ramin@rtgvax.UUCP (Pantagruel) (02/14/86)
Any self-respecting Thomas Pynchon readers out there...?
If you have Gravity's Rainbow phobia stay out of it...
Since moving down to Northern California a year ago, I have met only one
other person willing to admit they had read any Pynchon (and
"Crying of Lot 49" at that... not even a G.R. reader...)
Just curious as to what the prevailing opinion revolves around...
Was he only a passing fad or have regulars decided to follow Pynchon's
lead into seclusion...
= = =
Alias: ramin firoozye | USps: Systems Control Inc.
uucp: ...!shasta \ | 1801 Page Mill Road
...!lll-lcc \ | Palo Alto, CA 94303
...!ihnp4 \...!ramin@rtgvax | ^G: (415) 494-1165 x-1777
= = =
Standard disclaimer excluded for humanitarian purposes.jbuck@epimass.UUCP (Joe Buck) (02/17/86)
In article <25@rtgvax.UUCP> ramin@rtgvax.UUCP (Pantagruel) writes: >Any self-respecting Thomas Pynchon readers out there...? >If you have Gravity's Rainbow phobia stay out of it... I read and enjoyed "V" and "Gravity's Rainbow" and am not ashamed. But then I enjoy players of literary mind games like John Barth and Kurt Vonnegut (though some literary types are no doubt aghast that I'd put Vonnegut in the same category as Barth and Pynchon because he's easier to read). About a year ago, a lot of complaints about light bulb jokes were being made, and a couple of sf-lovers people were attacking Pynchon at the same time. Naturally, I posted part of the story of Byron the Bulb from Gravity's Rainbow. >Since moving down to Northern California a year ago, I have met only one >other person willing to admit they had read any Pynchon (and >"Crying of Lot 49" at that... not even a G.R. reader...) Well, I'm in northern CA (over a year now), but I'm still an easterner at heart. -- - Joe Buck <ihnp4!pesnta!epimass!jbuck> Better to be silent and thought a pig than to oink and remove all doubt.
jwp@sdchem.UUCP (John Pierce) (02/18/86)
A few months ago I found "Slow Learner", published in softback by Little, Brown
in 1984. It's five of his early short stories, with a fairly interesting
foreword (by Pynchon himself). Pricey at $7.95, but far better than nothing.
Really serious Pynchon-watchers will remember at least three of them from
20-25 years ago (they were, I think, in the New Directions anthologies circa
1960 though I may have read them in some more obscure place), but two I'm
certain I've never seen before.
I find it interesting that "The Crying of Lot 49" seems to be fairly available
again, but I haven't seen new editions of either "V" or "Gravity's Rainbow",
and I really need a new copy of "V", since mine's a now-20-year-old paperback
that I'm reluctant to let anyone else even look at, much less read.
John Pierce, Chemistry, UC San Diego
jwp%chem@ucsd.edu
{decvax,sdcsvax}!sdchem!jwprec@mplvax.ARPA (Richard Currier) (02/18/86)
In article <105@sdchema.sdchem.UUCP> jwp@sdchem.UUCP (System Management - jwp) writes: > >I really need a new copy of "V", since mine's a now-20-year-old paperback >that I'm reluctant to let anyone else even look at, much less read. > > John Pierce, Chemistry, UC San Diego > I too have that first paperback edition from my college days, now sealed in plastic and stored carefully away. -- richard currier marine physical lab u.c. san diego {ihnp4|decvax|akgua|dcdwest|ucbvax} !sdcsvax!mplvax!rec
wilson_3@h-sc1.UUCP (bradford wilson) (02/19/86)
> In article <25@rtgvax.UUCP> ramin@rtgvax.UUCP (Pantagruel) writes: > >Any self-respecting Thomas Pynchon readers out there...? > >If you have Gravity's Rainbow phobia stay out of it... > > I read and enjoyed "V" and "Gravity's Rainbow" and am not ashamed. But > then I enjoy players of literary mind games like John Barth and Kurt > Vonnegut (though some literary types are no doubt aghast that I'd > put Vonnegut in the same category as Barth and Pynchon because he's > easier to read). Bravo! "Gravity's Rainbow" is one of the more significant works of 20th century literature (and will eventually be reecognized as such). What makes Pynchon more sophisticated than Vonnegut is both his style, esp. use of tense and person, and the wide range of material he draws upon to form his literary-imagery melange. I read "Rainbow" before reading Pynchon's other stuff; I would probably recommend that others try "The Crying of Lot 49" first. It is MUCH shorter, and you should be able to tell if you can stand him in large doses. Please Email me if you try reading Pynchon because of these postings, or if you seriously loathe him and hold him in contempt -- I'd be interested to know WHY! DIRE wolf aka h-sc1!wilson_3@harvard formerly Wombat .:. ---------------------------------------- "Put down that axe, Mr. Scary, and come with us."
