Talk:Beat generation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Citation for The Beatles' name 2 Lenny Bruce? 3 Aureliano on Neutrality 4 Moving an odd Holmes/Keruoac passage here 5 please avoid hero worship, and don't sanitize 6 Consistency 7 Deleting Elsa Gidlow 8 Paging Atsab: why so much about David Kammerer? 9 reverting major changes for the last few months 10 more (temporary?) deletia 11 Talking over some additions with "208.222.71.77" 12 Deletions/Moves 13 Why the Simpsons? 14 The importance of the Beats 15 Older discussion (enter Doom) 16 suggested issues/topics for future work 17 Disambig at top 18 Starting the beat? 19 The Simpsons 20 Jackson Pollock 21 what about 22 Forgotten? 23 Hippie 24 The Poetry Itself 25 Rewrite 26 Link to www.johnlong.com 27 Influences on Western culture - Ginsberg quotations

[edit] Citation for The Beatles' name

The Wikipedia article on The Beatles names various theories as to the origin of the band's name, while this article states that it is based on the root-word "beat." This is not cited, and according to the other article, not true. ([User:Jackmont|Jackmont]] 9:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Lenny Bruce?

I was just wondering if Lenny Bruce is considered part of the beat generation. His dates of birth and death seem to match those of most of the beats. His product also maintains the anti-conformist ideals of the beat gen. He also took the same drugs and was arguably just as influential as many of the other famous beats that are mentioned on the page. (Ngoah89 18:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC))

Allen Ginsberg definitely defended his free speech rights several times. I don't have the full info, but I'll look it up. There's an interesting old Rolling Stone article about Beat Generation humor, about Lenny Bruce's influence on the Beats -- also Lord Buckley whose routines sound a lot like Ferlinghetti poetry.

[edit] Aureliano on Neutrality

About Aureliano's recent edits. He made some changes on the grounds of improving the article's neutrality, and I think I've got slight problems with one and bigger problems with the other.

On one point: the introduction lists 3 written works by the early beats presenting them as the major works or the principal works, or whatever. Softening this to say that they are merely some examples of beat writing is not, in fact, correct. There really and trully are the principal works by the principal members, the weight of critical opinion really does support this point.

The other point: it is not mere personal opinion to say that the beat writers were a big influence on 60s culture, (certainly on the counter-culture, aka "hippies", which is what people generally mean by "60s culture"). It's hard to imagine someone who knows anything about this denying the point -- I mean, there are photographs of Bob Dylan paling around with Allen Ginsberg, do you think those are faked? Another point: Neal Cassady was genuinely a cultural icon to the late 60s, early 70s freaks, I know this just from talking to some of them, but if you want some evidence, consider that the Pranksters recruited Neal Cassady to drive their infamous bus.

I think I know where you're coming from on this, you seem to be gunning for examples of empty hype, looking for overblown claims that you can tone down into something more likely to be factual (and certainly I have problems often enough with the pro-sixties clowns who seem to want to insert polemics in favor of psychdelic drugs everywhere). But that's a really tricky business if you don't know a lot about the subject (or aren't willing to stop and research the subject). You really shouldn't just use your nose to identify something that smells un-neutral. -- Doom 20:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, nice to meet you and thanks for your feedback on my edits. Here are my responses:

1. Major works

You haven't convinced me, I'm afraid. It is still a matter of opinion what the major works of the beat generation are. As you say, the weight of critical opinion supports the works listed, but that is my point; it is still opinion. An opinion, no matter how authorised or widely repeated, is still opinion. Reproducing the opinion of critics as 'fact' is not the business of an encyclopaedia. Art and literature reviews do that.

What the 'major works' are in a particular culture is determined politically. There is nothing inherently 'major' about an artwork in itself. Hence, it is not fact. Reproducing the institutionally authorised canon of 'major works' as 'fact' is not the business of an encyclopaedia. Art and literature reviews do that.

2. The beat generation influencing 60s culture

The best thing here is to cite your factual examples: that Bob Dylan read Allen Ginsberg or that the Pranksters recruited Neal Cassady to drive their bus and let readers decide for themselves how influential the beat generation was.

I'm strict with arts/humanities articles on neutrality because I believe that when you start to qualify and allow entry for quasi-factual (like those above) statements, you also open the door for half-baked theories and personal subjectivity. In practice, one cannot simply draw a line between what is acceptable and not; you need a substantial buffer zone on either side, otherwise the grey arguments start creeping in and you might as well not have a line at all. This might mean ommitting potentially useful statements like the ones we are talking about but Wikipedia should, I believe, err on the side of neutrality than not. Aureliano

As for Major works, yes this is an encyclopedia. As such, we don't use personal opinion but instead use widely accepted canon. That would mean what is widely regarded as the beat Holy Trinity: On The Road, Naked Lunch, and Howl. What your personal opinions about the relative strengths or weaknesses of those works might be is largely irrelevant. It is widely accepted that those three from those three authors are what is considered beat.

As for The beat generation influencing 60s culture, I think it is very clear the impact that both Dylan and Kesey had on the 60's and both have widely admitted their personal influences...the beats. Jim Morrison, also a major factor in the 60's...was a huge fan of On The Road and patterned himself after Dean Moriarty according to No One Gets Out Of Here Alive.

How can you, in good conscience, claim that these aren't accepted facts? IrishGuy talk 07:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you haven't responded to any of my arguments. Please re-read my post. Aureliano

Of course I did. You just refuse to see it. When you even admit that the vast majority of major criticism considers those books to be major works. Not just that, but look at book sales through the years..those are by every single definition the major works. You can keep writing it off as opinion, but what, pray tell, would be difinitive for you? Would God Himself have to declare them major? IrishGuy talk 02:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. However, the article needs plenty of references to indicate consensus by significant majority according to Wikipedia policies A simple formulation, and Characterizing opinions of people's work. Cheers. Aureliano

Aureliano -- Much of the "evidence" you're looking for is already in the article, you just haven't read it very carefully. And truth be told, you don't really know very much about this subject, do you? You don't actually have any reason to suspect that these statements are wrong.

