Helle's Reviews > Ham on Rye
Ham on Rye
by
by

Holy shit!
This is the story of Henry Chenaski, Charles Bukowski’s alter ego, who had a helluva depressing childhood in large part due to a father who was a real son of a bitch and whom I blame for Henry’s later love of the bottle, to a lesser extent due to the Depression that hit the States, and Los Angeles, when Henry grew up.
My heart bled for young Henry; like when his father forced him to mow the lawn when all the other kids on the street were out playing. When Henry was done, his father put his head down on the lawn, cheek on grass, spotted a stray blade of grass and (view spoiler) .
There was something about his loneliness and his plight, in the first part of the book, which reminded me of Holden Cauldfield ( The Catcher in the Rye). Both Henry and Holden throw around goddamned tough language whenever possible but are essentially lost kids. (There’s even the word ‘rye� in the titles of both stories, surely two of the only titles in literary history to use that word).
Apart from his pestilential father, Henry suffered from the meanest boils imaginable and went through a horrible ordeal for years trying to get rid of them while being painfully aware that a head full of boils (not to mention a back) didn’t exactly attract the girls. At this point he met one of the few good people to cross his path during his childhood, the nurse who treated him for the boils: ‘She was the kindest person I’d met in eight years.� (Henry’s mother wasn’t unkind to Henry; she just didn’t stop Henry’s father but rather joined Henry in his victimhood).
As Henry grew up, the graphic details increased. There were perhaps one or two of these I could have done without, but you sense it’s part of the honesty project here; if Henry (a.k.a. Charles) thought about these things � as there’s evidence to support he did, excessively so � they went into the book. He got more obsessed with girls (and their legs, and their hair, and their�.), and as he grew older, he became obsessed with women. And with booze. He turned into the Bukowski I’d read about. This novel provided much of the background.
Here’s another classic and perhaps even defining situation: Right after his high school graduation, Henry’s father is � once again � on Henry’s case about not amounting to much. ‘Why did I have a son like you?� he says to Henry, comparing him to some other kid. ‘How come you never applied yourself?� etc. etc. No congratulations, no ‘good job, son � you did what I never managed to do�. None of that. I found myself saying out loud, (view spoiler)
While I felt for the kid Henry Chenaski, I felt increasingly annoyed with his unpleasant adult self who, perhaps unsurprisingly, seemed bent on drinking himself into a stupor and general oblivion whenever possible, picking fights and heading deliberately for the low life on skid row. As a young man he seemed determined to become a loser while disdaining anyone who wasn’t. Though somehow: Who could blame him?
It felt good to sit alone in a small space and smoke and drink. I had always been good company for myself.
Henry’s existential derailment seemed circular and monotonous towards the end, which perhaps underlines the authenticity and the tragedy of his life if not the sense of literary appreciation on my part. Still, there were many linguistic gems � in that completely non-show-off-y kind of way, which in some ways also characterizes Catcher: an informal, mid-20th century, colloquial tone which lays bare a life, sometimes annoys, sometimes draws on your sympathy, sometimes makes you laugh and often gives you glimpses of what kind of writer Hank/Charles was to become.
Potential landlord: You working?
Henry: I’m a writer
PL: You don’t look like a writer
H: What do they look like?
Even in Henry’s increasing feeling of alienation, we sense something else underneath the scarred surface, an energy with which he might learn to suppress his apparent death wish.
Words weren’t dull, words were things that could make your mind hum. If you read them and let yourself feel the magic, you could live without pain, with hope, no matter what happened to you.