putnam@steinmetz.UUCP (jefu) (02/19/86)
In article <25@rtgvax.UUCP> ramin@rtgvax.UUCP (Pantagruel) writes: >Any self-respecting Thomas Pynchon readers out there...? Yup. >Since moving down to Northern California a year ago, I have met only one >other person willing to admit they had read any Pynchon (and >"Crying of Lot 49" at that... not even a G.R. reader...) I have read "Lot 49" and "G's Rainbow", but never (somehow) managed to finish "V". Dont know why, except that i found the later stuff much easier to read (!). Not that i found "G's Rainbow" easy. I finally finished it on a six hour plane ride. But it was worth it. There must be others out there, as i saw a rocket limerick just recently ("There once was a thing called a V2...") (I have been wondering why the Challenger accident hasnt prompted more such postings...) >Just curious as to what the prevailing opinion revolves around... >Was he only a passing fad or have regulars decided to follow Pynchon's >lead into seclusion... I have been waiting and hoping that out of his seclusion Pynchon would come up with something new. -- O -- jefu tell me all about -- UUCP: {rochester,edison}!steinmetz!putnam Anna Livia! I want to hear all.... -- ARPA: putnam@GE-CRD
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (02/20/86)
In article <657@steinmetz.UUCP> putnam@kbsvax.UUCP (jefu) writes: >I have read "Lot 49" and "G's Rainbow", but never (somehow) managed >to finish "V". Dont know why, except that i found the later stuff much >easier to read (!). ... I started G.'s Rainbow twice before finishing it, and V. three times before finishing it. :-) Seriously, V. is a wonderful book that will repay the effort you put into finishing it. Some of your favorite characters from G.'s Rainbow appear in V. (including Pig Bodine) What is V. about? V. as Zelig: V. as agent of change in history. The movie Zelig did remind me of V. as much as anything when it came out. The trash heap (as Pynchon sez) as metaphor for civilization. And V. as a junkyard rat, making her/its living from civilization's tendency toward decay. -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly
wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin ) (02/21/86)
This was brought to mind by the mention of Pynchon's "V": We all heard, back when the movie was released, how the producers of "Blade Runner" paid that book's author (or copyright holder) for the use of that title on the movie, which was made based on a different novel (Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep", of course). Well, then: Did the producers of the TV series "V" pay Pynchon (or his agent, or the copyright holder) anything for using that title, since his book, "V", had come out long before that? Anybody ever hear anything about that? Will
krantz@csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) (02/22/86)
*** MASSAGE THIS LINE WITH YOUR REPLACEMENT *** Well, finally a serious literary discussion on the net. Pynchon, depending on your aesthetic tastes, may well be the greatest living writer of fiction in the English language. Gravity's Rainbow, in scope and depth, is really comparable only to Ulysses, and there are those who'd say it's better (though I'm not among them). Personally, my favorite novelist is E.L. Doctorow, but that's sort of arguable with Pynchon around. Given the incredible amount of work that's gone into his first 3 books, it seems safe to assume that another monumental saga is on its way. Lord only knows when it will arrive and what it will be, though. To those who haven't found new editions of V. - they certainly exist in New York City. If you live anywhere else that's your own fault. :-) - Michael Krantz "A door slammed. The maid screamed. Suddenly a pirate ship appeared on the horizon."
martin@entropy.UUCP (Don Martin) (02/24/86)
<>
I had reason to check on copyright law last year and found, much
to my surprise, that the title is not included in the copyright
protection. This should have been obvious, since you see so many
repeats of tiltles.
Thus I suspect that Pynchon got nothing for the title.