If I thought that there was some serious debate about the prominence of these three works, I might happily go off and start tabulating sales figures and the frequency of critical references, but why would I want to do this just because someone is playing what amounts to legalistic games?

And I'm sorry that "gray areas" in the applications of principles bother you, but welcome to life.

By the way: I took a look at "Characterizing opinions of people's work" and I see that the Shakespere example has been mutating around quite a bit of late. It's become something of a parody of wikipedia, in that it now demands that the crank theory that Shakespeare was really a front for Marlowe be brought in. -- Doom 05:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moving an odd Holmes/Keruoac passage here

I'm not sure what this Kerouac quote via Holmes is supposed to add to the introduction, so I'm cutting it. Saving it here in case someone else can see a use for it:

Kerouac later wrote several articles about coining the term, sometimes with conflicting information, but Holmes recalled him explaining: "like we're a generation of furtives. You know, with an inner knowledge there's no use flaunting on that level, the level of the 'public', I mean a kind of beatness...because we all really know where we are"

-- Doom 06:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] please avoid hero worship, and don't sanitize

Once again, I'm changing the language from "accidental" shooting to something that doesn't let Burroughs off the hook so easily. Maybe this version will stay there for a little while, but I have no doubt that at some point another Burrough's fan will decide that's it's un-neutral to not go along with whitewashing Burrough's history. (He was drunk, goofing around and he pointed a gun at the woman's head, and pulled the trigger. And we're supposed to call this an "accidental shooting"? And actually, we just hope that he was goofing around, because none of us were inside his head at the time: there is no way to know what his motives were.)

But its hard to argue that he really intended to murder her, which is what you seem to be insinuating. Did he ever beat her, abuse her, degrade her like a typical abusive relationship? I don't think there is evidence of that. If he was trying to kill her why do it in a crowded room? There are a lot of accidental shootings in the United States because there are too many guns and not enough common sense. At any rate, I don't think it is hero worship to point out the facts of the case, and there are plenty of sources that point towards the case of a drunken accidental shooting- meaning his mens rea was lacking for a case of murder. --Mikerussell 17:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm also dropping this bit, for similar reasons, though I could be persuaded that the information belings in there somewhere:

She did, however, serve as an inspiration: Allen Ginsberg was said to have written Howl after having a dream about Vollmer, and William Burroughs claimed he would never have begun writing if she had not lived.

-- Doom 06:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Consistency

The term 'Beat Generation' is presented with varying capitalisation throughout the article. We should probably decide on a standard. -- Resonance 22:41, Jan 6, 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Deleting Elsa Gidlow

I've been uncomfortable with this insertion for some time now:

The poet and anarchist Elsa Gidlow, who hitchiked from New York (where she had lived in Greenwich Village) to the San Francisco area in 1940, is representative of independent-minded women in the 'bohemian background' of the popularly recognized Beat Generation. Gidlow later became an integral member of the West Coast circle that included philosopher Alan Watts.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to include this woman in this article, though it might be reasonable to point out that there were women amongst the various pre-beat bohemias... And I definitely didn't like it appended to the end of the first paragraph of the "Women of the Beat Generation" section.

I'm just deleting it for now, though I could be persuaded that it would make sense to have a paragraph about pre-beatnik boho women at the end of this section.-- Doom 05:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I suspect the accuracy of that Elsa Gidlow info... I see elsewhere that she moved to San Francisco in 1927.

Anyway, I'm creating a stub article for Elsa Gidlow.

-- Doom 09:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paging Atsab: why so much about David Kammerer?

Hey Atsab... I was reading your expansion of the David Kammerer story in the history section of the Beat Generation node.

I was wondering if you could give us some idea of what you were after there, why did you think this much detail was needed and so on.

It seems to me like the History section is getting kind of long. Possibly some of your material should be in a different node, maybe one about Lucien Carr?

Also, can you cite some sources? For example, how do you *know* that Lucien Carr wasn't bisexual?

-- Doom 05:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

yeah, sorry about that. I can't remember full details at the moment but I remember going on there and reading some false info. So while I was correcting it I got ahead of myself and started rambling about the Beat Generation (I was using no source other than my memory, hence the non-citing). I was planning on expanding the WHOLE history section but my progress was interrupted and thus, Kammerer incident was the only thing expanded. My bad- though I DO think it's an extremely important part of the whole development.

Looking around a little, I've found some small suggestions that Lucien may have been bisexual/bicurious, whatever. I don't particularly care myself, but I think it's important not to project our own interpretations on this story.

Similarly, I think it's important not to assert that the stabbing of Kammerer was "self defense". That's certainly plausible, but Lucien Carr was the only witness, and he did do some time for it.

Okay, I'm going to move some clips from the history section to here in an effort to tighten it up a little. If I chop something important, maybe it can be worked back in later (also, the Lucien Carr article is still fairly sketchy at the moment... that would be a good place to add more details of Carr's academic carreer, if you're so inclinced):

They developed a friendship. Although Carr was not gay, he apparently enjoyed the attention of the older man and let Kammerer follow him to the various schools he was expelled from, Andower, then Bowdoin, and then (in the fall of 1942) the University of Chicago. That's where Kammerer introduced 17-year-old Lucien Carr to his old St. Louis friend William S. Burroughs.

After reading a book called You Can't Win, Burroughs was fascinated with the criminal underworld and in Chicago associated with thieves and the like, plotting to stick up a Turkish bath and rob an armored car. Nothing ever went past the planning stage.

Kammerer allegedly claimed he'd kill Carr if they didn't make love immediately.

While Carr was in prison, Kerouac and Ginsberg began a close friendship, and soon the two of them and Burroughs formed a trinity.

