Spontaneous Western haiku Tuesday (5-7-5 free zone)

Kerouac wrote Burroughs wrote
Ginsberg wrote the Generation wrote
The Shrouded Traveler wrote their souls wrote


Heat of my heart
Healing discomforts
Time slows and slows


Maine's state bird
Which kind? argue the people
The chickadees don't care


"It will be here when
You come back in"
She smiled knowingly


Everything that comes goes
Everything with a beginning has an ending
But nothing that's good ever dies


She asked "What does any of
this have to do with Kerouac?"
And I cried Beat tears

Jack Kerouac and 666 (UPDATED: 2-28-19)

At the top of my blog's dashboard when I have it on "All Posts," it was just reading 1-100 of 1666, which freaked me out a little bit because I am numerologically superstitious and you all know what 666 represents.

So I decided to publish this post, which effectively changed that number to 1-100 of 1667. But then I thought, what's the connection between Jack Kerouac and the number 666? As I've said many times, everything connects to Kerouac.

I'm not aware of any direct connections off the top of my head, so I turned to the Google machine and found that Gina Arnold wrote a book titled, Route 666: On the Road to Nirvana; in it she charts the journey from punk to grunge. In the abstract of a lecture she gave at a KISMIF conference about the topic, she used a Kerouac quote (click here). Yet there are two more connections. First, the title of her book includes the phrase "on the road," which most people associate with Kerouac. Second, 1/3 of the Beat triumvirate, William S. Burroughs, is widely acknowledged as an influence on punk and grunge music, so I suspect he is mentioned in Arnold's book.

Then there's this tangential connection from page 112 of Robert O'Brian's Jack Kerouac's Confession, in which Kerouac and the number 666 are mentioned in the same paragraph:

I'm pretty sure, given his Catholicism, that Kerouac was at least aware of the number 666 and its meaning. Whether he mentioned it in a novel or a journal or a letter will take someone with a better memory than mine or who has all of Kerouac's writings digitally searchable. Any takers?

P.S. Dave Moore, Kerouac scholar extraordinaire from the U.K., took me up on my offer and posted in the Facebook Kerouac group an excerpt from a Kerouac letter in which he mentions Route 666 (now U.S. Route 491). See comments below.

Jack Kerouac's The Dharma Bums full text on-line

I've mentioned this before, but I forgot to mention in the context of my recent project -- summarizing each chapter of The Dharma Bums in one sentence (click here) -- that the full text of Jack Kerouac's novel is available on-line here. It's probably a huge copyright problem and it could disappear, so you might want to cut-and-paste the whole thing into your own document. I would never do that, of course, since it would be illegal.

Sex, lies, and Jack Kerouac

*******READ THE WHOLE POST BEFORE YOU GO BALLISTIC*******

Sorry about waxing so political yesterday. Well, not really. Suffice to say I want readers to know that I didn't go there in order to cause more division where there is already so much. But sometimes things are on my mind and I want to write about them. Writing my thoughts out helps me not only organize them but also think more deeply about them as I try to find the right words to express them.

And, of course, as I have said many times, this is my blog and I'll write about what I want and say what I want. As long as I promise to connect what I say to Kerouac -- even if tangentially -- I am on course provided I'm being compassionate.

Which brings me to today's topic: compassion. What is it? And what does it have to do with Kerouac?

Well, it happens that I've written about compassion a few times in the past here on The Daily Beat. Two pieces I still think are on point are available here and here. Those two pieces pretty much answer the two above questions. In summary, compassion is concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others, and Jack was devoted to the principle (whether he acted on the principle in all cases is not the point here, and besides, no one does).

