In the following poem, how do we determine Bukowski's relationship with the

Question: In the following poem, how do we determine Bukowski's relationship with the subject!? What IS the relationship!?

Raw With Love

little dark girl with
kind eyes
when it comes time to
use the knife
I won't flinch and
I won't blame
you,
as I drive along the shore alone
as the palms wave,
the ugly heavy palms,
as the living does not arrive
as the dead do not leave,
I won't blame you,
instead
I will remember the kisses
our lips raw with love
and how you gave me
everything you had
and how I
offered you what was left of
me,
and I will remember your small room
the feel of you
the light in the window
your records
your books
our morning coffee
our noons our nights
our bodies spilled together
sleeping
the tiny flowing currents
immediate and forever
your leg my leg
your arm my arm
your smile and the warmth
of you
who made me laugh
again!.
little dark girl with kind eyes
you have no
knife!. the knife is
mine and I won't use it
yet!.

Charles BukowskiWww@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

Jack understands this poem, and many of the contributors to the poetry section would do well to read at least his most recent blog entry!.

The poem surprises in its ending because the typical reader, from what she knows of relationships and what she wants to hear from the speaker of a poem, reads the beginning as if it is from the perspective of the VICTIM in the relationship (as if it were always or even usually as simple as that)!. Why else, the reader asks, would the poet/persona be writing, especially if he talks about a knife!?

So Bukowski thwarts expectations by revealing that the "little dark girl with kind eyes" is the only person who could be a "victim" here, that the knife, the severing of the cord, is his and his alone to do!. When "little dark girl with/ kind eyes" is on two lines at the beginning, it can be interpreted much more ironically; "kind eyes" as a unit set apart makes it seem that the girl's eyes could be anything but!. But at the end of the poem, when the description is repeated, this time on ONE line, the narrator conveys the girl's literal and total innocence, reinforces everything he's said about her (all of it purely physical, as others have pointed out)!.

He also reveals his condescension toward her!. I don't think it's a profound condescension at this point, but it IS there!.!.!.!. He is musing over her and his ability to cut the cord in this way because he knows SHE would never think about these things!. She's that innocent, that easily duped!. "I won't flinch and/ I won't blame/ you"---he'll be merciless and sever everything with a fast, clean cut!. He knows from his past experiences with women, though, that when he does this she'll most likely lash out and try to hurt him!. There's a very subtle shift from what we almost always hear: instead of "I don't blame you" (for being angry, usually), it's "I won't blame you" (for doing what you'll do out of anger, stupidity, etc!.---or simply for hating me for the rest of your life)!. (It's similar to what Jesus says before being crucified: "Forgive them, for they know not what they do!." Many an artist has identified with Jesus on some level, justified or not, Christian or not!. In many ways it's an enviable position to be in!.!.!.!.) In this case, the narrator is the judge who's seen all imaginable break-ups before, at least of a certain kind!. But he's the defendant in all of them, a defendant who could turn the tables and "blame the victim" if he wanted to!. Most people wouldn't think that was fair, but, luckily for them, he doesn't either!. In the narrator's eyes, everything else is fair, though, and that's where condescension finds form and some sustenance!.

A lot more could be said, for instance that, for the aesthete, surface and physicality are everything, that Kierkegaard insisted for that reason among others that morality trumps aesthetics every time, that !.!.!. well, probably all this should wait till another day!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

What IS the relationship!? I think this IS a good question!.
One could say there is only one person and the contemplation of suicide!.
Rather I think, the narrator is a self-destructive person who has found joy yet striving to let go of their old habits!. They enjoy their 'little dark girl with kind eyes' but feel they must sabotage the relationship-the knife- to feel relief and/or whole!. As pain is addictive and once tasted, one experiences reality, seeing happiness is only temporary but pain ever available!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

well the most obvious is lover, then muse!. But it gave me the sense that she was younger, felt like his impulse was to molest her maybe just metaphorically
for me the knife was the cutting intellect, or the act of departure, closure!. I even debated the knife as a phallus!.
!.!.!. I found it interesting that some took dark eyes as race
raw kisses - made me think of chapped lips in a tropical location!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

