something be trashed if there are just as many powerful poets that insist on using proper mechanics and keep the mechanics alive and in the forefront?

Perhaps Kerouac and his pals were trying to make a statement like the Dadaists such as Wyndham Lewis during the First World War period, only like forty years later?

Kerouac's Haiku typically doesn't follow the 5 - 7- 5 set up either. He's said to have "Americanized" it...

Kerouac had trouble finding a publisher -- something like seven years -- after he first wrote On the Road. Many consider John Clellon Holmes the real first documenter of the "Beat" lifestyle before they were "Beats" with GO (1952). OTR came out in 1957. His first book Town and the City was actually said to be better by many, because it followed a more traditional editorial and grammatical approach.

Maybe this is more a social issue where the formalists feared a literary change. Life is about change and transcending so why should art be any different, and I consider literature a written art.

I enjoy meter and rhyme, and certainly respect the poets that can still create within the formal parameters. I highly recommend that everyone at least once, write a sonnet in iambic pentameter. Or a rondeau or syntactical poem -- great excersise.

My professor recommended, that we learn how to write using the mechanics and rules of traditional styles, then of course are free to break the rules if we so choose to express oursleves. I've found the different styles suit some personal moods better and are more efficient vehicles to get our feelings at that time on paper. Some styles simply work better than others.

Ferlinghetti (City Lights founder) and Coney Island of the Mind is probably my favorite though. The Bob Dylan documentary shows an interview with Ginsburg, and he gets emotional when he discusses a "passing of the torch" when he talks about the first time he heard Bob Dylan -- a tipping point, the passing of the Beat torch to a new generation.

Check out the documentary from Netflix called What Happened to Kerouac (1986). Jack reads his own work (old recordings and interviews) along with interviews of the major Beats -- Ginsburg, Snyder, Corso, Ferlinghetti, Burroughs, Holmes, Neil Cassady, Robert Creely, Diane Di Prima and Joyce Johnson. Very, very cool doc celebrating the flavor of the times. Jack's daughter is on it too.

I attended a poetry workshop by a university professor who had published quite a few books of poetry and had read on NPR. During the workshop, she used poems submitted by the audience for her critique. She began to basically shred one to pieces, written by another creative writing professor in the audience, apparently not realising who's work it was. We were allowed to ask questions so I said:
"But didn't the author intend this to be a syntactical poem?"
The guest poet and workshop leader stopped in her tracks and shrugged. The author nodded "yes". The guest poet then sort of apologized, and admitted she NEVER wrote in rhyme or meter. Always freestyle.

So I think many of us then felt strange, and a respect for structure, that there is no absolute, nor should a certain style out weigh another. There was a strange high-mindedness about something with no framework whatsoever that seemed to undermine itself. It was all in her delivery, and a little obnoxious. I found it ironic that a poet would completely shun rhyme and meter. She gave a fantastic reading of her own work later when it was time too. I enjoyed her reading -- she even wore a black beret -- but disliked and disagreed her anti-rhyme & meter politics. With all due respect, it all seemed like an easy way out to me. But, she's up there and I'm not, nor did it keep her off NPR or scare away publishers.

I think we should all keep an open mind, because it's all communication, whatever the style. Thanks for reading this if you have. I welcome your thoughts and comments if you feel like it.:D

[JBI]

I didn't say all poets who were affiliated with the Beats were bad, I just said the Beat poets tended to be. And Charles Olson wasn't a beat poet, he is generally accepted to be a second wave modernist poet.

All the poets you mentioned may have a few good works, but lets be honest, how many compare to Roethke, or Lowell, or Bishop, all of whom were writing at that time.

[Page Sniffer]

Thefairestmonth ~ I personnaly like Kerouac's prose passages when he's doing the camping-out thing, when he's a part-time fire warden on Desolation Peak in the mountains over-looking Seattle. Beautiful imagery and a sense of being one-with-nature.

JBI ~ Any thoughts on Bukowski? Not a beat, but it seems Beat inspired. I don't know what wave of modernist to call him. I have a couple of his books, but frankly reading about the same old dirty underwear, skidrow gutterral sexual exploits and drinking binges bores me. Been there, done it. I suppose he's a self-destructive free-style documentarian.

