Lowry went to great efforts to make sure his language in Under the Volcano was as perfect as it could have been, he breaks all the rules of English just so it can flow and be alive in every sentence, I will never understand anyone who is bored by Under the Volcano
@@foljs5858 no it's not bro there are/were are plenty of "cultural" or "subtle" american writers like melville, pynchon, hemingway, cormac mcarthy,don delillo, philip roth, take ya pick etc etc you just sound like you're trying to be clever but put your foot in it
Btw Buk is/was very direct, stark, sometimes absurdish even in his style. he didn't get too much critical attention when he was around but did after his death by some apparently, and was imitated a bit. he just didn't like many (most? lol) writers of the day except for John Fante and some others. Perhaps he didn't like what he saw as literary snobs or those who beat around the bush. I get there's a fair chance you're messin about, but still a bit pretentious tbh m8
@user-ni6ou2ok6c no, he didn't know it. I'm rereading Volcano 🌋 and it's a fine book. Buk was bored because books do not have legs and so on. I understand Buk very well, and he is off concerning Lowry.
When I was a drunk, I couldn't take in Lowry. Now that I'm sober, I can admire Lowry so much more, tho he was a drunk, too. I soo understand Bukowski, but he is so wrong. Have another. Malcolm Lowry was a fantastic writer, you just have to have a mind for it.
I saw the NFB film Volcano, read Lowry`s novel, Day`s biography, Houston's film...when I finally arrived in Mexico City it was Dia del los Muertos...I even gave the Mexican woman I visited a copy of Bajo El Volcan..Lowry is a prescence that lures us..somewhere
I do admire some of Bukowski’s work, but as others have stated here, it’s quite unfortunate how ignorant and silly his remarks are here. I do think he certainly had some underlying jealousy regarding how popular and well received Under The Volcano was upon its release, while Buk struggled for years, yet that struggle made for some of Buk’s best writing. His flagrant dismissal of Lowry’s obvious talent is really embarrassing. I completely disagree with him here, Lowry had pace and plenty of “juice” in his prose, it was just presented in a different way, through symbolism and at times convoluted passages that while not Buk’s style, still described the personal existential hell of alcoholism and humanity in a strikingly original and masterful way.
At this point in his life, Bukowski was probably WAY more popular than Lowry. Say both their names to an average reader and see which they know. I'm not sure why Bukowski would be jealous. For the record, I like both writers. So I'm not trying to defend Bukowski here. But look, it's okay for a writer not to like another one. And it doesn't have to be attributed to jealousy. Bukowski probably just didn't dig the dense style, which is understandable.
Well, to not recognize the complete mastery and creativity of Malcom Lowry reveals Bukowski's profound lack of insight. Under the Volcano is unquestionably one of the masterpieces of twentieth century literature. It is breathtaking in its scope, depth, and complexity of style and composition. Clearly, Bukowski doesn't like long sentences, but there is more literary analysis than just that. Are we going to dismiss Proust based on that criteria alone? Sheer idiocy.
Lowry's novel was supposedly written more in the style of Joyce's Ulysess rather than Proust, though you wouldn't be the first to draw the similarities between their writing. Bukowski on the other hand was trying to rip off Hemingway, which explains his viewpoint in which their is so much resonance of Hemingway's philosophy of 'one true sentence'. Bukowski was a repulsive and corrosive dick, which is why readers tend to get pulled into his orbit, rubbernecks and all that we are for some tidbit of truth disguised as grit.
I love Under the Volcano, but it is unnecessarily tedious, lacking in structure and composition, and yes, I understand the artistic reasoning behind it's laboriousness but I think such dull painful reading could only be welcomed by those who feel as though suffering is an exotic, foreign land.
He was known to read his Hemingway, but he had a... conflicted relationship with Hemingway's literature. He both respected and repudiated it. You can even find some references to this relationship in a couple of Bukowski Short-stories, where he spars (respect) with someone early reminiscent of Hemingway, while being a bit jealous and highly critical (repudiation).