As I read it, it was a love relationship that is now apart!. He is reminiscing about the relationship and pondering suicide, his own!. Deeper signifigance with the knife is that he is not ready to end the relationship or chance of it continuing!. A great flow to the words and images are strong and bold with no wasted words!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

"Leaving Las Vegas" was presumably based on Bukowski's life!. The story shows the relationship with a prostitute ("dark" could refer to her nature, rather than her complexion)!. While he was suicidal, the protagonist could not finish that job!.!.!.but allowed the drugs and alcohol to take over and eventually kill him off !. This seems to me a possible interpretation!.

http://www!.youtube!.com/watch!?v=H3_1_0ZCC!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

HOW we determine it is in the use of the knife in his poem!.!.!.that is the clue!.!.!.!.the WHAT is then the treasure to discover with various interpretations, but I do not for a second believe it is literally a little dark girl with kind eyes!.!.!.she is a metaphor for legions!.

maWww@QuestionHome@Com

The knife could be your memory and your refusal to forget--this could go so many ways!. Loss of a marriage, loss of a relationship of another kind, loss of a child, finding out about a child aborted----so many deep things could be this relationship!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

it seems he personalizes her too much for her to not be an actuality: "your records!. your books!." he is contemplating taking his own life and just wants to reassure her that she is no part of this decision!. their pleasures together were simple and yet abundant!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Interracial relationship gone bad!. Now he is contemplating killing her!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Ouch!.!.!.!.!.
not easily
There is more than one way of interpreting this!. I see one and then another shows its face!.!.!.
I think it brings the mind into a focal point and we will interpret it from our own emotional make up!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Hmm, the other Lolita!. Raw, legs, tiny currents!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

sounds like an old married couple
the knife being divorce!.
i'm just guessing
not versed in the literary worldWww@QuestionHome@Com

I think someone cut the cheese!. Wasn`t me!.
"The Troll Hunter"Www@QuestionHome@Com

Lost love as to pre suicidal eventWww@QuestionHome@Com

I hope it's not his blow up doll! LOLWww@QuestionHome@Com

i think Mr!. Charles!.!.!.!.

!.!.!.!.!.!.does not believe!.!.!.!.!.

!.!.!.in unconditional love!.!.!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I'm going to go with: The relationship is held together by a mere thread, and his self destructive behavior is the knife!. "I won't use it yet" means inevitably he's going to, he doesn't want to, but hey; he's a rude drunk!. I know it, you know it, and he most definitely knew it!.

And of course the girl with kind eyes could be anybody and everybody that's been kind to him that he's sh!t on, or is going to sh!t on!.

Or, what Jack said!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

The best preparation one can have for understanding Bukowski's oeuvre is Kierkegaard's "Either/Or" (in particular, the "Either" section)!.

In short, Bukowski is rendering a description of the ultimate aesthete who is capable of passion, but never love!. For the aesthete, the ultimate value of everything and everyone is how "interesting" they are in a purely objective sense!. This perspective of viewing existence almost as though it were a work of art to be appreciated from afar creates a distance which the aesthete defines as "freedom!." And it is in this sense that Bukowski is speaking here!.

Consider, every single description of the girl is purely physical!. She's interesting!. But though he's interested, he still remains emotionally aloof because his freedom demands it!.!.!.

"and how you gave me
everything you had
and how I
offered you what was left of
me,"

The girl is willing to give everything, and he, only what he can give "what was left of me!." But NEVER "everything!." Please note, she "gives," he merely "offers!."

The knife he's referring to is neither about suicide nor homicide; it is his "power," his "independence," his willingness and capacity to sever the relationship at any time of his choosing and simply walk away!.

You ask of his relationship to the girl -- it is purely "aesthetic;" he finds her interesting!. And when he no longer finds her interesting, he will take out his knife and sever the relationship!. He will cut, and she will bleed!. Then he will move on, because that is the nature of the aesthete; he must ever and always be free to experience the next "interesting" thing!.

Hope this helps!.Www@QuestionHome@Com