The poem includes many surreal phrases which Solomon mumbled after his shock treatments.

[edit] reverting major changes for the last few months

After two months absence, I came back to find this node getting cluttered up with random additions... while there have been some good edits, they were mostly minor. The major changes fall into largely two categories: (1) random remarks that don't seem to add anything (2) irrelevant insertions about someone's hobby horse topics, in particular "Sandra Scoppetone", which seems to be an obsession of: "69.104.76.195" -- my first thought was that this IP address must be the author herself, but it seems unlikely that she would misspell her own name quite so frequently.

To make it a little easier on myself, I did the reversions in one step here, by working "off-line" in a copy of the article that I put in my own version control system. Here's the log for these changes:

revision 1.13
date: 2005/07/04 08:14:04;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Restoring the Gregory Corso quote (I don't care if you don't like
his grammar, it's what he said... if I remember right, this is
in the documentary "Whatever Happened to Kerouac?", so you can go
and check it if you like.):
  "Three writers does not a generation make."
----------------------------
revision 1.12
date: 2005/07/04 08:06:46;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Deleting this bit:
  and "Oriental" thought
Don't see what that adds to the original remark about
Zen Buddhism.
----------------------------
revision 1.11
date: 2005/07/04 08:04:07;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +0 -2
Deleting this random discussion of drugs, and the later
editorializing about "sensation seekers":
   Too many Beats had become sensation seekers, and left the
   faiths of their parents to make liberal use of wine and
   marijuana, and some of them had occasionally used
   benzedrine or experimented with such traditional and
   natural psycho-active agents as peyote or yagé.
   Amongst the hippies, generally, there was a widespread
   fondness for marijuana, and only slightly less an interest in
   the synthetic LSD, which largely (though not completely)
   replaced peyote, always in somewhat limited availability.
----------------------------
revision 1.10
date: 2005/07/04 08:02:32;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +0 -1
Deleting this from the beginning of "Women of the Beat Generation"
   The "beatnik" stereotype is discussed in another section,
   below; however, it might be said that the stereotypical
   woman of the beat period was an artsy or intellectual
   bohemian who might be studying or practicing modern dance,
   painting, or theater arts and hanging out in the cafés of
   Greenwich Village.  Along with men who were also involved in
   artistic or free-wheeling intellectual pursuits, they formed
   the social backdrop for those particular writers who came to
   be referred to as the Beat Generation.However this kind of
   Activity and mixing of Race and culture had become popular in
   America as early as th 1920's when the Jazz age actually began
   to flourish.
----------------------------
revision 1.9
date: 2005/07/04 08:00:37;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +0 -1
Dropped
  *The Subterraneans by Jack Kerouac (1958)

From the list of "Principal writings" -- I like this book a lot
too, I like "Dharma Bums" even more, and there are many other
fine Kerouac books, and they are not going to be listed here
under "principal writings".  That list is already too long: the
Cassady and the Johnson are already pushing it --
----------------------------
revision 1.8
date: 2005/07/04 07:58:31;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -4
minor edit: deleted spurious line breaks
----------------------------
revision 1.7
date: 2005/07/04 07:57:47;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Deleting references to Sandra Scopptone [sic]:
  *Suzuki Beaneby Sandra Scoppettone and Louise Fitzhugh
   (1961; this out of print Comedy of Manners, dipicts the life
   of a Bohemian child Suzuki Beaneand her relationship to a
   world full of Squares and conformists.The Story is still
   considered a 'Classic' by everyone fromPlayboy Magazine
   Editors to members of the Christian Clergy,and teachers as
   Good for everyone to enjoy.
----------------------------
revision 1.6
date: 2005/07/04 07:56:49;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Deleting references to Sandra Scopptone [sic]:
   artists (including Sandra Scoppettone and Louise Fitzhugh, the
   Authors of beatnik lovers childrens book "suzuki beane" )not
   to exclude the mention of the many musicians who explicitly
   acknowledge their debt to the beat writers
----------------------------
revision 1.5
date: 2005/07/04 07:55:30;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Deleting references to Sandra Scopptone [sic]:
   Sandra Scoppttone (author of Suzuki Beane)
----------------------------
revision 1.4
date: 2005/07/04 07:38:03;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -6
In Beatnik Sterotype: Folded the two TV cartoon examples into one paragraph.
----------------------------
revision 1.3
date: 2005/07/04 07:34:23;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
Chopped this from the introduction:

  The actual word, "beatnik" was introduced by Herb Caen, the
  famous San Francisco Chronicle columnist.  Ever the wordsmith,
  Caen also coined the words, "hippie" and yuppie.

The term beatnik is discussed later.  (I suspect that the Herb
Caen fan here didn't bother to read very far.)
----------------------------
revision 1.2
date: 2005/07/04 07:32:45;  author: doom;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -2
Moved Beatnik redirect down to the beatnik section.  Once again
trimmed the stuff about the programming language.
----------------------------

[edit] more (temporary?) deletia

This passage was appended to the "historical context" section. Possibly it belongs in the "influences" section, though I think I would argue against:

Nor should it be assumed that the Beat influence was limited to the 1950s and 1960s. Gary Snyder was one of the movement's leaders who institutionalized the Beat ethos on the university level, where he continued to teach writing well into the 1990s, influencing a new generation of authors such as novelist Robert Clark Young.

The trouble is that *far* too many writers have been influenced by the Beats. Naming one of them is an invitation to list hundreds. If there's a point in doing that (and I doubt it) it should be done in another page that this one links to.

I have similar problems with the list of "Principle Works", which already includes *two* obscure works that the author of the list *knew* would be controversial (they might belong on a list of "proto-beat" works, for those who enjoy making lists). -- Doom 17:05, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talking over some additions with "208.222.71.77"

((I've rearranged things here a little so the discussion is in chronological order... look down for the latest.))

