Jack Kerouac - In Defence Of A Great American Writer.

[brucebond007]

cancelled thread...

[PeterL]

I can understand you thinking what you do about Kerouac, but some of his best writing is of things that should be experienced rather than simply read about.

A lot of people criticize his writing for technical reasons, but I think that he was a competent writer, who was better than some big name writers now like George R. R. Martin and Gaiman, just to cite two.

[brucebond007]

Curious as to which things you are referring to (better experienced than read about)?

[PeterL]

Curious as to which things you are referring to (better experienced than read about)?

I was thinking especially of On the Road. I read OTR after I had hitchhiked across the U.S.A., and found the experience to be better that=n the read; although my experiences were not identical. The same is true of some of The Dharma Bums and some of his other books. Seriously, can anyone prefer reading about such things to actually doing them?

[dfloyd]

I have only read On the Road, purportedly his most significant work. But Kerouac cannot be placed in the pantheon of Mark Twain, Jack London, Ernest Hemingway, Sinclair Lewis, John Steinbeck, F. Scott Fitzgerald etc. etc. etc. as the King of Siam used to say.

[Paulclem]

A lot of people criticize his writing for technical reasons, but I think that he was a competent writer, who was better than some big name writers now like George R. R. Martin and Gaiman, just to cite two.

I think he's a competent writer too. George RR Matin is also competent, but sometims excellent. His vampire book - Fevre Dream was excellent, and certainly better written than either On The Road or The Dharma Bums - both of which I liked.

Just to add - does he need defending? His reputation is established, and the books recognised as an important aspect of US culture.

[dfloyd]

I would argue that while he is interesting to read he was not a part of any mainstream American culture. His dying of cihrosis of the liver, after a life time of drinking, sets him apart from all aspects of cultural America. He was to America, perhaps, as Benny Hill was to England.

[Paulclem]

I would argue that while he is interesting to read he was not a part of any mainstream American culture. His dying of cihrosis of the liver, after a life time of drinking, sets him apart from all aspects of cultural America. He was to America, perhaps, as Benny Hill was to England.

Not sure about that - a literary equvalent of the road movie? I think that is part of the US tradition.

[Alexander III]

I would argue that while he is interesting to read he was not a part of any mainstream American culture. His dying of cihrosis of the liver, after a life time of drinking, sets him apart from all aspects of cultural America. He was to America, perhaps, as Benny Hill was to England.

Because Faulkner, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Poe and Jack London are noted for their ascetic lifestyles...

[OrphanPip]

I would argue that while he is interesting to read he was not a part of any mainstream American culture. His dying of cihrosis of the liver, after a life time of drinking, sets him apart from all aspects of cultural America. He was to America, perhaps, as Benny Hill was to England.

What does being part of the mainstream matter? Plus, he was the child of immigrant parents who grew up in a working class neighbourhood, his experiences were those of a number of Americans.

[Rores28]

To me he is overrated, not bad mind you. But I agree that he is not in the same league as fitzgerald, hemingway, blah blah blah.

There is actually a pretty funny, if not a little tedious, parody of his writing style in Alan Moore's "The Black Dossier." Five pages of which are devoted to an excerpt from Sal Paradyses book "The Crazy Wide Forever"

Pick it up the next time your in BandN and give it a skim.

[MarkBastable]

I think he's an important and influential writer, but not actually a very good one.

But, dfloyd, if you judge writers by whether you approve of their lifestyle, you're into a process that'll lead to the downgrading of a hell of a lot of classic literature.

And that's assuming it's specifically your approval that we go by. Start consulting a few other readers on their views of how writers should live and we could end up with no books to read at all. I, for instance, insist that writers should die of cirrhosis of the liver, preferably with a side of tertiary syphilis, and I will not take seriously any work produced otherwise.

[Desolation]

I've always thought that the life of a writer was irrelevant. Even if most of their writing is about the way they lived their life.

Whether or not Jack is in the same category as Hemingway and Fitzgerald is also, to me, completely irrelevant. That's completely subjective. They're all classic American writers who are firmly placed in the canon. In some ways, Kerouac will always stand out to me as the most important writer that I've ever stumbled across. He made me dream, he made literature breathe for me. My admiration for every single other writer is a direct result of Kerouac grabbing my imagination. Maybe now, in the years gone by since I first read On the Road, I enjoy the writings of Hemingway more...I might rank For Whom the Bell Tolls over On the Road in my list of favorite novels, even. But nothing that I've ever read or ever will read can have the same power on me that Jack did when I first discovered him. He was my first love in literature. And I know that many other people my age can say the exact same thing. He opens the doors for the misplaced into the vast bounties of literature. That alone should seal his importance and justify his legacy.