[JBI]

Bukowski I would think to be one of the most overrated poets, but I disagree with myself when I consider he isn't even that highly rated. Seriously, he has the most basic style, content, and imagery, and is not nearly as developed as any of the names I mentioned. When I review that time period, the best poet seems, by light years, to be Bishop, and then probably Roethke, and Lowell, followed by Merril, and Ashbery. O'Hara wasn't bad, I simply didn't mention him since he was not a Beat poet. Dylan Thomas seems to be the best English language poet at that time, though I didn't include him because he was Welsh.

Just read the first bit of The Armadillo by Bishop

The Armadillo
Elizabeth Bishop
for Robert Lowell

This is the time of year
when almost every night
the frail, illegal fire balloons appear.
Climbing the mountain height,

rising toward a saint
still honored in these parts,
the paper chambers flush and fill with light
that comes and goes, like hearts.

Once up against the sky it's hard
to tell them from the stars --
planets, that is -- the tinted ones:
Venus going down, or Mars,

continued here: http://unix.cc.wmich.edu/~cooneys/poems/bishop.armadillo.html

The style feels unique, and each word hand chosen. The voice is clearly hers, and stands alone, from everyone, including her revered contemporaries. Roethke too sounds like Roethke, and Lowell, though less of a perfectionist, was still a fantastic addition to the American canon. If you compare those guys with Bukowski, or Kerouac, or even Ginsberg, who seems to be the best of their lot, though feels heavily influenced by his precursors, and often quite unpoetic, and a little too rooted in his politics, you cannot even begin to consider them beyond a culture phenomenon, and as unique artists.

[Page Sniffer]

JBI ~ I'm glad you brought up Dylan Thomas. I went to New York City -- as a hopeless romantic -- and went to the White Horse for drinks and later to Saint Vincent's Hospital (at about 3'oclock on a freezing, rainy morning) on a pilgrimage.

We read Under Milk Wood last Christmas out loud like a mini-reader's theatre. I love his use of language and the rythm patterns. It was definitely written to be read out loud and performed, and as you say for Bishop, Dylan hand picks each word and celebrates them, holds them up to chew on, taste and hear. Wales however has many, many more poets as I'm sure you already know. Dylan has just seemed to steal the limelight I think with his wonderfully bodacious visits to the US, with his oratory, and drinking exploits in the Village. I have some early Thomas, that some say is his best work.

On Bishop: I'll get some. Thanks for sharing that passage.

[_Shannon_]

I didn't say all poets who were affiliated with the Beats were bad, I just said the Beat poets tended to be. And Charles Olson wasn't a beat poet, he is generally accepted to be a second wave modernist poet.

All the poets you mentioned may have a few good works, but lets be honest, how many compare to Roethke, or Lowell, or Bishop, all of whom were writing at that time.

All kinds of people get chuked in with The Beats..or associated with the Beats....whether or not that is an appropriate tag or not. Olson sometimes gets chucked in because of Black Mountain College.

For me, Lowell and Bishop take a seriously divergent path from the groundwork which was laid by Williams in developing and pushing forward a distinctly AMerican tradition of poetry. I don't like their poetry much at all...but then again I don't like much 20th century academic poetry at all.

If those who were truly part of the Beat "movement" -which seems just sort of a silly distinction, becaue there wasn't really a common writing style or goal--but if they weren't really all that awesome- I think that they made way for people like Robert Creeley,and reintroduced poets like Oppen, Reznikoff (who is one of my very favs) and Zukofsky is laudable in and of itself.

[_Shannon_]

FWIW- Robert Lowell credits Ginsberg as a major influence for his most popular books--that because of Gisberg, Loweell saw (heard?) the benefit of not being unfailingly structred in his meter.

[JBI]

I didn't say he couldn't credit him, but somewhere mid-career Lowell, with the publication of Life Studies seems to have figured himself out, and finally created his voice. Ginsberg may be an influence, but lets be honest, the war is over, and everyone can see where he got his "unstructuredness" from. He simply took Whitman, and took out all the assonance.