Just to let the discussants know that I added a paragraph that deals with criticism of the beat movement and also the transition from the beat-era to hippie-era. It isn't a full treatment but I do describe Charles Thompson's 1957 novel criticizing the beats, as well as Richard Farina's depiction of the transition years (although Farina builds the story around a protest at Cornell in 1958, the drug use is clearly early 1960s--this mixing of time periods works fine because the characters are so high most of the time that they wouldn't have known it if they were being shuttled back and forth in a time machine anyway!). I hope someone else will deal with Podhoretz and his Captain Ahab style obsession with destroying the beats; he is definitely part of the story. 1-11-05 -- "208.222.71.77"

A fellow known only as "208.222.71.77" has added a lot of interesting discourse that I'm moving to here for now. I have a feeling there are some points here that can be salvaged but I'm just not up to it now. Here's a listing of problems I've got with it, off the top of my head, in no particular order:

(1) It doesn't belong at the end of the History section, and myself I would rather not see it sandwiched between "History" and "Beatnik Sterotype", because there's a logical flow from one to the other.

(2) Some of the material looks interesting, e.g. the stuff about the novel "Halfway Down the Stairs", and yet it strikes me as not directly relevant to this writeup. 1957 is not an early enough publication date for it to count as a predecessor ("Go" was out in 1952, "The Town and the City" in 1950), and as described it sounds like an example of an older genre of fiction (very common in the early paperback era) where wild immoral people come to bad ends (thus giving the reader vicarious thrills, and also satisfying the moralists).

(3) There may be a point here about the Beats being an expression of some sort of larger zeitgeist -- I've been meaning to write a little about other things going on at the time myself -- but I don't know that your examples are really that great... the comparison to the Angries is sometimes made, but no one can seem to decide if "the Angries" ever really existed...

(4) But then, it's a general problem that writer's are often ambivalent about being categorized one way or another, and that's certainly true about the Beats... however, at least with the Beats the "big" names were relatively comfortable with the label.

(5) I have to say, I know nothing at all about your soviet examples... could it be that they should have an article of their own?

(6) Oh, by the way: you went to Cornell, didn't you? It shows. The point of veiw here isn't very "neutral" then, right?

Here's the block of material I've moved here from the main article:

The Beat Generation is best understood as the most concentrated and "typical" expression of a sensibility and thematic focus that was shared by many writers who were not officially "beats." Certain writers of the San Francisco Renaissance never regarded themselves as beats, and often strongly criticized Kerouac and his pals, but in many respects were part of the same post-World War Two brand of bohemianism. The science fiction writer Phillip K. Dick probably should be considered to have shared the beat sensibility in this larger sense.

In "Halfway Down the Stairs" (1957), the novelist Charles Thompson depicted a beat-in-all-but-name group of Cornell University students. This unfairly forgotten novel is set in the same late 1940s period as "On the Road"; the leading figure in the bohemian circle is a Neal Cassady type swaggerer and World War Two veteran roughly the same age as the hero of Kerouac's masterpiece. Thompson is sympathetic to his characters but does not romanticize them. The book ends in tragedy for "Hugh," the Cassady type character; the narrator, living in New York City several years later, expresses ambivalent feelings about this own involvement in the circle.

If Cornell was the setting for the first novel to seriously criticize the beats it was also later the backdrop for Richard Farina's "Been Down So Long It Looks Like Up to Me" (1966), an attempt to romanticize the movement's campus manifestation circa 1958. The chief significance of Farina's book is that it shows the beat sensibility in transition towards the hippie years and the hard-drug culture.

A beat-style sensibility can be seen in the work of the "angry young men" in Britain in the 1950s, although mixed with a working class and lower middle class anger that is more conventional than that of the American beats. The most celebrated of these works is Kingsley Amis' "Lucky Jim."

Less well-known is the literary expression of a similar zeitgeist in the Soviet Union during the Khrushchev years, when a number of novels and short stories depicting youth in rebellion were published. The best known of these are Anatoli Kuznetsov's "Sequel to a Legend" (1957) and Vasili Aksenov's "Ticket to the Stars" (1961). When the latter book was published in the United States, its characters were compared to the American beatniks. Given the pressures of Soviet censorship, the heroes of these books end up more or less making their peace with the system. But Kuznetsov and Aksenov would both become open dissidents and move to the West.

REPLY TO THE [above] FROM FELLOW WHO ADDED DISCOURSE: "Halfway Down the Stairs" was published the same year as "On the Road." It is set in the same years (late 1940s) as "On the Road" and apparently reflects real experiences of its author. The character who leads the bohemian circle, "Hugh," is remarkably similar to Neal Cassady. It was not originally a paperback but was a hardcover that received favorable reviews from legit critics such as Merle Miller. There is no reason to believe that it was some kind of quickie ripoff of Kerouac's popularity. After dipping into Thompson's book for the first time in decades last night, I have changed (below) my description of it to remove the implication that it is in a conventional moralizing tradition. As to the alleged partiality for Cornell (I am myself a graduate of another university in another part of the country), it is merely a historical accident that novels reflecting the early beat years (Thompson) and the late years (Farina) were set at Cornell. It should be pointed out, however, that the beat "movement" would develop a very strong presence on college campuses after 1957, although Kerouac did not write about this. He did note a campus connection earlier at Berkeley in "The Dharma Bums." (The circle at Cornell portrayed by Thompson bears a strong resemblance to the beatnik circle at my own college circa 1961.) I have shortened and made other changes (see below) to the material on Soviet writers, pointing out that the "Ticket to the Stars" characters were compared in the United States to the beatniks. As to the Angry Young Men, perhaps it could be disputed that they were not actually a literary "circle," but there can be absolutely no doubt that they existed as a well-defined trend in the literature, theater, and cinema of the 1950s distinct from any other British trend before or since.