I like Bukowski`s work. I agree to an extent that much of Lowry`s novel is dull, but there are some great passages in "Under the Volcano"..descriptions of drunkenness and death. Lowry died too soon and accomplished too little..btw from overdosing on barbiturates...funny ending of interview
Four lines from Ivonne's description or the prison of paradise metaphor make a great book, even though long barranca pargraphs. chinaski never hangover in here
There's a difference between alcoholism and heavy drinking. Lowry was an alcoholic, buk was a heavy drinker. I don't think Lowry would be getting up at 5am to work the post office.
Thankfully not all writers follow Bukowski’s advice. Writers need to write as they need. That’s it. A lot of Bukowski’s writing is “dull shit” as he described it.
Pre-WWII authors dull shit? Fuck. What about Jack London, who's politics were socialist, and who's considered a founder of dystopian literature? Of which the genre floods the market place over a 100 years later.
I have to agree, Under the Volcano is a brilliant book but it is sometimes boring and I would find myself having to reread bits because I had lost concentration. It's interesting how Bukowski and Lowry were both tortured alcoholic writers who played on that archetype for fame, but they are very different.
i dont know why people get so salty that one writer doesn't like another. And they take offense in the tone, when they well know he was an alcoholic and visceral. Get over yourselves people.
Lowry wrote the greatest novel on an alcoholic in history. This man didn't have a thousandth of Lowry's talent. To all the fanboys and posers watching this licking Bukowski ass: He doesn't know what great writing is.
Lowry could drink and write Buk under the table, different league. Buk was an ego on steroids who wrote some fair to middling poetry in the vernacular of LA.
@@puupasiecodrowonszniejacek Buk had Hollywood celebrity status and an adoring publisher. So a lot of second-rate/filler material was included in the annual releases. I suspect he never really read Lowry. Buk had a dark humour which lifted his writing from the banal. If he'd read Lowry he would have picked up on the same dark humour from a fellow alcoholic writer.
Ich schätze Bukowskis literarische Arbeit. Langweilt mich Lowry? Natürlich nicht. Hat Lowry Bukowski gelangweilt? Das Interview deutet darauf hin; seinem Werk wäre es aber dennoch sehr wahrscheinlich zuträglich gewesen, wenn der Mut zum Lesen die Langeweile überstiegen hätte. Davon ab gibt es sehr glaubwürdig beschriebene Abende, die im Delirium mit Lowry verbracht wurden; Bukowski nächtigte derweil wahrscheinlich in schäbiger Unterkunft. Meine Wahl ist getroffen. Darauf einen Mescal.
Sadly this clip is one of the few were Bukowski comes across as flat out ignorant. For one you can immediately tell he never read Lowry's novel Under The Volcano. Yes, it certainly is of a much different pace than Bukowski's stylings, however, Under The Volcano is absolutely one of the most monumentally crushing novels ever written precisely because of the structure, pace, descriptive modes, and scope. I love Bukowski but it's sad to see him trash a work of art he obviously never read (or at least never finished) and trash a man (Malcolm Lowry) who Bukowski knew nothing about. Lowry didn't choke to death on his vomit he died of alcohol and sedative poisoning. Bukowsky and Lowry....two very great but quite different styled writers. I think in part Bukowski resented Lowry because of the critical acclaim Under The Volcano received. It just sucks because many Bukowski fans take his word as "the word". And in doing so they may miss out on one of the most intensely existential novels about the nature of man and addiction ever written. And a damn fine story as well...
What an odious and silly little drunk, dissing great writers by boringly repeating the mantra of Bim Bim Bim. Whose names are remembered? Lowry and Faulkner.
most of Lowry's stuff was unfinished, published posthumously, put together by his wife. Lowry never achieved his potential. I'm not trying to vindicate him, as I tend to agree with Bukowski, but Lowry often seems formulaic because he could never finish anything and was essentially writing the same novel again and again - a bit like Bukowski, a bit like all writers.
