5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A fresh look at a worn subject, January 11, 2006
This review is from: Charles Bukowski (Hardcover)
With so many works on the life of Bukowski out there, I was skeptical about this new biography. However, I have read many other good bios by Miles, and was looking forward to this one. It did not leave me disappointed.
The best way to get to know Bukowski is through his numerous autobiographical writings, but I enjoyed this independent take on his life. Unlike Cherkovski's biography of Buk, this book is written by someone who was not intimately familiar with the man. That, in and of itself, was refreshing. Miles is a competent biographer, and at times his resourcefulness for following through with sources and information really come through in the book. The reward for the reader is some new information on Buk that I hadn't read before elsewhere.
The book does have some weaknesses. This book does pull from most of the expected sources a Buk reader would expect, like "Ham on Rye" and interviews, so some of it is repetitious. But Bukowski teetered on the edge of vagrancy most of his life, so you can imagine tracking down a paper trail of facts after his death is not an easy task. Also, at times the author, I think, makes some stretches in his conclusions. But on the whole I thought it was a fresh and balanced look at the life of Bukowski. I think that this will become the preferred biography of Buk over the Cherkovski biography.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Not great, March 12, 2006
This review is from: Charles Bukowski (Hardcover)
I'm a huge Bukowski fan. This is the worst biography about Bukowski that I've read.
There were a few interesting things that were uncovered through research - histories of some of Buk's women, for example. Unfortunately, there were far too many case where the author jumps around in time, for no good reason. He'll be talking about Bukowski publishing a book in the 70s and then jump back and have a few sentences about 66 when Bukowski did something strange when he was drunk. C'mon! If there were good dramatic reason for it (the Godfather films, for example) I'm all for it. Here is just seems sloppy.
This is an example of how the author figures out if something really happened or not (I'm paraphrasing here): "Bukowski wrote about this a few different times, so it must be at least somewhat true!" Thanks pal, I could've figured that one out! The author does this repeatedly and it gets tiring. Sometimes, the author tracks down someone who was actually there, but not often.
I really only gave this 2 stars because it's about BUKOWSKI, which is welcome. I could even tolerate the weird "proving" of events. But I cannot stand the jumping around, it's distracting. Peace.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Could be a lot better, May 10, 2009
I've read all of Bukowski's prose and about a third of his poetry, as well as a number of biographical works on Buk. Miles' bio has its moments, but it is nowhere near a definitive examination, or even record, of Charles Bukowski's life. The pluses are in the sections where Miles relates Buk to other writers, and to a lesser degree, where he enumerates Buk's influences, although these efforts do not go far enough in showing specific connections. Anyone who has read Bukowski has a fair sense of his life, since the work is so autobiographical. Simply laying out the events in Buk's life is a little redundant. That's where Miles' interpretation and correlation to literature and the wider world pay dividends. Even more would have been better.
The troubling parts are the sloppiness, unevenness, and self-contradiction. Names are misspelled (Crotti/Crotty), words misused, and details presented inconsistently. Perhaps these are oversights that slip into any work of a certain length. If so, an editor could easily have tidied up these errors. Left to stand, they raise questions about the accuracy of the work.
It isn't hard to tell which parts of the story Miles enjoyed writing. Bukowski's youth was not one of them, which gets the book off to a sluggish start. By the time Buk hits the road, Miles starts having more fun, and his prose becomes more lively and fluid.
For the life of him, however, Miles simply can't decide whether Buk's autobiographical writing is fifty percent, seventy-five percent, ninety, or ninety-five percent fact, with the remaining percentage embellishment. He give all four percentages. His better calls come when he addresses the factuality of individual works or incidents.
Worst of all is Miles' flat and repeated assertion that Bukowski was a misogynist. No argument, the guy was damaged where relations with other humans was concerned. Neither his father nor his mother offered healthy models for his social development. Buk's abnegation of social contact was a barometer of his inadequacy in relating to other people as much as it was his intellectual contempt for the trivialities of human existence. The late initiation of sexual relations with women and the very late blossoming of his sex life -- both well documented by Miles -- are the key indicators of both Buk's emotional disadvantages and his lifelong growth in relating to women. For all Buk's whores and one-night stands, he maintained long relationships with Jane Cooney Baker and Linda King. In later life, he settled down with Linda Beighle. Despite their differences, the nasty fights, and numerous break-ups, Buk finally matured enough to overcome his own debilities and make a home life with one woman. Not a perfect man by any means, but one who at least faced his deficiencies and grew.
MIles gives the end of Bukowski's life short shrift, especially the involvement with Buddhism. Further, John Martin, Bukowski's publisher and sustainer, doesn't get as much attention as deserved. If Bukowski's women went through a lot, what did poor Mr. Martin, a Christian Scientist and teetotaler, endure?
In sum, this bio reads something like a fan's blog. It's not that Miles knows nothing about Bukowski. He appears to have read and enjoyed the bulk of Buk's catalog. Rather it appears he was willing to do enough to get by but not enough to create a polished and definitive work. Looking at his other titles, Mr. Miles appears to a writer looking for topics that sell books more than a writer out to create works of substance.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No