Review of Charles Bukowski's 'Women' [SPOILER ALERT]

I just finished reading Charles Bukowski's 'Women'. Like, just finished it. Just now. For most of the book I had no idea where he was going with the whole thing... it just seemed like one graphic, semi-pornographic sexual encounter after another. I mean, obviously I knew he was going somewhere, because I've read 'Ham on Rye', and 'Post Office', but I had no idea where, or whether it would be anywhere truly interesting, and I had absolutely no inclination whatsoever to begin guessing.

I think 'Women' is by far the best of the three Bukowski books that I've read though, and it definitely resonated with me much more than the other two... the language, he is so detached. Every sexual encounter starts with his eyes roaming up some girl's legs – they're not even girls though, really, just bodies with names on them. Then she undresses and submits to him completely; “I mounted, stuck it in, and then...” is a fair summation of the end of every other chapter in this book, and there are one-hundred and four of them. He jumps from woman to woman to woman to woman, never growing attached to them, or even seeming to care when they walk out on him. At one point around the halfway mark he muses that all of his women leave him, but it is clear that this is only the case because he will take sex wherever he can get it. Only on his terms though. Only ever the way he wants it... he knows how he is, and for most of the book he is aware that he is selfish, and a bastard, and he understands why they all leave. He is seemingly at peace.

The morning hangovers and physical sickness barely seem to drain him, and the paid poetry readings that sustain his lifestyle somehow keep popping up out of nowhere, along with groupies, and fan-mail from easy women. He dismisses the men. But he hardly talks of love – he was married once, but had been in love four times. Now a dirty old man of around sixty, he dreams of the day when he is “an eighty year old fucking an eighteen year old.” Life-long dreams of a professional pervert.

This chauvinistic, evil womaniser has his run of the town for most of the book, and the thing is... and I don't know whether this thing is scary, or sobering, or humbling, or maybe just deliciously tempting in its realism... the thing is, it speaks to me. I don't stand for all men, and I'm sure there are saints out there somewhere among us, but the way Henry Chinaski (Bukowski's literary alter-ego) laps up woman after eager, fawning woman should have most straight men salivating. It's not pretty, and it's not nice, and it sure is pretty fucking uncomfortable, but he gets right to the core of it, at least for me. No wonder there is no mention of his mother... no family, no moral compass or ties to a possibly innocent past. Just a dirty old man, “sucking beer”, puking up blood through three-hundred hangovers a year.

Towards the end though, maybe the last seventy or so pages (out of three-hundred) things start to get a little clouded for Henry Chinaski. The sex is still good – in fact the whores and sluts that he so adores only become more and more sumptuous, their young flesh more and more tempting... but he has also met a girl, Sara, who touches something else in him. He doesn't say he loves her, and I trust him, he is a very honest narrator, and is frank and blunt about his feelings, both to his women, and to the reader. He doesn't love Sara, but he knows that she is 'a good woman', and this is a phrase he uses sparingly only once before. But the difference with Sara as well, is that she won't fuck him. She knows about his continuing conquests, and she suffers through his ongoing selfishness, but she always comes back, and there is something in that that strikes a chord with old, dirty Henry Chinaski. His last few sexual encounters span the whole range of women possibly conceivable: a young, nubile belly-dancer from Canada who gives him the time of his life, and gives it to him again and again; an old, haggard, sagging woman whom he loathes even before she is between his sheets, and infinitely more afterwards; a black hooker who sucks his dick terribly five minutes after meeting him in the car park of a liquor store; a ninety-pound, eighteen year old – at last. He has seen everything. Fondled every part, fucked every crevice. Still Sara waits, over Thanksgiving, Christmas, then she gives herself to him, without his asking and says, “Happy New Years Henry”; they fall asleep together.

After he accepts terrible head from the black hooker for twenty dollars, and then drives her to an intersection where she continues to hitchhike and no doubt solicit more of the same, he makes one last attempt – and there have been many beforehand – to steel his mind against any more fucking around.

“Sara was a good woman. I had to get myself straightened out. The only time a man needed a lot of women was when none of them were any good. A man could lose his identity fucking around too much. Sara deserved much better than I was giving her. It was up to me now.”