Do you Pynchon fans know that a small press in England
has been reprinting a few of his stories that were published
in magazines?
Does anyone have a complete list of stories including the
place and date of publication?
Donald C. Martin, phone (206) 543 1044
SC-32, Dept. of Biostatistics., U. of Wash, Seattle WA, 98195
{decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax!lbl-csam}!uw-beaver!entropy!martinnobi@mtuxo.UUCP (m.juliar) (02/24/86)
You can't copyright a title.
phillips@cisden.UUCP (Tom Phillips) (02/24/86)
In article <1204@brl-smoke.ARPA> wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes: >This was brought to mind by the mention of Pynchon's "V": We all heard, >back when the movie was released, how the producers of "Blade Runner" >paid that book's author (or copyright holder) for the use of that title >on the movie, which was made based on a different novel (Dick's "Do >Androids Dream of Electric Sheep", of course). >Well, then: Did the producers of the TV series "V" pay Pynchon (or his >agent, or the copyright holder) anything for using that title, since his >book, "V", had come out long before that? Anybody ever hear anything >about that? If I remember what I saw correctly, the TV drek was an "adaptation" of a book by (BIG uncertainty) Karel Kapek (sp) of RUR fame. The book was titled something like _The_Invasion_of_the_Salamanders_. Details could be off, but I'm sure that it was not a reference to Pynchon. -- Tommy Phillips From the banks of the great grey-green greasy Limpopo River, all set about with fever-trees. cisden!phillips
boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) (02/25/86)
> From: brl-smoke!wmartin (Will Martin) > This was brought to mind by the mention of Pynchon's "V": We all heard, > back when the movie was released, how the producers of "Blade Runner" > paid that book's author (or copyright holder) for the use of that title > on the movie, which was made based on a different novel (Dick's "Do > Androids Dream of Electric Sheep", of course). > > Well, then: Did the producers of the TV series "V" pay Pynchon (or his > agent, or the copyright holder) anything for using that title, since his > book, "V", had come out long before that? Anybody ever hear anything > about that? At the risk of assuming that you aren't kidding with this posting, no, no such arrangement was made, and for a very simple reason. The tv series title is pronounced "vee", whereas Pynchon's book's title is, as I understand it (I haven't read it), pronounced "five" (and incidentally, the book title is "V.", not "V".). --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Acton-Nagog, MA) UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...} !decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.DEC.COM
krantz@csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) (02/25/86)
> You can't copyright a title.
This is true. It applies just as well to music (but they're
so nasty over in net.music these days that I've decided to
move back to books), where it's common to steal old titles,
as for "cover" versions of songs. In theory, anybody who
wanted to publish a story or novel called "Gravity's Rainbow"
would be welcome to (though a publisher or magazine editor
would be unlikely to consider use of the title justified
by the material.) Like there probably won't be another
novel titled "Moby Dick," but, for instance, there has
been in the past, and will be again, a book called (as
Joyce Carol Oates' recent work was) "Solstice," since
that work wasn't authoritative enough to pre-empt the
title.
- Michael Krantzwendyt@pyramid.UUCP (Wendy Thrash) (02/26/86)
JERRY BOYAJIAN, in <1359@decwrl.DEC.COM>: > The tv series title is pronounced "vee", whereas Pynchon's book's > title is, as I understand it (I haven't read it), pronounced "five" > (and incidentally, the book title is "V.", not "V".). Say what?! Jerry hasn't read the book; I have, three times, and pronouncing it "five" makes absolutely NO SENSE*. It is, therefore, probably true, and I conclude that, in order to have such obscure inside information, Jerry Boyajian is really Thomas Pynchon (or vice-versa). :-) ---------------- *OK, I'll admit I haven't counted the instances of V. in the book; it could be five, or a multiple of five, in which case it would make some sense. Wendy Thrash (...pyramid!wendyt), an occasional human yo-yo.
