Henry Miller

[davemarc]

At 04:57 PM 5/28/96 +0300, you wrote:
>
>
>My two cents.
>
>Around fucking episodes Henry Miller builds a "wildly" sentimentalistic
>and "daringly" eloquent pseudo-philosophy, which, as I see it, is meant
>to justify his cock -- his masculine imagination, his masculine universe. 
>
>One reason why Charles Bukowski is a much better writer than Miller is that 
>there are no such schmaltzy apologetic levels in his books. This makes the
>narrational stance much less authoritarian in Bukowski than it is in Miller.
>
>_GR_ is impurely involved with phallic powers, sure, but the kaleidoscopic
>reflections of the narrator and characters won't cement any ego-boostings 
>of male individualism. Instead, the text desparately tries to prompt its
>readers to look for ways to subvert institutionalized phallic traditions.
>
Miller's texts strongly encourage the subversion of institutionalized
traditions--phallic, academic, and otherwise.  He championed individuality,
celebrated the "will" a la Nietzsche, and consistently criticized the
mainstream culture and values of his homeland, the United States--the
government of which wouldn't officially allow some of his books within its
borders until the early Sixties.

Authoritarian narrational stance?  I expect that from an author.

davemarc