• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

RHETORICAL THEORY CONCERNING THE MAKING OF A WRITER IN THE POETRY OF CHARLES BUKOWSKI A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES BY WILLIAM WALKER WOODS, B.A., M.A. DENTON, TEXAS DECEMBER 1992 for Stephanie, my wife, and Thomas, my son, with thanks and love iii RHETORICAL THEORY CONCERNING THE MAKING OF A WRITER IN THE POETRY OF CHARLES BUKOWSKI WILLIAM WALKER WOODS DECEMBER 1992 More than any other contemporary American poet, Charles Bukowski devotes the majority of his poetry to the topic of being a writer. As rhetorical theory must ultimately concern itself with the making of a writer, Bukowski's poetry frequently is concerned with the rhetorical theory of invention. He returns again and again to what seems to be his favorite topic, the early training of the writer, the writer's place in the world around him or her, the influences upon the writer, th·e pains and pleasures of being a working writer, and so on. Bukowski can be studied as a poet who constantly offers guidance and advice to the aspiring writer, and in this regard acts in the role of a rhetorician, not unlike Aristotle, Quintilian, Cicero, Blair, or I. A. Richards. Beneath the veneer of Bukowski's drunken brawls, charity wards, and skidrow alleys, there lies a very established and sound rhetorical theory which can be applied to the college composition course, a theory which calls for extensive early training and inspiration on the part of the writer, practice and endurance, a clear, direct style appropriate for any writing occasion, and the emergence of enjoyment in the writing process. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION iii ABSTRACT iv Chapter I. INTRODUCTION: BUKOWSKI AS RHETORICIAN 1 II. LITERARY RENEGADE AND POET LAUREATE TO THE LOWLIFE. 21 III. THE LIFE AND TIMES OF BUKOWSKI 43 IV. THE EARLY TRAINING OF A WRITER 62 v. AGAINST THE PEDANTS AND FALSE WRITERS. 92 VI. THE PAINS AND PLEASURES OF BEING A WRITER. 121 VII. THE WORKING LIFE OF A WRITER ••••••• 155 VIII. PRACTICAL ADVICE TO THE ASPIRING WRITER •• 174 IX. BUKOWSKI'S RHETORICAL THEORY AND THE COLLEGE COMPOSITION COURSE •••• 217 WORKS CITED •••••••••••••• 228 V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: BUKOWSKI AS RHETORICIAN . ,:. More than any other contemporary American author, Charle� Bukowski, who remains an avant-garde lege�d_amo�g open-microphone-poetry-readings and the "little" literary magazine circuit,,, devotes the·•, l majority of his writing to , ('' � \. -- the topic of being a writer. As rhetorical theory must : )' ultimately concern itself with the making of .. a writer, I , �, - we can study Bukowski's poetry,'1 for its rhetorical theory of invention. Though his numerous works of poetry deal with a wide range �f _topics--political:·u·; events, growing up, relationships, lost loves (basically, to all the traditional literary themes)--Bukowski returns again and again to what seems to be his favorite bopic, the training. , l and making of a writer, the writer's place in the world aroun him, the infl e ce� pon writer, the p �_ � � � ��� �ins and pleasures of being a writer, and so on. Jim Cain argues that Bukowski constantly., offers. " ,� - his readers a chronology of the physical, psychological, and, to a greater degree, aesthetic' development't A • 0 of the writer (9). In short, it seems to me that much more� ..,, t "' than any;i other contemporary 1 2 writer, Bukowski can be studied as a poet who constantly offers guidance and advice to the aspiring writer, much in the tradition of that branch of rhetorical theory concerned with such topics, that branch of rhetorical theory called literary rhetoric. Admittedly, Bukowski himself has often scorned and mocked anything quite so pedantic as rhetorical theory. Bukowski, whom Molly Haskell calls the "West Coast poet and patron saint of drinking writers, or writing drinkers" (11), offers guidance and advice which is a far cry from, say, a Quintilian or a Burke. Bukowski prefers to be inspired by great quantities of alcohol, hapless relationships with down-and-out skidrow girlfriends and wives, and winning afternoons at the local race track. Nonetheless, Bukowski works from a very traditional theory of composition heavily influenced by classical and modern rhetoricians, even if he himself would claim otherwise. In this dissertation I plan to arrive at his rhetorical theory concerning the actual making of a writer. By carefully describing the proper steps one must take to become a true writer, Bukowski in essence can be viewed as a modern rhetorician. Before arriving at Bukowski's rhetorical theory, I should first briefly explain the difference between classical rhetoric derived from Aristotle and literary 3 rhetoric concerned with the making of a writer, framing them historically. Only by first proving a distinction does exist between these two schools of rhetorical theory can I next move on to the various poems of Bukowski which in fact work within