This is his final challenge to himself... three-hundred and four pages in and barely one more to go, he convinces himself that he needs to give this good woman a proper chance, because if he lets her slip away, then he will be doomed. Then another girl calls, another admirer, and this is where I was scared. Charles Bukowski was about to offer his opinion, in this last page, in one last conversation between a dirty old man and a juicy, delicious, groaning and spread-legged nineteen-year-old temptress. In the final lines of 'Woman' Charles Bukowski would decree whether, in his humble opinion, it was at all possible for a flawed man to accept the love of a good woman.

Anyone who says that Bukowski is a sexist, chauvinistic pig is probably right... but anyone who says that this is all he is is a single-minded, blind fucking moron. 'Women' is a book that is not afraid to delve past the scared facades that we put in front of ourselves to mask our true desires in our attempts to play the role of the good guy. I'm still not sure if Henry Chinaski is a good guy or not, but I am sure that he is a real guy, about as real a guy as there could possibly ever be in my eyes, and when his time came to decide whether he could be loved in the final pages of this book, my heart was in my mouth, as I felt my fate too, rested in his decision.

He sent her back. And still, there is hope yet.

Peace, Taco.

On Humility

I just went on the r/StandUpComedy subreddit and had a look at a post by a comedian who said he'd been doing comedy for about a year and was asking everyone to reply to his thread with what their biggest achievements thus far in stand up had been. Proud moments, goals for the future etc. This thread excited me because while I go onto this subreddit every now and then, I don't usually stay for very long because it seems to be mostly filled with people posting videos of gigs and asking for feedback or people linking to comedy specials by comedians that I don't find terribly hilarious... and just a quick aside: I don't have a problem with people posting footage of their gigs and asking for feedback, in fact I think it's great, but I'll get to the slight problem I have with it which may not be a problem at all but just me being a dick... in a little bit.

Anyway, so I went on to check out this thread and straight away I was pleased to see a bunch of long responses, and I started reading. After reading all comments though (only sixteen, but they were all pretty lengthy) I was a little disappointed. I had hoped to find... well actually, I don't know what I had hoped to find on here, and maybe sharing comedy advice on the internet just isn't the same as sharing it in person, but I'll say now that I didn't find what I thought I had.

To me, the way the thread came off was just a bunch of comedians, in similar positions to myself, becoming excited by the invitation to talk about themselves and the growth they have experienced in the first stages of their 'careers'. It seemed like a bunch of egos competing for screen time, basically – fevered egos, you might even say (Eh! Eh!). None of the long comments had replies underneath them, they were all just individual replies about the particular poster's achievements and goals which basically said to me that these people weren't reading here to exchange actual advice, they were just looking for a forum to gloat upon... actually I lie, there was one comment that started a conversation: one between two comics, the first comment had called a particular city's scene 'cliquey', there was a friendly disagreement, and then plans to meet up with a slightly back-peddled explanation by the original poster. Fevered egos really, but who am I to judge?

I'm not even sure about the reasons that I had for coming on to this page? I mean, to be completely honest, I had no intention of posting my 'achievements' or 'goals' on there, but not because I don't like bragging... just because I don't really care about bragging to people that are in no position to get me anything for my hard bragging work. But I had a bit of a think about the reason why some of the advice that these people were handing out for free over the internet was that I sort of half-resented, half-dismissed them as idiots. Petty. Pathetic. I found myself thinking, “who the fuck is this cocky tosser? Thinking he can dole out advice like this when he's only been doing comedy for *re-reads start of comment* TWO YEARS!!!” That may be the problem with comedy advice over the internet... it's all well and good to talk about the giving and receiving of advice in person and there is a valid point to be made about the fact that it doesn't matter whether you think a comedian is good or not, advice is advice and should be taken gratefully. The fact of the matter though, is that it is a narcissistic reflex to reject advice that comes from a source whose credibility you don't have positive proof for.

There is a reason piano teachers give recitals and put themselves last, there is a reason that past football players often slot nicely into coaching roles, and it is the same reason that I don't feel comfortable being told about 'the industry' or given tips on witing by some fevered ego sitting behind a keyboard on the other side of the world. It's because we are all the same fevered egos, and we only like to be told what to do by people we know can do it at least as well, or hopefully better, than we can. Well... I don't know, maybe you're not all that shallow. All I know is the day I can come onto a forum like this, read the comments, and take a meaningful piece of advice from something someone has said without requiring proof of their talents; on that day I will finally have learned humility.

Peace, Taco.