[outer space]

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kp7u3haOh41qzjiplo1_400.jpg


but seriously, was he really more than just some cool guy who wrote about smoking weed and being cool. I mean On the Road is a fun read, but I do not think he was the brilliant writer hordes of preteens think he is. It's not just that he wrote his book on amphetamines, it's that the writing itself is uninteresting. Cool he hitchhiked around America and was friends with a crazy guy but the sentences themselves are nothing spectacular. I've never read anything by him where I had to keep re-reading passages because of how amazing and moving they were. I mean his entire "legacy" is based around the notion that "cool is timeless" and people back then were hip and smoked giant joints rolled in newspaper. Great he captured a unique perspective of Americana, but his books are still fiction and by general literary standard he doesn't quite cut it.

[brucebond007]

I was thinking especially of On the Road. I read OTR after I had hitchhiked across the U.S.A., and found the experience to be better that=n the read; although my experiences were not identical. The same is true of some of The Dharma Bums and some of his other books. Seriously, can anyone prefer reading about such things to actually doing them?

Oh, now I see. I couldn't agree more. But, growing up in Australia OTR offered a pretty exciting insight into a slice of America that was a long, long ways away...


I have only read On the Road, purportedly his most significant work. But Kerouac cannot be placed in the pantheon of Mark Twain, Jack London, Ernest Hemingway, Sinclair Lewis, John Steinbeck, F. Scott Fitzgerald etc. etc. etc. as the King of Siam used to say.

Again, we come down to personal preferences...For my mind I can't think of anything more boring than having to read Steinbeck. But I find Kerouac's work fascinating.


Just to add - does he need defending? His reputation is established, and the books recognised as an important aspect of US culture.

Clearly he does need defending - just read some of these damning posts. Also, the reason why I thought he needed defending in the first place was having to experience the endless high-handed mockery of literature buffs who would look at you like some kind of peasant when you said you liked Kerouac...


I think he's an important and influential writer, but not actually a very good one.

But, dfloyd, if you judge writers by whether you approve of their lifestyle, you're into a process that'll lead to the downgrading of a hell of a lot of classic literature.

If we condemned great writers for being alcoholics then we wouldn't have many great writers - Hemingway and Faulkner to begin with...

[Paulclem]

Clearly he does need defending - just read some of these damning posts. Also, the reason why I thought he needed defending in the first place was having to experience the endless high-handed mockery of literature buffs who would look at you like some kind of peasant when you said you liked Kerouac...

:biggrin5:

Yes - I meant his reputation as a US icon is established.

I'm glad I read him.

[brucebond007]

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kp7u3haOh41qzjiplo1_400.jpg


but seriously, was he really more than just some cool guy who wrote about smoking weed and being cool. I mean On the Road is a fun read, but I do not think he was the brilliant writer hordes of preteens think he is. It's not just that he wrote his book on amphetamines, it's that the writing itself is uninteresting. Cool he hitchhiked around America and was friends with a crazy guy but the sentences themselves are nothing spectacular. I've never read anything by him where I had to keep re-reading passages because of how amazing and moving they were. I mean his entire "legacy" is based around the notion that "cool is timeless" and people back then were hip and smoked giant joints rolled in newspaper. Great he captured a unique perspective of Americana, but his books are still fiction and by general literary standard he doesn't quite cut it.

I really don't get this whole focus on Kerouac and 'cool'. I never read Kerouac because he was cool. I read him because I thought he was exciting to read. Part of what I liked about Kerouac was exactly that I didn't have to re-read every sentence. Perhaps this is his appeal? His writing flows effortlessly. But regarding the whole 'cool' thing I don't think you can just write a him off on that account. I don't think Kerouac was trying to be cool. He was just being himself. It's a bit like Bukowski mocking Kerouac because he 'looked like someone out of a western movie'. What's a man to do of he happens to be handsome? Make himself ugly to gain credibility?


:biggrin5:

Yes - I meant his reputation as a US icon is established.

I'm glad I read him.

Agreed.

[kinesj]

I can understand you thinking what you do about Kerouac, but some of his best writing is of things that should be experienced rather than simply read about.

A lot of people criticize his writing for technical reasons, but I think that he was a competent writer, who was better than some big name writers now like George R. R. Martin and Gaiman, just to cite two.

If you like Kerouac, give Thomas Wolfe a shot. There are some definitely stylistic similiarities as Wolfe was an influence on Kerouac, but I'm of the opinion that Wolfe was a better writer.

[JBI]

Meh, he's what losers who smoke pot in high school read. Not cool enough to blaze with the cool kids, but not lame enough to not blaze.

[PeterL]

If you like Kerouac, give Thomas Wolfe a shot. There are some definitely stylistic similiarities as Wolfe was an influence on Kerouac, but I'm of the opinion that Wolfe was a better writer.

I like some of Wolfe's writing, and I think that the late, great Dr Hunter S. Thompson was sometimes really great, but he wasn't consistent. Wolfe may have been better in the technical details, but Kerouac caught the flavor much better.