So why is it on my mind today? The Robert Kraft story. If you haven't been following the news, Kraft -- the 77-year-old famous owner of the New England Patriots -- was just charged with soliciting prostitution in a sex trafficking sting at a Florida massage parlor. Folks are in an uproar over it, and there's not a peep among the talking heads that hints at giving Kraft the benefit of the doubt here (i.e., extending some compassion to him). Who knows all the variables that go into his decision to pay for sex? First of all, he's a widow. But, he has a girlfriend. Is it okay with her that he paid for sex with someone else? Who knows? Maybe they have an agreement? Did he know the women at the massage parlor were being mistreated and coerced by the owner -- in other words, sex trafficked? Who knows?

Certainly we should feel compassion for the women being forced into selling sex. Sex trafficking is not okay, and no one should think it is. But what about some compassion for Robert Kraft? It's way too easy to just dismiss the guy as an uncaring rich pervert who took advantage of powerless women. It's much more difficult to see him as a human being trying to meet needs. Do we have to agree with his strategy for meeting those needs (we all have them -- needs are universal)? No. We do not.

Kraft broke the law and he will likely suffer some consequences. He could be sanctioned in some way by the NFL, which could be significant. And his reputation had now been sullied by the press, perhaps permanently.

I am not excusing Kraft, but at the same time I have to go on record as saying I don't generally have a problem with the idea of paying for sex. Maybe if it were legal, we could regulate it and reduce sex trafficking. Jack Kerouac paid for sex on occasion, both in the U.S. and in Mexico. In the latter case with girls we would consider minors! Not okay, in my opinion.

Because paying for sex is illegal in most states, it makes it difficult to assess whether the person (I won't be gender-specific here because either gender can sell their services in this regard) is making a choice or is being forced into the act of selling sex. I am sure that some might say that no prostitute engages in the act freely, that there is always coercion afoot in some manner. I disagree. I can envision a mature women -- or man -- of legal age with many options in life who freely chooses prostitution as a way to earn money. Maybe this is rare. I don't know. Can't you imagine someone who loves the sex and the risk and novelty and the money?

I just can't get my brain around the notion that prostitution is always wrong and so is soliciting it. It's legal in certain areas of Nevada. I wonder how that fact has impacted related crimes, abuse, HIV rates, etc. I suppose that data is out there. For an interesting take on data from a retired call girl, see this Washington Post article.

Just like with the recent Jussie Smollett case, people are jumping on Kraft before they even have the full story. It may be that he should have suspected the women he was soliciting were being trafficked, in which case he was in the wrong. It does surprise me that a billionaire would resort to patronizing a massage parlor when he could easily afford a high-end escort. But maybe he was doing it behind his girlfriend's back, which is not okay either.

Maybe Robert Kraft is a bad guy. I don't know. I rather think it's a bad idea to solicit sex in a massage parlor, especially one in a state where prostitution is illegal, but I'm not going to pile on without more information. Like my linked post above says, compassion doesn't discriminate. There may be suffering on both sides of the equation -- if you care to look for it.

Jack Kerouac and Trump's "wall"

*******WARNING: BLATANTLY POLITICAL POST AHEAD*******

My brain hurts. It's not unusual (Tom Jones reference?) for that to be the case -- lots to make it hurt going on these days -- but in this case it's the realization that I may be a racist xenophobe for thinking that having strategic sections of fence as part of border security is something other than a symbol of hatred for the "other." If well-off white-skinned people were pouring over our northern border I don't think I'd care about a "wall" to keep them out. So it's not about immigration -- it's about keeping certain people "out" based on the color of their skin or some perception about their value as human beings. At least that is one way to frame it.

I'm thinking about this because I'm reading best-selling author Michael Connelly's 2016 novel, The Wrong Side of Goodbye, and just came across this:

Politicians could talk about building walls and changing laws to keep people out, but in the end they are just symbols. Neither would stop the tide any more than the rock jetties at the mouth of the port did. Nothing could stop the tide of hope and desire.

I asked myself -- "symbols of what?" -- and the only thing I could come up with are racism, xenophobia, etc. And having supported "strategic sections of fence where needed," I stand guilty of both, I'm afraid.

Damn you, Michael Connelly, for making me use my brain.