Sorry, didn't mean to cast aspersions on "Halfway Down the Stairs"... I just wanted to point out that there were earlier works about the Beat circle than "On the Road", and they, too tended to focus on "Neal Cassady"-types (e.g. Bill Cannasta). The real breakthrough artistically with "On the Road" is the fusion of style and content: celebrating spontaniety by using spontaniety... the image of Kerouac pounding out a novel on a scroll of rice paper has a lot to do with the actual effect that the Beats had (as much or more so than the content of what they wrote).

Oh, and my apologies for the undeserved crack about Cornell.

Anyway, there's more to say, but I'm going to be off-line for a week or so. If you'd like to play with this some more dive right in... I think most of what you want to say might fit in the section "Historical Context", though I might suggest putting the bit about Farina in the "Influences on Western Culture" section (talking about the beat-hippie transition somewhere or other would definitely make sense). And it looks to me like there's no discussion at all of the "Angries" in the wikipedia as of yet... maybe you'd like to get a node about them started?

By the way, why not create a wikipedia account? It makes it a little easier to keep track of who you're talking to... Doom 07:07, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

I think the main issue here is around other San Francisco Renaissance poets, many of whom do predate the beats. Filiocht 14:27, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

to expand: The whole historical background needs to be covered: Blake, Walt Whitman (both these esp for AG), Henry David Thoreau , Imagism (esp Ezra Pound, William Carlos Williams and H.D.), Objectivists, Henry Miller, then the 50s, including the Beats, Black Mountain poets, deep image and the rest of the San Francisco Renaissance. GS read Pound early and was encouraged in his Japan/China interests via Pound's work. Pound was also important to AG and to most of the SFR people (Charles Olson, Robert Creeley, etc). H.D. is crucial to Robert Duncan. Rexroth published with the Objectivists. Pound's presence in the States, running the 'ezraversity from his ward in St Elizabeth's from 46 to 58 was a big factor. Williams encouraged a number of beats and wrote a preface for Howl and other poems. 'Independents' like Cid Corman and Theodore Enslin also trace back along this line, and without Corman's publishing efforts, much of the 50's would have remained silent. The 50s are, in some respects, a return to this native American modernist tradition after the disruption caused by the depression and the war. Currently, the article reads as if the Beats appeared ex nihilo.

As you may have noticed, I tried to use some of your material here in the main article. I didn't go quite as far as to call the Beats the return of the modernists (why not, say "the revival of romanticism"?), though I don't doubt that that's a defensible thesis. Doom 23:00, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletions/Moves

I'm in the process of making some deletions of other peoples additions, and in the event that anyone cares, here's why (possibly some of this should be moved elsewhere, see point 3):

(1) A number of mechanically (if not programmatically) generated links have been appearing, e.g. connecting the word "novelist" to the article on the novel, connecting the place name Manhattan to the article on "Manhattan" (when there's already a link for New York City earlier in the article, even!). This kind of stuff strikes me as a bit inane, a distraction from the main point of the article. Anyone who knows English knows what a novelist is, for that matter anyone who knows English knows what New York City is. Not everything that *can* be linked, *should* be linked (ultimately, an article might exist for every noun).

(2) This mention of a connection to the existentialists strikes me as gratuitous:

They were both directly and indirectly influenced by the European trend in Existentialist philosophy.

I don't doubt that they were indirectly influenced by existentialists -- many people were -- but it's pretty indirect. I don't see why it's worth saying... I actually can't remember a *single* reference to an existentialist author by any beat writer. Nietszche was mentioned a few times though; Proust's name came up often; Ginsburg owes a huge debt to Walt Whitman; Burroughs read everything he could get his hands on... a brief article can't possibly list every direct influence, let alone indirect ones.

(3) I'm dropping the assertion that Burroughs revolutionized science fiction:

William Burroughs' Naked Lunch was the first of a series of novels in which he completely revolutionized science fiction by introducing elements more usually found in modernist writing. The impact of his achievement has influenced trends in science fiction ever since and can be seen particularly clearly in the writings of Michael Moorcock, Norman Spinrad, Brian Aldiss and J. G. Ballard.

There are many problems with this, not the least of which is that it isn't true. A number of SF writers liked Burroughs, and this short list of writers -- roughly speaking, all members of the "New Wave" circle -- look like they were probably Burroughs fans, but these writers themselves have not really revolutionized science fiction. If you go to the store and look at the SF racks, you'll notice a strong Star Trek influence on SF, but very little New Wave influence. For better or worse the New Wave produced very few permanent changes on the shores of SF.

Another problem: I think the influence of Burroughs on New Wave SF probably belongs in the article about Burroughs, rather than here.

Still another problem: I really don't like it in the History section. Someone else here was complaining about the lack of an explicit discussion of the influence the beats had, why not just create a section about that, and put things like this there?

(I'm of the opinion that wikipedia writing suffers from "appendicitis" -- my pet fact is missing, I'll just append it to the end of some paragraph.)

Oh, and while I'm at it, I've restored my original language concerning Burroughs shooting of Joan Volmer. Calling it an "accidental shooting" let's Burroughs off far too easily, it makes it sound like he was just cleaning his gun or something. The actual event was complicated, and allows many interpretations (accident/murder or even "assisted suicide").

Doom 07:38, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Why the Simpsons?

Is the Simpsons reference really necessary? I think these modern pop culture references tend to demean the integrity of both the page and Wikipedia in general.. -- "134.117.153.210"

Well "134.117.153.210", we'd have to ask "216.221.81.99" why the Simpsons remark was added. I can only guess, but I think the idea was to give a young reader a point of reference to understand the "beatnik stereotype" which was under discussion at that point. That's why I'm reluctant to delete it, though I certainly wouldn't have added it myself.

