John Kerouac

To say he only "typed" was a pretty facile analysis on Capote's part. That's not to say that Capote isn't talented in his own right.

Kerouac's pieces were primarily visceral. This was not by mistake. His conception of "Spontaneous Prose" was meant to foster such characteristics. His style was heavily influenced by trappings of his manner of living. (free thought, Jazz, Benzedrine, etc). He did a fantastic job of presenting an interesting perspective on America based on his time spent traveling. During his time spent at Columbia University he was exposed to various "intellectual" works and concepts. He says as much by way of allusions to such things mentioned in "On The Road". It's in his seminal work (On The Road) that he juxtaposes such esteemed, and oft haughty, concepts that he's been exposed in school with the people/places he came across while hitchhiking. The people he met and befriended in real life are the obvious inspirations for characters like Carlo Marx, Dean Moriarty, et al.

What I see when I read his novels is a smart and talented guy who was in constant search of authenticity in lieu of the detached intellectual life he was exposed to. I'm not surprised so many young people see him as "deep" considering he presented his readers with very human, accessible characters while also musing on about his own place in the world. Some people call him a philosopher while others don't. I'd say both view points are applicable. What qualifies someone as a philosopher? Academic pedantry within the field of philosophy? Thinking about things on more than a surface level? I'd say both. He was a middle class American who took it upon himself to wander the earth and react to/observe the things that surrounded him. Sometimes he did this with elation. Other times sadness. These reactions and observations were never made to dazzle literary critics by utilizing lingual/stylistic acrobatics. He also never attempted to intimidate his audience with purposefully complex concepts that were simply abstractions of authentic experiences and feelings. His literary works were just manifestations of his mind meant to be as authentic as possible. This is demonstrated by both style and content which were intertwined in order to best capture what he was trying to say.

Yep. Kerouac's prose and poetry feel so immediate and unworked. I can understand why someone wouldn't like it, but the almost conversational quality of his writing it the perfect antidote to overworked and often pretentious academic writing. It just makes sense on an intuitive level to me.

And his jazz poetry albums are great too

Kerouac was a honest fella. There are many better writers who aren't honest.

I'm halfway through On the Road, and I must say, I really don't like it.

I would have liked to hear some more about what his experiences meant to him, or what his philosophies on life were, but it was pretty much 'I did x. Then I did x. Then he did x. The I did x. The we did x. Then she did x. Then I did x'

The prose isn't even good.

Perhaps I'm missing the point.. But I'm putting this down there with Salughterhouse Five right now.

Hack

Good poet and I liked a few of his books. On the Road is worth reading once. He really captured that desire to be free and the reality that no one ever will be entirely free.

There's something to be said about the kind of man who would rather always be traveling that staying in one place.

Now that i've finished a few of his books I probably won't read any more.

thanks for the thoughtful post

>it's another "tell me what to think" thread
Kys

Little to no substance. Relies on "wows" and "wahs" and "At this moment I realized that..." to make the reader feel that's he's unto some kind of truth or great discovery, before using buddhism and mystical discourse as a stage ploy, to pull it off. Most of his prose is garbage. He's somewhat bearable in translation. Often narrates as if his narration was deliberately leaving something out, to give an air of mystery to the fact that a bunch of young men are trying to "get their kicks".

The only interesting parts are reported speech of other people, and a few scenes, the better one being that of a girl in a bus talking about drinking pop every sunday.

Avoid this author.

Honestly, On The Road is overrated. Kerouac's best book is The Subterraneans - it's much tighter, the prose more developed, and works much better.

read 'On the Road' when i was about 16 and loved it. I can;t remember much now but it was one of those books that made me realize the possibilities of the novel. THis is after having read almost solely 19th century English novels that all seemed so mundane and monotone.

You read 19th century anglo garbage literature and somehow thought it was better to read its degenerate 20th century offspring?

Yeh where I live and went to school Dickens, George Eliot,Brontes, Austen (not Victorian, but you know...) are considered unquestionable canonical greats. Kerouac seemed so...fun in comparison.

He's not a fraud, just stupid. He's not pulling a trick, he really believes "he's unto some kind of truth or great discovery". You're supposed to read him as a tragedy.

I would "fuck" him 2bh. He's like a friendly, literary Chad.

You too can be a not particularly good writer and impact literature profoundly and forever.

>he's this intimidated by people having different opinions

I read On the Road when I was around 16 and miserable and it made me more depressed and then I got addicted to heroin

Damn I hate it when books make you fuck up your own life and do hard drugs, right? I watched the matrix once and it made me a sex addict.

nice