Bukowski hated dealing with people. He wrote a poem about murdering a young admirer who approached him at the race track. In his letters he constantly complained about people mailing him poetry and expecting him to read it. As soon as he had enough money to stop giving readings, he did.
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "ruperthowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Your fellow LA poet Bukowski had to deal with a lot of crazy people > too. And it took him quite a long time to make any money from his > poems. People didn't tend to buy poetry in such large numbers. > Eventually he started writing novels, a more commercial and accessible > form, he got published because of his notoriety as a poet and the > beauty of his writing, and the cash started coming in. He still wrote > the poems and dealt with the crazy people, partly because he loved it, > partly because it was just an integral part of the way he chose to > live his life and make his art. > > "The nine-to-five is one of the greatest atrocities sprung upon > mankind. You give your life away to a function that doesn't interest > you. This situation so repelled me that I was driven to drink, > starvation, and mad females, simply as an alternative." > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "ractalfece" <john@> wrote: > > > > I see the philosophical difference. I understand starving for art. > > Knut Hamsun's "Hunger". Great book. But here's the difference > > between Knut and me. I'm starving and dealing with people. Why > > should I have to accept the hardships of fame without compensation? > > > > I don't. That's why I can't guarantee in the future you'll be able to > > see my work without paying. > > > > - john@ - > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jen Proctor" <proctorjen@> > > wrote: > > > > > > I'm sorry that you've had hard financial times. I could go into the > > > financial straits my family and I have endured as well, but I don't > > > think that's the point. I don't think the hardship of living out of a > > > car is still any kind of justification that art is best served within > > > commodity culture. > > > > > > I'm not saying that YOU should remove your work from commodity > > > culture. That's not my argument - you should do whatever you feel is > > > right for your work and your life, and I completely respect that. I > > > just take issue with the notion that asking viewers to pay the > > > individual maker for online video is any kind of revolution or, > > > ultimately, a viable solution. > > > > > > It's simply a philosophical disagreement - power to ya to do whatever > > > is right for you. I just can't guarantee that I'll pay to watch your > > work. > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "ractalfece" <john@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I guess my point regarding Information Dystopia is that as > > much as > > > > > I'd like to see artists better compensated for their work, whether > > > > > through public funding or individual donations, as requested > in the > > > > > video, the disconnect from this larger history makes the call for > > > > > compensation feel more like hubris than a revolution. The > > situation we > > > > > are in as artists on the web is nothing new in terms of trying > > to make > > > > > money. To me, as Rupert has stated earlier, the greater > > revolution of > > > > > the web is in the possibilities for removing our work from > commodity > > > > > culture - making the work free, accessible, open, and remixable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jen, watch this video response I did to Mark Horowitz's "7 Days in a > > > > Sentra" ad campaign. > > > > > > > > Mark Horriblewitz's video: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eMXE2Z58QI > > > > > > > > My response: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHFPsx_7id0 > > > > > > > > Then tell me about removing my work from commodity culture. > > > > > > > > - john@ - > > > > > > > > > >
