This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
As an anthology, The Portable Beat Reader excellently showcases the 'best' work of 'The Beat Writers' of the 1950’s and later. Its contents include poems, short stories, and selections from lengthier works. The title of the book probably accurately describes its content. I read the book as a part of required reading for a class in which I enrolled. Beat Writers have never resonated with me and I generally dislike their work. I took the class hoping that if I understood the work and the creators of it a little better, I might come to understand and like their works. Both the class, the professor, and this book thoroughly explained Beat Writing and its particular niche in literature. The teacher presented the writers, which he thinks highly of, as "ahead of their time." Frankly, for me, their nichę is still the trash-can. Now that I understand them, I dislike them even more than I had. I do have more accurate insights into these writers and this is what I now understand about them. 1. They were a group of self-righteous and arrogant people blessed with natural talent but too lazy to do the work that would develop their talent into actual literary skill. 2. Instead of working on becoming serious writers, they chose to admire their own drivel and then fruitlessly justify it to people who actually understand what good writing is. They did succeed in self-delusion, however, and succeeded in finding publishers with poor judgment. 3. They regularly and vociferously bemoaned how misunderstood they were. This perception of their work shows that, in addition to being arrogant, they were delusional. 4. Some writers today even attempt this same kind of poor craftsmanship. Avoid them! Even poor writers are better than writers who believe themselves good in spite of the evidence.
What these writers needed rather than hapless publishers and foolish book-buyers was a qualified sophomore high school composition teacher, a different occupation that they'd actually be good at, a lesson in the difference between talent and vanity, and a good stout spanking. ( )
Poets, drug addicts, criminals, alcoholics, hedonists, ne'er-do-wells, agitators, college dropouts, social revolutionaries; the Beats were the voice of the Lost Generation born (mostly) between two world wars, looking for fresh artistic outlets and ideas away from those approved by contemporary academe. They found them. ( )
A really nice sampling of “beat” literature! Sort of like a greatest hits compilation! Parts 1-3 were full of writings that I love, and that were wonderful to revisit! I especially enjoyed reading the "Joan Anderson" piece! Part 4 fell pretty flat for me, as did part 6 and the appendix. But Part 5 was my joy! The writings in it gave me the feeling of the people on the periphery of the Beats - the children, lovers, spouses, etc.! I really glorify and romanticize many of the Beat authors and literature, and this section grounded me a bit, showing some of the real consequences of that lifestyle and movement. Strong stuff. And strong book! ( )
So you have been sitting around the house wondering what to do? Smoking some reefer and listening to jazz? Then must be just about time for you to flip through The Portable Beat Reader. It gives you a good glimpse at all the usual subjects: Burroughs, Kerouac, Ginsberg, etal...and also may give you a glimpse into some you may not have known: DiPrima, Corso, Casady. Overall you would be much better served by picking up some favorite pieces by the ones you enjoy, but half the fun in life is picking up on something you have never read before and digging it. There can be no better place for an introduction to beat writing of any sort than right here...Now go throw on your Bud Powell record and use that LP cover for something besides storing an album. Groovy ( )
We were so many, We were working as one, We were miles of moiling wheat In a sizzling summer's heat. But now we are scattered And flung far apart, But you and I still live as one Through coals in the heart. And if anything is left Of the coal in the soul, Oh, flash it to me.
--Ed Sanders, "Keeping the Issues Alive" (Song)
Dedication
THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED
TO MY DAUGHTERS
MALLAY AND NORA
First words
[Introduction] Earlier in the history of American literature, the novelist Henry James acknowledged in his biography of Nathaniel Hawthorne that "the best things come, as a general thing, from the talents that are members of a group; every man works better when he has companions working in the same line, and yielding the stimulus of suggestion, comparison, emulation."
The poet Gary Snyder once joked there was no Beat Generation - it consisted of only three or four people, and four people don't make up a generation.
)
)
Google Books — Loading...
Wikipedia in English (6)
1
I read the book as a part of required reading for a class in which I enrolled. Beat Writers have never resonated with me and I generally dislike their work. I took the class hoping that if I understood the work and the creators of it a little better, I might come to understand and like their works. Both the class, the professor, and this book thoroughly explained Beat Writing and its particular niche in literature. The teacher presented the writers, which he thinks highly of, as "ahead of their time."
Frankly, for me, their nichę is still the trash-can.
Now that I understand them, I dislike them even more than I had.
I do have more accurate insights into these writers and this is what I now understand about them.
1. They were a group of self-righteous and arrogant people blessed with natural talent but too lazy to do the work that would develop their talent into actual literary skill.
2. Instead of working on becoming serious writers, they chose to admire their own drivel and then fruitlessly justify it to people who actually understand what good writing is. They did succeed in self-delusion, however, and succeeded in finding publishers with poor judgment.
3. They regularly and vociferously bemoaned how misunderstood they were. This perception of their work shows that, in addition to being arrogant, they were delusional.
4. Some writers today even attempt this same kind of poor craftsmanship. Avoid them! Even poor writers are better than writers who believe themselves good in spite of the evidence.
What these writers needed rather than hapless publishers and foolish book-buyers was a qualified sophomore high school composition teacher, a different occupation that they'd actually be good at, a lesson in the difference between talent and vanity, and a good stout spanking. (