As to whether it's "demeaning", I think the answer is no. High art and low are all grist for the wikipedia, and after all, there was a time when beat writers were ranked pretty low. Doom

Personally, I don't see why this would "demean the integrity" of Wikipedia... actually, to me, this is why I love Wikipedia. it goes BEYOND what 'normal' encyclopedias would feature. and, let's say someone is writing an essay about the Beat Generation, wouldn't the Simpsons stuff be great to show how the Beat Generation has influenced our culture, and how the beatnik stereotype can be seen in a Simpsons episode? Anyway, personally I would definitely leave it there, as that kind of stuff is what makes the articles much more interesting to me... all kinds of little details you wouldn't find in those encyclopedias at the library. - Sourcecode 18:31, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Funny, while I had (and I guess, have) no serious problem with using the Simpsons as an example here, it's starting to become a bit of a peeve with me -- Simpsons fans seem to take the show way too seriously as a cultural barometer (e.g. anyone who's done a Simpsons cameo *must* be important). If you look around throughout the wikipedia, there are all sorts of gratuitous Simpsons references popping up...

I don't know what to make of that other cartoon reference (Doug) that's sprouted in the "beatnik stereotype" section... I'm seriously thinking about deleting it.

And I should probably write something for the style guide about how it's possible to have too many examples ("Enough is enough"?). -- Doom 21:32, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Decided to cut the "Doug" reference:

On another cartoon, Doug, Doug's sister, Judy, dresses and talks in the manner of a beatnik.

-- Doom 00:34, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

User Doom: While I am not going so far as to re-insert the "Doug" reference, I would like to say that when I read that line I thought it was a good way to illustrate the beatnik to younger readers, and is a constant character whereas Flander's parents were a one-time deal (I think). It's hard to really give a picture to generations far removed from an era without examples. Just my two cents. -- cindy

Okay, sounds like a good point. I put it back. Doom 07:03, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of modern pop culture references. I noticed that Ferdinand had reverted out the recent anonymous insertion about the "Breaking the Rules" film. I'm not arguing with the reversion, but just wanted to say let's remain open to the possibility that that film may have something to say to this article. Ferlinghetti is featured, and it apparently does start with the Beat gen as a starting point for considering the whole issue of subcultures in America, although it goes far beyond the Beats up to the hip hop and rap cultures of today. I haven't seen the film, personally. Mark Dixon 20:31, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I haven't seen the movie either, although it looks interesting. But I had a look at the website, and I don't see that it serves as anything other than an advertisement for the movie. I think deleting commercial links that don't directly have something to say about the subject of the article is justified. I certainly didn't mean to imply that the movie is worthless or uninteresting -- if the link was to a film clip of Ferlinghetti, instead of an advertisement for one, that would be different. --Ferdinand Pienaar 22:29, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand the simpsons and doug references, they are useful as tack on examples saying "beats are often portrayed wearing berets and having goatees, stereotypes like these have been included in shows like doug (judy dougs sister) and the simpsons (the flanders)." as it is these examples have their own paragraphs implying taht it is a sterotype when they are actually just a take on the existing stereotype. I'm not a very good writer, hard for me to say what i mean, but it seems that the examples are useful but seem out of place.

[edit] The importance of the Beats

Seems to me that the real question here is why does the article have a section on the stereotype but nothing on why the beats were important, what their influence was (hippies/Ken Kesey/British 'beats'/Russia/Zen in the West/loads more. This needs doing or why bother having the article at all? Filiocht 08:06, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Okay, since you requested it, I put in a little on the subject. (Though you know, nothing stops you from adding something yourself...). I tried hard not to mention any names (whenever you try and list two examples in a wikipedia article, the next time you come back it will have become twenty).

Doom 09:06, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Older discussion (enter Doom)

I'm actually pretty sure that Gregory Corso is a core member of the original beatniks (it was at least a minor frustration to him later in his life that he kept getting written out of the history). I'll check the details before I do any re-writing though... Doom

May 14: Please do add some material - this page needs attention! Talk of 'core' is always contentious though, as he was a later member than the original 4, who'd already developed their ideas quite substantially before he arrived. Perhaps first add some material to the Gregory Corso page!

Doom again: Yes, I was just looking at doing a Corso page. The Gary Snyder page needed some work too (the assertion that Snyder isn't really a beat was pretty silly).

Doom again, after my "total re-write" Okay, I hope that wasn't too contentious a set of changes.

It turns out that there is indeed some ambiguity as to whether or not Corso was one of the original/core members of the scene, and I've tried to make that clear by including dates, and using the word "cannonical" which I think is a little better than core. (cannons are formed later, and it's a literary grouping, not a social one).

On the other hand, the idea that Cassady was there before Hunke isn't right. Also, Cassady wasn't really a writer in those days (though he did later publish an autobio in 1971, "The First Third")...

I dropped the suggestion that "Naked Lunch" was written with the cut-up technique. This is a common misconception, but it's pretty clearly not true (1) the timing is wrong: according to the Ted Morgan biography Gysin came up with cut-up in 10/59, and the first ed of Naked Lunch was in 7/59... (2) if you read "Naked Lunch", it's all pretty conventional linear prose (it's just the subject matter that's warped). Compare it to a later work like "Nova Express", which is nearly incoherent. Now that's what cut-up looks like.

There's probably still a lot of room for improvement here. Here's some additional angles that could be followed up:

[edit] suggested issues/topics for future work

• Photographs. What's the legal status of the typically used photos of the early beats? E.g. the-big-three-plus-hal-chase is pretty essential. The Joan Vollmer shot is already up in her node.

• Better to directly quote Podohretz than rely on "Last Intellectuals".

• Cross-correlate with rise of "juvenile delinquency" (the phenomena, if any, and also the national obession): did it preceed the beats, or follow them?

• Possibly, a separate topic: "spontaneous prose"?

• More on music would be good... what kind of jazz were they into, was it only Kerouac who was a fan, etc.

• what about: role of promiscuity. (A thought: drug "experimentation" is often given credit as a quest for enlightenment, but sex is shrugged off as pure hedonism. Did the Beats think of it that way? Think about Reich.)