Which brings me to Jack Kerouac. What would he think about President Trump's wall? I have to give Jack credit for experience in this regard, since he crossed the southern border into Mexico and vice versa any number of times when he was "on the road." While there he interacted freely with the very type of person our President purports to keep out -- people on the margins of society like drug users, criminals, the poor, etc. Based on that experience and his own family's history, I might guess Jack would have some empathy for the plight of immigrants and thus not be a supporter of the wall.

But then I think about the older Jack who espoused conservative values and I wonder if he might be a supporter of the wall, or at least -- as I admittedly have been -- a supporter of strategic sections of fence where needed.

Two things are certain. First, we'll never know what Jack Kerouac would think about Trump's wall, and second, the whole situation is too damn complex for sound bites. It involves deep-seated values in tension with each other, and there are no easy answers.

So whether you are a Trump supporter or not, a wall supporter or not, I hope you think about the fact that we are talking about real human beings who are affected by border policies, and that they deserve compassion -- something Jack was big on. And remember that I love you either way you lean because you are a human being first and everything else is secondary. Would that we all started framing our thinking with that in mind!

We are all human beings with the same needs, security being one of them. It's understandable that some human beings see a wall as a necessary strategy to provide them with security. And it's understandable that other human beings think other strategies are better options for meeting that same need. Our needs are not in conflict, just the strategies we espouse to meet those needs. If we could start with that, we might get somewhere. So maybe I shouldn't label myself as a racist xenophobe but, rather, look at my intent when I support border fencing. And I should extend that courtesy to other as well. Are we fence supporters because we hate brown people, or because we value border security as a general construct and think fencing would help with that? But even if the answer is the latter, how do we know there isn't unconscious racism and xenophobia afoot?

And thus my brain hurts.

Those are my ramblings for this Friday morning. The sun is shining and I am sitting here in my warm house ensconced in white privilege and feeling mighty guilty about it.

How's your day going?

Keroucian reboot Thursday

As I suffer writer's block again, once more I offer some past posts I consider noteworthy for one reason or another. Happy reading.


Visit to Kerouac's grave during Lowell Celebrates Kerouac 2015 (from September 18, 2015)

Literary giants and cats, Kerouac included (from December 31, 2015)

Jack Kerouac and social media and the one-inch dash (from February 15, 2016)

On the Road is a holy book (from February 29, 2016)

Spontaneous human combustion, Forteanism, synchronicity, and Jack Kerouac (from March 18, 2016)

Spontaneous prose on a lowery afternoon (from March 28, 2016)

Summer 1956: Jack Kerouac and Edward Abbey alone together in the American wilderness (from May 8, 2016)

Jack Kerouac and suffering (from May 15, 2016)

Spontaneity, travel, NYC, and the Beat Generation: A brief tale of Kerouacian adventure in The Big Apple (from June 9, 2016)

Jack Kerouac and the "Bradley standard" on race relations (from July 10, 2016)

Kerouacian reboot Monday

With nothing new to say this morning, I thought it would be a good time to go back through the archives and provide links to some of my favorite posts from the past. There is no rhyme or reason here -- I just scanned back posts and pulled out a few that struck my fancy today. I stopped at 10. Maybe I'll post 10 more in a future post. Happy reading!

Living the answers -- Kerouac style (from November 17, 2008)

Jack Kerouac and the diamondcutter of mercy (from November 29, 2008)

Defending Kerouac (from August 29, 2009)

Interview with Helen Weaver (from November 17, 2009)

Jack Kerouac license plates request (from July 22, 2011, updated May 3, 2018)

Interview with Al Hinkle (from January 31, 2012)

The Making of On The Road: Exclusive Interview with Gerald Nicosia (from May 18, 2012)

Dimetapp dreams: Bottomless from bottom of the mind (from September 20, 2012)

San Francisco Kerouactivities Report (from January 13, 2013)

Kerouacian+ Report from NYC - Redux UPDATE 9-16-15 (from September 15, 2015)