a long tradition of literary rhetorical theory. In classical rhetorical theory, as we know, rhetoricians dealt only with the art of spoken persuasion. It is not the purpose of this chapter to enter the academic fray upon the debate of what is "true" rhetoric and what is, according to George Kennedy, "secondary" rhetoric. Aristotle's distinctions in his Rhetoric and in his Poetics seemingly settled firmly any questions concerning the dominion of rhetoric and the dominion of belles lettres. Nonetheless, suffice it to say that as far back as Aristotle, for every treatise we find on rhetoric of the spoken persuasion school, we find parallel treatises on rhetoric of the literary tradition. As for the relationship between the two types of rhetoric, the primary rhetoric of spoken persuasion and the secondary rhetoric of poetics, according to Kennedy, "Within the pure classical tradition that relationship is rather clear, even if not understood" (114-15). In Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition, Kennedy explains that in the classical world many different 4 arts were acknowledged, some more basic than others. He writes: As seen in the so-called liberal arts of later times, basic arts were regarded as limited to grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic, which are the three arts of communication, and geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, and music, but certain other arts are probably nearly primary, including physics and medicine. Some arts, however, are clearly secondary developments, built upon one or more of the basic arts. Secondary arts include some of the noblest forms, such as architecture, which involves both physics and geometry. In the purest classical tradition, poetics, or the art of poetry, is also a secondary art which uses the three arts of communication --grammar, rhetoric, dialectic--and also uses music in the creation of a text. (115) For Kennedy, then, what I term a literary rhetoric concerned with the making of a writer is "the study of the specific compositional needs of the poet working within the poetic genres" (115). Kennedy further argues that Aristotle viewed rhetoric as an art of communication, parallel to dialectic, whereas he viewed poetics as a productive art, like painting (116). It is crucial at this point that I further clarify my own distinctions between poetics proper and literary rhetoric. I am not suggesting that the finished product, such as Robinson Jeffers' poem "Rock and Hawk" is rhetoric (though Kenneth Burke and I. A. Richards might disagree); but if, for example, Jeffers had written a poem on how he created the poem, or even further, what steps one must take in order to be a poet who could write "Rock and Hawk," 5 then that would be an example of what I call literary rhetoric, even though this second poem on the making of a writer has nothing to do with Kennedy's art of spoken persuasion. In short, any work which takes on as its primary goal the training of a writer can be classified as literary rhetorical theory. Can we find this sort of literary rhetorical theory in the classical texts? Undoubtedly Aristotle's Poetics acts in this fashion, but even further, I would argue so does his Rhetoric. As Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg have pointed out in The Rhetorical Tradition: Aristotle's division between rhetoric and poetic usefully reveals the different purposes, effects, and methods of the two realms of discourse. Nonetheless, from Aristotle's time to our own, rhetoric and poetic have been closely linked. (912) Though Aristotle calls rhetoric "the counterpart of Dialectic," concerned with discussing statements and maintaining them, defending ourselves or attacking others (Rhetoric 19) and poetics "the art of imitation" intended to please an audience (Poetics 223), Friedrich Solmsen notes that the two pieces work very well together: For generations after him Aristotle was to be an authority in both fields; his name and prestige were to do their part in drawing the two subjects together. One reason for this is that poetry serves Aristotle in the Rhetoric as a mine of illustrative material--it is remarkable how many excellent arguments he lifts from speeches of tragedy. ("Introduction" xii) 6 Clearly, speech and poetry share many characteristics in common. Sooner or later, Solmsen feels, Aristotle became aware of these shared characteristics. He notes, "In the Poetics, when isolating some facets of the finished work, [Aristotle] realizes that they need but little comment since to discuss them fully would mean to duplicate sections of the Rhetoric" (xiii). We should also recall that by Aristotle's day, poetic thought had become quite "rhetorical": Everything under the sun is discussed; arguments and counter-arguments abound so freely that the larger and small doses of thought that are dispensed in carefully constructed speeches must often have diverted interest from the central idea of the play.

Load more

  238

Copy Link