• more about their intellectual environment might be interesting. In the forties, you needed to be up on your Freud and your Marx, and what else? Burroughs was into some odd Big Ideas people, like Spengler and Korzybski. Nietzsche? There's no mention of any of the existentialists in any of their writing that I can remember: why would that be? Was Sartre seen as your Old Man's philospher, a wartime LostGen guy?

partially done

Some items from the todo list that have at least been touched on:

• what about: role of homosexuality ("first subculture" is pushing it: maybe queers were first)

• There are the connections/imitations of the Jazz subculture.

• A possible theme: Most of the original beats were middle-class or upper-class intellectuals who seemed to feel that "slumming" was necessary, that the underclass was living a more authentic existence than they were.
  (In this respect, Corso might be called "the real thing": he was a criminal-convict-turned-poet, not a poet playing at criminality.) ((And as a Snyder fan out there likes to point out, Snyder is the Real Thing of a different sort -- the anti-Corso?))
  • Sub-theme: where did they all get this nutty idea? 30s gangster flicks?

Old items from the todo list above

• the roots of later "counter-culture" in the beats,
• Possible topic: the transition from beat-era to hippie-era.

• Was it all just authors? No beat painters, beat musicians? ((Essentially: No, not in the early years.))

• Add some more references, e.g. to film documentaries "Whatever Happened to Kerouac?"; and "The Source". Many books could be mentioned: Morgan's "Literary Outlaw" (about Burroughs) is good for beat history overall.

• There were other art scenes going on that deserve mention, if not detailed comparison: John Cage, Robert Rauschenberg, Jackson Pollack, the Black Mountain College scene.

• A peeve of mine: The movie "The Source" uses a veiw of the transamerica pyramid to introduce beat SF, but it didn't exist back then. What was there was housing, where many writers/artists lived: the Montgomery & Clay block, aka "Monkey Clay". A lot of the beats, e.g. Snyder hated and probably still hate this pyramid, he calls it "an arrogant and wasteful building".

• I made no mention here of the Zen Buddhism associated with Gary Snyder and the later writings of Kerouac. This was a major shift in "beat thinking", and it happened relatively late (just before the media circus kicked in).

• Add a section about criticism of the beats, e.g. Norman Podhoretz.

• what about: role of drugs, particularly marijuana, heroin and speed.
  • Sub-topic:
    • Did they know what they were getting into (i.e. it was self-destructive) or were they not sure (so possibly it was "experimenting").
      My guess: heroin use was self-destructive, speed was experimentation

[edit] Disambig at top

The primary-topic disambig is there instead of Beatnik being a disambig page. If terseness is important to you, please say so here. Deltabeignet 05:47, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, terseness is somewhat improtant to me, but it's not so important in a Talk page, and I can't figure out what you're talking about.

I intensely dislike inserting a line about the Beatnik programming language at the top of the Beat Generation node. It makes no sense to me to do so: why would someone reading about the Beat Generation want to know it? Why not also list the various bands and songs with Beatnik in their names, and so on?

I see that someone has changed the Beatnik re-direct to point at the "beatnik sterotype" section within Beat Generation. Would you object to moving this (rather pointless) "disambiguation" message down to there? -- Doom 06:44, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Starting the beat?

I recently read in a book about the 1950's that Jack Kerouac actually coined the term "beatniks" (it might have been beat generation). Did he "make it up", or make it popular? Just wondering. Thanks.

Never heard that one. As far as I know, what I've written here is correct. "Beat" was slang in use in the NY underworld, "Beat Generation" was Kerouac's coinage, and later Herb Caen invented "beatnik". If someone has citations that show otherwise, please do present them. -- Doom 06:47, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

All sources I have agree with what's written here - beatnik wasn't coined by Kerouac, beat generation was. Greenman May 31, 2005

The term "beat generation" was Kerouac in conversation with JC Holmes. The derogatory term "Beatnik" was aparantly coined by San Fransisco Chronicle columnist Herb Caen in April 1958. See Ann Charter's intro to the Portable Beat Reader, page xxii.

Are you sure 'beatnik' is derived from 'Sputnik'? What about 'refusenik'? The latter certainly seems more appropriate to the context.

[edit] The Simpsons

I was just looking at some of the above stuff, and the comment on the Simpsons caught my eye. I honestly found the bit of Simpsons trivia interesting (although I'm not a fan), and I can truely say that it appeals to younger readers like myself, (I'm 17), simply because it is a bit of pop culture that we can relate to. I also really loved the Doug reference, because I grew up watching Doug, and I recall not understanding what Judys' "style" was. Well, now I know. Just my two cents of course.

[edit] Jackson Pollock

Just a picky thing really, Jackson Pollack was definately supported and apparently most likely funded by the CIA for his artwork. Is it a good idea to compare his work, then, to the beat poets in the Historical Context section? After all, the majority of beat poets were fiercely against the CIA and the CIA against them. Pollock was cultural expression against Communist ideals of oppression, whereas the beats took inspiration from McCarthyist (and so on) repression. I'll happily stand down though. 86.132.181.41 18:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the Beats or the public were aware of the CIA connection at the time. In fact, there is no hard evidence that Pollack knew. While this connection is certainly relevant to Pollock’s biography, I can see no reason why it should affect his relationship to the Beat Generation. Jack Kerouac distanced himself from the Hippies and even supported Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War, yet no one can deny him his rightful place in the history of the Beats. Terry1944 22:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what about

what about george orwell a.k.a. eric artuhr blair

no way.

You'd think the beats were just writers/poets to read you guys. Anyone ever heard of Michael Bowen? He not only knew/hung around with Kerouac, Corso, Ferlinghetti, Burroughs et al, but he was a prolific painter and connects the beats with the hippies, was the instigator of the human be-in and knew Leary, Hopper and others when psychedelia took over. Pete

Well, I fixed the link in the article to the Human Be-In, in the hopes that an interested reader might find out something about Micahel Bowen there (though that article doesn't mention him at present, I don't know why not -- maybe I'll toss in a detail about him and see what happens to it).