Under The Volcano is anything but "basic" or "formulaic" lol it's one of the greatest, most tragically beautiful, and most challenging novels ever written. It requires effort from the reader, that's why I think some people have sour grapes about it.
Lowry proved that despite drinking, he failed as an artist. Bukowski proved that he made great art with alcoholism. "Under the Volcano" would have made a good short story. But as it was, it became mostly uninspired, stupid, boring babble. “An intellectual is a man who says something simple in a difficult way. An artist is a man who says something difficult in a simple way.”
Bukowski likely simply too drunk to be able to read Lowry. Under the Volcano a brilliant book.
Yes, probably.
"What are the three secrets to great writing, Charles?"
"Bim, bim, bim!" 🤣
I agree with Bukowski on most writers, but he's got Lowry all wrong...great, great writer
'Well, you see Lowry drank too much.'
Bukowski.
Lowry went to great efforts to make sure his language in Under the Volcano was as perfect as it could have been, he breaks all the rules of English just so it can flow and be alive in every sentence, I will never understand anyone who is bored by Under the Volcano
Bukowski is an American. They're not known for their subletly or cultural capacity, except in folk/urban genres
@@foljs5858 very pretentious comment tbh
@@harrycluedo3739 But also true
@@foljs5858 no it's not bro there are/were are plenty of "cultural" or "subtle" american writers like melville, pynchon, hemingway, cormac mcarthy,don delillo, philip roth, take ya pick etc etc you just sound like you're trying to be clever but put your foot in it
Btw Buk is/was very direct, stark, sometimes absurdish even in his style. he didn't get too much critical attention when he was around but did after his death by some apparently, and was imitated a bit. he just didn't like many (most? lol) writers of the day except for John Fante and some others. Perhaps he didn't like what he saw as literary snobs or those who beat around the bush. I get there's a fair chance you're messin about, but still a bit pretentious tbh m8
This must be a case of jealousy because Under the Volcano is a masterpiece
I love this interview.
“In the words of a friend of mine, I drink to make other people interesting.”
🙄
The worst of Lowry, is leagues above the best of Bukowski.
Well Lowry is great and under the volcano is brilliant but let’s not go that far
@user-ni6ou2ok6c no, he didn't know it. I'm rereading Volcano 🌋 and it's a fine book. Buk was bored because books do not have legs and so on. I understand Buk very well, and he is off concerning Lowry.
When I was a drunk, I couldn't take in Lowry. Now that I'm sober, I can admire Lowry so much more, tho he was a drunk, too. I soo understand Bukowski, but he is so wrong. Have another. Malcolm Lowry was a fantastic writer, you just have to have a mind for it.
I saw the NFB film Volcano, read Lowry`s novel, Day`s biography, Houston's film...when I finally arrived in Mexico City it was Dia del los Muertos...I even gave the Mexican woman I visited a copy of Bajo El Volcan..Lowry is a prescence that lures us..somewhere
you're drunk, charles, go home.
I do admire some of Bukowski’s work, but as others have stated here, it’s quite unfortunate how ignorant and silly his remarks are here. I do think he certainly had some underlying jealousy regarding how popular and well received Under The Volcano was upon its release, while Buk struggled for years, yet that struggle made for some of Buk’s best writing. His flagrant dismissal of Lowry’s obvious talent is really embarrassing. I completely disagree with him here, Lowry had pace and plenty of “juice” in his prose, it was just presented in a different way, through symbolism and at times convoluted passages that while not Buk’s style, still described the personal existential hell of alcoholism and humanity in a strikingly original and masterful way.
At this point in his life, Bukowski was probably WAY more popular than Lowry. Say both their names to an average reader and see which they know. I'm not sure why Bukowski would be jealous.
For the record, I like both writers. So I'm not trying to defend Bukowski here. But look, it's okay for a writer not to like another one. And it doesn't have to be attributed to jealousy. Bukowski probably just didn't dig the dense style, which is understandable.