[_Shannon_]

Lowell was the one who said that while he was reading his poetry aloud that he found that he would add or drop syllables, etc....and that he realised that this was precisely what Ginsberg was doing- and went with that from Life Studies onward.

I dunno- I like Ted Berrigan much more than I like Lowell, much more than Bishop- it seems to take more risks , the sonnets are just supreme.

And I guess I can just never forgive Lowell's part in the Confessional poetry-run-amuck debacle. I loathe the Confessional Poets and think that that movement is responsible for the huge influx of just mounds of truly awful poetry which abound. Everyone who ever has a bad thought thinks it's poetry worthy...but I digress.....

[JBI]

How can you defend Ginsberg, while smacking confessionals. He is grouped in with them half the time. Besides which, our own idiosyncratic tastes make no difference in the scheme.

[_Shannon_]

I am not defending Ginsberg- I think he wrote dreck-and have said so from my first post in this thread :) However I think that to dismiss the Beats catagorically is a misstep- even if for no other reasons than:
A.) really great poets get lumped together, even tangentially, with the more "core" Beats (I still feel like the Beat movement was no movement at all, as there was a lack of coherence of style or artistic philospophy--but rather anyone not writing academic poetry or literature and happened to be tied in some way with a group of friends gets chucked under the label of the Beats)
B.) the Beats were responsbile for the resurgence of really important American poetry. and
C.) Though not often all that good poetically- the Beats kept a lifeline open and blood flowing to a distincly American, non-academic tradition of poetry

[stlukesguild]

I'm somewhat interested... puzzled with this dichotomy of the Beats vs the Academics. My guess is that both terms are somewhat bandied about as a form of pejorative. Perhaps a mid-century American variant upon the Romantics vs the Classicists. I would be very interested, however, in just who or what qualifies as an "academic poet"?

[JBI]

Academic=good, Beat=loud.

[JBI]

Bam! 1000 posts - sorry for the spam, but just felt like sharing.

[_Shannon_]

Woot! Woot! On your 1000th!!!

[stlukesguild]

Academic=good, Beat=loud.

Well... I didn't quite want to go there myself, but...:nod:

[Page Sniffer]

Check out the documentary from Netflix called What Happened to Kerouac (1986). Jack reads his own work (old recordings and interviews) along with interviews of the major Beats -- Ginsburg, Snyder, Corso, Ferlinghetti, Burroughs, Holmes, Neil Cassady, Robert Creely, Diane Di Prima and Joyce Johnson. Very, very cool doc celebrating the flavor of the times. Jack's daughter is on it too. Decide for yourself.:banana:

[AxeHandle]

Kerouac was never much of a poet to begin with. He was heavily influenced by the minds around him, ie - Ferlinghetti, Burroughs, Ginsberg, Snyder, Rexroth... all fantastic poets. Kerouac's novel writing suited him fantastically, and his poetry was always a short step behind.

If you want to read, in my opinion, his best attempt at great poetry, check out his lengthy "nonsense" poem at the end of Big Sur. It's really rather good, but I think it juggles many themes and style from Ginsberg on to Snyder.

If you're an avid Kerouac reader, you already know that Jack wasn't much on confidence. He clung to those around him, mostly his mother, for attention, reinforcement, help and more times than not, a place to eat and sleep. I don't think there are many people who can truly overlook the Kerouac canon, but if he were alive today, I'm sure he wouldn't be nearly as "liked" as he portrays himself in his novels. Read any letters between Kerouac and Neal Cassady following his publishing of On The Roadand you'll see that Kerouac was infamous for his lack of awareness to those around him. It wasn't really until his coming out in Buddhism, with help from Snyder, that he really saw the world for what it was. Even then, Snyder is quoted saying he felt that Kerouac missed the mark on Buddhism (the Dharma).

Reagardless, Kerouac will forever be enshrined, I think, in the halls of great literature, and I love the mans writing deeply. Unfortunately, to even regard his poetry as decent, especially against a jury of his peers as aforementioned, is perhaps not well founded.

[quasimodo1]

http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html

[Sweets America]

http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88v/howlanniversary.html

Thanks for this.