This is the story of Henry Chenaski, Charles Bukowski’s alter ego, who had a helluva depressing childhood in large part due to a father who was a real son of a bitch and whom I blame for Henry’s later love of the bottle, to a lesser extent due to the Depression that hit the States, and Los Angeles, when Henry grew up.
My heart bled for young Henry; like when his father forced him to mow the lawn when all the other kids on the street were out playing. When Henry was done, his father put his head down on the lawn, cheek on grass, spotted a stray blade of grass and (view spoiler) .
There was something about his loneliness and his plight, in the first part of the book, which reminded me of Holden Cauldfield ( The Catcher in the Rye). Both Henry and Holden throw around goddamned tough language whenever possible but are essentially lost kids. (There’s even the word ‘rye� in the titles of both stories, surely two of the only titles in literary history to use that word).
Apart from his pestilential father, Henry suffered from the meanest boils imaginable and went through a horrible ordeal for years trying to get rid of them while being painfully aware that a head full of boils (not to mention a back) didn’t exactly attract the girls. At this point he met one of the few good people to cross his path during his childhood, the nurse who treated him for the boils: ‘She was the kindest person I’d met in eight years.� (Henry’s mother wasn’t unkind to Henry; she just didn’t stop Henry’s father but rather joined Henry in his victimhood).
As Henry grew up, the graphic details increased. There were perhaps one or two of these I could have done without, but you sense it’s part of the honesty project here; if Henry (a.k.a. Charles) thought about these things � as there’s evidence to support he did, excessively so � they went into the book. He got more obsessed with girls (and their legs, and their hair, and their�.), and as he grew older, he became obsessed with women. And with booze. He turned into the Bukowski I’d read about. This novel provided much of the background.
Here’s another classic and perhaps even defining situation: Right after his high school graduation, Henry’s father is � once again � on Henry’s case about not amounting to much. ‘Why did I have a son like you?� he says to Henry, comparing him to some other kid. ‘How come you never applied yourself?� etc. etc. No congratulations, no ‘good job, son � you did what I never managed to do�. None of that. I found myself saying out loud, (view spoiler)
While I felt for the kid Henry Chenaski, I felt increasingly annoyed with his unpleasant adult self who, perhaps unsurprisingly, seemed bent on drinking himself into a stupor and general oblivion whenever possible, picking fights and heading deliberately for the low life on skid row. As a young man he seemed determined to become a loser while disdaining anyone who wasn’t. Though somehow: Who could blame him?
It felt good to sit alone in a small space and smoke and drink. I had always been good company for myself.
Henry’s existential derailment seemed circular and monotonous towards the end, which perhaps underlines the authenticity and the tragedy of his life if not the sense of literary appreciation on my part. Still, there were many linguistic gems � in that completely non-show-off-y kind of way, which in some ways also characterizes Catcher: an informal, mid-20th century, colloquial tone which lays bare a life, sometimes annoys, sometimes draws on your sympathy, sometimes makes you laugh and often gives you glimpses of what kind of writer Hank/Charles was to become.
Potential landlord: You working?
Henry: I’m a writer
PL: You don’t look like a writer
H: What do they look like?
Even in Henry’s increasing feeling of alienation, we sense something else underneath the scarred surface, an energy with which he might learn to suppress his apparent death wish.
Words weren’t dull, words were things that could make your mind hum. If you read them and let yourself feel the magic, you could live without pain, with hope, no matter what happened to you.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Ham on Rye.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
July 14, 2016
–
Started Reading
July 14, 2016
– Shelved
August 8, 2016
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-24 of 24 (24 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Seemita
(new)
-
rated it 2 stars
Aug 08, 2016 01:21AM