Well put my friend. I'll meet you at El Farolito...
pim pim pim pim pim pim -> masterpiece
Well, to not recognize the complete mastery and creativity of Malcom Lowry reveals Bukowski's profound lack of insight. Under the Volcano is unquestionably one of the masterpieces of twentieth century literature. It is breathtaking in its scope, depth, and complexity of style and composition. Clearly, Bukowski doesn't like long sentences, but there is more literary analysis than just that. Are we going to dismiss Proust based on that criteria alone? Sheer idiocy.
Lowry's novel was supposedly written more in the style of Joyce's Ulysess rather than Proust, though you wouldn't be the first to draw the similarities between their writing. Bukowski on the other hand was trying to rip off Hemingway, which explains his viewpoint in which their is so much resonance of Hemingway's philosophy of 'one true sentence'. Bukowski was a repulsive and corrosive dick, which is why readers tend to get pulled into his orbit, rubbernecks and all that we are for some tidbit of truth disguised as grit.
I love Under the Volcano, but it is unnecessarily tedious, lacking in structure and composition, and yes, I understand the artistic reasoning behind it's laboriousness but I think such dull painful reading could only be welcomed by those who feel as though suffering is an exotic, foreign land.
At last someone dares to speak out what I always felt when reading Lowry...
Painfully embarassing. Never realised Bukowski was so ignorant.
@@gordonm7038 I recognise this is a year late but what?
Books by drunks are dull. Bukowski is the exception. He's gets to the fucking POINT.
2:18 Based
He is right, Lowry has some silly metaphors…like ‘ it got dark like the house of usher’ ahahahaha like obvious drop how educated I am or what…
Bukowski must have loved Cormac McCarthy.
bim-bim-bim bim-bim-bim
I imagine he's an Ernest Hemingway fan. Either that or the 'Jack and Jill' readers.
He was known to read his Hemingway, but he had a... conflicted relationship with Hemingway's literature. He both respected and repudiated it. You can even find some references to this relationship in a couple of Bukowski Short-stories, where he spars (respect) with someone early reminiscent of Hemingway, while being a bit jealous and highly critical (repudiation).
Glory Lawry!
He should’ve reread Volcano
never liked Bukowski, but “yawned myself to shit” is the kind of funny only a maniac drunk could drum up and it is great
sounds like another one of his stories about the track.
Jim stevens Lmaoo!
I like Bukowski`s work. I agree to an extent that much of Lowry`s novel is dull, but there are some great passages in "Under the Volcano"..descriptions of drunkenness and death. Lowry died too soon and accomplished too little..btw from overdosing on barbiturates...funny ending of interview
Monumentally wrong
Four lines from Ivonne's description or the prison of paradise metaphor make a great book, even though long barranca pargraphs. chinaski never hangover in here
There's a difference between alcoholism and heavy drinking. Lowry was an alcoholic, buk was a heavy drinker. I don't think Lowry would be getting up at 5am to work the post office.
Thankfully not all writers follow Bukowski’s advice. Writers need to write as they need. That’s it. A lot of Bukowski’s writing is “dull shit” as he described it.
Anyone come here because of Bukowski and not Lowry?
ahaha spot on Buk...
If he showed a bim with juice then I'd believe it
Pre-WWII authors dull shit? Fuck. What about Jack London, who's politics were socialist, and who's considered a founder of dystopian literature? Of which the genre floods the market place over a 100 years later.
lol the interviewer so obviously disagrees with him
Rightly so.
I have to agree, Under the Volcano is a brilliant book but it is sometimes boring and I would find myself having to reread bits because I had lost concentration. It's interesting how Bukowski and Lowry were both tortured alcoholic writers who played on that archetype for fame, but they are very different.
i dont know why people get so salty that one writer doesn't like another. And they take offense in the tone, when they well know he was an alcoholic and visceral. Get over yourselves people.
If Buk, never mentioned Lowry and just talked about common mistakes young writers fall into then there's merit to his words.