Michael Bowen himself seems like an interesting guy, though to my eye he doesn't seem like a prominent enough figure on the "Beat" side of things to want to talk him up in this article.

As for the "Beat" thing mostly being about writers, yeah, as far as I can tell it definitely was, at least in the early days in New York in the late 40s. By the time you get into the "beatnik" era (post-"On the Road"), I would guess there would be a bunch of identifiable Beatnik artists/muscians/actors/etc, but I can't think of any really prominent ones to mention, and haven't come across any references on the subject. If anyone can think of one, I'd be happy to read it.

(I guess there's Jay DeFeo, the woman who painted "The Rose"...) -- Doom 03:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

If they weren't a part of the original '40s New York group or one of the very original San Francisco group (circa Ginsberg and Kerouac's first one or two visits) then they aren't by definition part of the beat group. Influenced by...surely. But part of? No. IrishGuy 08:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Forgotten?

As far as I know there are two major authors you did not mention. John Fante, author of "Ask the Dust" (among other novels) and Charles Bukowski, author of "Factotum", "Holywood",..... Serge de Gosson

Bukowski, though of the same era, isn't considered a Beat generation writer because he wasn't associated with Kerouac, Ginsberg or any of the other generally considered Beat writers. Fante, as far as I can tell, is of the previous generation and dealt with the life of the disillusioned first generation American immigrant. They'd be worth a minor mention, though. RasputinAXP c 15:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

John Fante was closer to the Lost Generation of Hemingway. Bukowski had nothing at all to do with the Beats other than meeting Neal Cassady once in passing. IrishGuy 07:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hippie

The hippie movement had absolutely nothing to do with the beat movement. The "beatnik" movement was completely created by the media to mock the beat movement. Please don't confuse them. IrishGuy 08:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey IrishGuy... first, let me say thanks much for keeping an eye on this page, nice job on the vandalism reverts.

Anyway, about the beatnik/hippie business, I think it's an exaggeration to say that these have "absolutely nothing" to do with the beat movement. Case in point, Allen Ginsberg.

The picture in my head (reflected in this article, much of which I wrote) is that "beat generation" -> "beatnik" -> "hippie" gradual transformation. There was a small group that was held up as representatives of a "generation", and then became leaders/icons that really did inspire a generation (for better or worse). Make what distinctions you like, but I think it's hard to find a place draw hard lines between those various stages.

That the term "beatnik" was intended to be an insult is obvious, but I think it stuck and became one of the standard names for something that was going on. -- Doom 20:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments. As for the hippie thing, what I meant was that while the hippies were somewhat influenced by the beats, the beats had really nothing to do with the hippies. Kerouac didn't agree with most of them and their beliefs (he was pretty conservative in his later years). Burroughs didn't associate with them (quite possibly simply because by temperament he wasn't a "joiner"). Really only Ginsberg did and that isn't really much to link them. I will agree that the hippies were influenced by the beats. IrishGuy talk 20:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I get the objection here... one of the three big guys happily crossed over to the hippie side, and I think if you look closely you'll find a lot of minor beat figures had no problem with "being hippies". What do you think of Ed Sanders? His take is essentially that the media just changed the label on the bottle. One year they were calling his friends "beatniks", the next year they were calling them "hippies". -- Doom 05:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but the minor beats didn't become minor beats until the shift was already happening. The hippie movement was primarily a west coast thing whereas the original beat movement was an east coast thing. IrishGuy talk 16:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The whole of the hippie could probably be traced back to the book On the Road. Not only do I think hippies were directly influenced by the beats, I think that the beat gen is almost just a label given to the first hippies. Guys like Ken Kesey can be used as an example here. Is he a beatnik or a hippie? He had all the same ideals as the beat gen, he wrote influential & intellectual texts and all of his early friends were beatniks, but, he started the psychedelic drug and art trend and gave the world grateful dead and such that would become traits of the hippie gen. To try and call Kesey a hippie or a beatnik would be difficult. It's because hippies are basically just the older beatniks. The only real difference is a change in image. (Ngoah89 19:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] The Poetry Itself

Could anyone include or perhaps point me in the direction of a literary analysis of beat poetry? Similar to what one might find on metaphysical poetry or romantic etc. Just some kind of formal description of typical beat poetry outlining form and style, length and typical subject matter. When one searches for beat poetry it redirects here to this beat generation page and almost all other content relating to beat poetry on the web is taken from here or is also about the beat generation and its very frustrating as someone (like myself) who would simply like to read about the poetry itself for the time being can find only discussions pertaining to the generation that spawned it, which while important, is not exactly what I'm looking for. I'm just hoping for some sort of focus on the poetry itself, I know there is obviously no definitive set of guidelines to officially make a poem, a 'beat' poem but SOME information would be very helpful if anyone knows where to find it or would be so kind as to include it here.

203.166.237.154 00:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

Does anyone else feel this page needs a rewrite? It's just messy. 71.101.199.152 17:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link to www.johnlong.com

Hello, I did my doctorate in France at the Université de Paris III (the Sorbonne). My thesis was "Drugs and the 'Beats': The Role of Drugs in the Lives and Writings of Kerouac, Burroughs and Ginsberg." I have translated it into English and it was published last year. I invite you to have a look at my website if you wish: www.johnlong.com My question is, would you be willing to put a link to my site on yours?

Thanking you in advance for your consideration, I am

Sincerely yours

John Long 193.248.218.190 14:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Influences on Western culture - Ginsberg quotations

Ginsberg has characterized some of the essential effects of Beat Generation artistic movement in the following terms: (clip)• Liberation of the word from censorship.

Please, "WORD" is correct, not "WORLD." This is a _quote._ It is not debatable. ~cailan 06:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)