reply
|
flag

But seriously, it is very interesting to read yours and Seemita's reviews one after the other, Helle. I feel I'm walking around this book, getting a look at it from different sides - and it's getting more and more interesting by the minute. I think I might like Henry, in spite of all his boils and bitterness :-)




For another Beat I wanted more writing out of Kerouac after On the Road and was satisfied to do Dharma Bums despite a lower rating.

Seemita, it strikes me that we (all) approach reviews and books in similar ways, certainly differently and with different expectations, and so mine will never be lyrical while yours will always be. Vive la différence! But I'm glad I read this novel and glad that I got to peek inside CB's crazy, disillusioned head. Thank you, too, for the buddy read. Let's opt for something totally different next time to see where that takes us.

I certainly don't want to cause any choleric attacks, Jean-Paul, and I have to say that, from what I've seen so far of your literary tastes, I wouldn't exactly recommend this novel to you. It's not actually the kind of thing I read that often either, but I find it rewarding to steer off my well-trodden path sometimes, and there were things I appreciated about this novel despite my three stars.

But seriously, it is very interesting to read yours and Seemita's reviews one after the other, Helle. I feel I'm walking around this book, getting a ..."
Ha - yes, indeed, Fionnuala: Seemita's and my common friends were a bit sandwiched there. And if you have an affinity for booze-afflicted would-be (and gonna-be) writers, Bukowski's your man. I did think this novel offered some interesting insights but also felt a bit bogged down by the unsurprising inertia at the end. You might like Henry, too, precisely because of that eclectic mix of boils, bitterness, booze - and emotional rawness, occasional wisdom and love of words.

Thank you very much, Cheryl. 'Distressing journey' is an apt description of this coming-of-age story, in which I dare say Henry only partly succeeds in coming of age.

Ilse, I recall next to nothing from the books I read as a teen, and of course only the ones we believe most worthy will queue up again for a second reading. I imagine I wouldn't have felt so much pain for the kid Henry as a teenager as I do now, and I might not have felt that much empathy with the adult, disillusioned Henry. Thanks for stopping by!

Ah, yes, I quite remember that scene, too. In fact, I had it in mind when I wrote this He got more obsessed with girls (and their legs, and their hair, and their�.) but of course left it open for readers and non-readers of the novel alike to fill in the blank.

Perry, I think the overall tone of the novel ensures that it does not bring on the blues - at least it didn't for me, and I can be a pretty emotional reader sometimes, especially when children are involved. But he narrates it in a way which makes it part entertaining, part gruesome-truthful and part detached, I felt. So if you've wanted to pick it up sometimes, don't let that 'fear' stop you.

Michael, I totally agree that it's not always the most known or hyped work of an author that one ultimately ends up appreciating the most. Edith Wharton (whom I know you've read, too) is a good example. I like many of her novels and adore her prose, but she really got me with Ethan Frome, which for some unfathomable reason is rated lower than most of her other novels here on GR.
Bukowski was certainly interesting if occasionally also annoying, and I'm glad I got acquainted with him. For some reason, I've always assumed I wouldn't like On the Road and so have avoided Kerouac altogether, so thanks for the tip - and for stopping by!


Thanks very much, Laysee. You are absolutely right in saying that it takes skill to write a book which can elicit such different emotions. That's usually one of the things I appreciate most in books. And yes, I remember that quote from Stefansson's book from various reviews. As voracious readers, I guess we often respond to writers who explictly share our love of words.

I agree, Jean-Paul, that I think with age we become better at separating the wheat from the chaff in various aspects of life, be it books, people or things to spend our time on. So while I'd like to keep developing as a human being (which means sometimes treading down new paths), I also try to choose things that I believe I'll appreciate or enjoy, which I guess is what you're saying as well.


It absolutely makes sense, Christine, and I agree. I guess a lot of writers write in order to make sense of some of those things, and I think the good reader tries to empathize with characters (indirectly writers, to some extent) despite the childhood dramas or events being different. The 'problem' would be if certain events or moments become defining traumas which prevent people (writers and non-writers alike) from seeing other aspects of themselves and their history - an all-too human challenge, I suspect.



Good point, Christine. It seems a bit pointless if that's all they do (recycle the same pain in different books). I recall reading that Hemingway wrote as a way out of his pain; again, given how it ended for him, he clearly didn't quite succeed. On the other hand, who knows what would have happened if he/they hadn't chosen to write...?

That is a very perceptive observation, Dolors, and I totally agree with you. As much as I felt for the young man and the child, Henry Chenaski, I just couldn't muster any continued connection to him - precisely (I see now) because he didn't seem intent on creating a connection! And I guess that's what I first and foremost look for in literature - a way of connecting with the characters in it, sometimes the author. Thanks for finding and commenting on this review, Dolors. It missed your voice!