Lowry wrote the greatest novel on an alcoholic in history. This man didn't have a thousandth of Lowry's talent. To all the fanboys and posers watching this licking Bukowski ass: He doesn't know what great writing is.
Lowry could drink and write Buk under the table, different league.
Buk was an ego on steroids who wrote some fair to middling poetry in the vernacular of LA.
Middling at best, and that's a charitable thing to say.
@@puupasiecodrowonszniejacek Buk had Hollywood celebrity status and an adoring publisher.
So a lot of second-rate/filler material was included in the annual releases.
I suspect he never really read Lowry.
Buk had a dark humour which lifted his writing from the banal.
If he'd read Lowry he would have picked up on the same dark humour from a fellow alcoholic writer.
Ich schätze Bukowskis literarische Arbeit.
Langweilt mich Lowry? Natürlich nicht.
Hat Lowry Bukowski gelangweilt? Das Interview deutet darauf hin; seinem Werk wäre es aber dennoch sehr wahrscheinlich zuträglich gewesen, wenn der Mut zum Lesen die Langeweile überstiegen hätte.
Davon ab gibt es sehr glaubwürdig beschriebene Abende, die im Delirium mit Lowry verbracht wurden; Bukowski nächtigte derweil wahrscheinlich in schäbiger Unterkunft.
Meine Wahl ist getroffen.
Darauf einen Mescal.
“juice”
I love Bukowski, but he is a bit of a bastard, so I'll take what he says about other authors with a grain of salt.
being a bastard alcoholic is what made him a great writer. Being alcoholics is what made other writers also great. Take them or leave them.
@@carlosparra8976 Malcolm Lowry was also a bastard alcoholic, Under the Volcano is about alcohol addiction.
Sadly this clip is one of the few were Bukowski comes across as flat out ignorant. For one you can immediately tell he never read Lowry's novel Under The Volcano. Yes, it certainly is of a much different pace than Bukowski's stylings, however, Under The Volcano is absolutely one of the most monumentally crushing novels ever written precisely because of the structure, pace, descriptive modes, and scope. I love Bukowski but it's sad to see him trash a work of art he obviously never read (or at least never finished) and trash a man (Malcolm Lowry) who Bukowski knew nothing about. Lowry didn't choke to death on his vomit he died of alcohol and sedative poisoning. Bukowsky and Lowry....two very great but quite different styled writers. I think in part Bukowski resented Lowry because of the critical acclaim Under The Volcano received. It just sucks because many Bukowski fans take his word as "the word". And in doing so they may miss out on one of the most intensely existential novels about the nature of man and addiction ever written. And a damn fine story as well...
What an odious and silly little drunk, dissing great writers by boringly repeating the mantra of Bim Bim Bim. Whose names are remembered? Lowry and Faulkner.
Bukowski is also remembered. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I bet you Bukowski sells way more books that Lowry.
It's true, most of Lowry's stuff is so basic and formulaic, puts me to sleep every time.
most of Lowry's stuff was unfinished, published posthumously, put together by his wife. Lowry never achieved his potential. I'm not trying to vindicate him, as I tend to agree with Bukowski, but Lowry often seems formulaic because he could never finish anything and was essentially writing the same novel again and again - a bit like Bukowski, a bit like all writers.
Lowry was an undisciplined writer, but readable nonetheless.
Are you fucking joking??? But down the Bukowski and actually try reading Under The Volcano. It may be a bit challenging for you though....
Under The Volcano is anything but "basic" or "formulaic" lol it's one of the greatest, most tragically beautiful, and most challenging novels ever written. It requires effort from the reader, that's why I think some people have sour grapes about it.
Bukowski never impressed me much.
What makes this juice head think he's better than Lowry.
Blah, blah, blah...
Lowry proved that despite drinking, he failed as an artist. Bukowski proved that he made great art with alcoholism. "Under the Volcano" would have made a good short story. But as it was, it became mostly uninspired, stupid, boring babble.
“An intellectual is a man who says something simple in a difficult way. An artist is a man who says something difficult in a simple way.”