floyd@brl-smoke.ARPA (Floyd C. Wofford ) (02/26/86)
I was able to pick up copies of both "V" and "Gravity's Rainbow" in a Goodwill outlet a couple of years ago for about 10 to 15 cents a copy. One might wish to try keeping a look out in their local outlet. I am curious about anyone's comments about John Barth. I got a copy of "The Sot-Weed Factor" in the same way. Having not had enough time to read either of them (time.. I never have the time to read all the stuff I would like to) I am interested to find out if I should make the effort sooner. Somehow I have Barth and Pynchon labelled in the same general class as I have Richard Brautigan, Kurt Vonnegut, Tom Robbins, etc. This is a rather vague and arbitrary grouping I understand, but they all seem to have a similar feel to them. That's all that is implied here, so please, no flames. I would much rather read a juicy book list. floyd@brl.arpa
nobi@mtuxo.UUCP (m.juliar) (02/26/86)
Re: Those paperback versions of "V" that several of you have squirreled away. Don't count on using them for collateral for your next house. A true first edition of "V" in cloth in dust jacket, all in very good condition brings a dealer around $300, a seller to a dealer maybe $200-250, depending on current market conditions and the condition of the book itself. A paperback copy, first printing would bring, I would guess, around $10 if in top-notch condition. I'm not certain of that because I haven't been able to turn up a citation for one because the demand for such an item is quite low. If you are going to keep your very own copy of "V" in a bank vault, realize that it is for sentimental reasons only. I wonder what Pynchon would think of that?
mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) (02/28/86)
In article <947@h-sc1.UUCP> wilson_3@h-sc1.UUCP (bradford wilson) writes: > > Bravo! "Gravity's Rainbow" is one of the more significant works >of 20th century literature (and will eventually be reecognized as such). >What makes Pynchon more sophisticated than Vonnegut is both his style, esp. >use of tense and person, and the wide range of material he draws upon >to form his literary-imagery melange. Certainly Pynchon is much more accomplished than Vonnegut, but that's not really the relevant comparison. The style, organization, and tone that Pynchon seemed to have created for his _V._ seem a less impressive achievement after you discover that he could have learned most of it from a book published a few years earlier, _The Recognitions_ by William Gaddis, the most important American novelist of this half of our century. (GulP! at that unhedged claim.) With two huge masterpieces and a respectable minor work, he has a serious cliam to that accolade. Coincidentally, that's almost the count for Pynchon (you'd have to add the stories in _Slow Learner_), but of course you don't tally things up that way. What matters is the quality of the individual works, and I suggest that _The Recognitions_ is IT among American novels of this century, i.e. yes, right there with or past the best of Faulkner, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Pynchon if you insist, etc. Gaddis has the complexity and playfulness of Pynchon, and the audacity of the more obvious experimentalists, but also an important underlying seriousness Pynchon largely lacks. The heat-death of the universe -- what a stupid thing to worry about when you get right down to it. Sex, art, and religion -- now those are important things to worry about. I acknowledge that to count _JR_ as an additional masterpiece, you have to give it my slightly nonstandard reading. Most people read it as a sour satire on the world of business, and as such a pretty good one of its kind, but not a first-rank book overall. In my reading, we shift the focus from JR himself to the three main adult characters, and you get a rather deep munching on problems of responsibility. Also some remarkable technical innovations. (To get this reading you have to discount the title a bit, but so what?) The advice people have been offerring here--get started on Pynchon with his short novel, _The Crying of Lot 49_--does not really carry over for Gaddis. His recent short novel (well, it's 261 pages, so short only by comparison) _Carpenter's Gothic_ is probably hard to take. Let _JR_ give you a tutorial on how to read Gaddis's indirect narration. Further advice: when you read _The Recognitions_, don't be put off by the density of the prose in the first 50 pages or so. Things get clearer pretty soon; and in fact if you return to that opening after finishing the book, you'll see that it's actually fairly easy to follow (now that you know what's supposed to be going on). -- -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) (02/28/86)
In article <1359@decwrl.DEC.COM> boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) writes: > ... whereas Pynchon's book's >title is, as I understand it (I haven't read it), pronounced "five" >(and incidentally, the book title is "V.", not "V".). > >--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Acton-Nagog, MA) > "Five" is quite unlikely. The book is full of characters whose name begins with the letter 'V', and one mysterious figure often referred to just as V. The number five, on the other hand, has no special bearing on what goes on in the book. (He may well employ it as a pun somewhere, of course.) -- -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (02/28/86)
In article <1359@decwrl.DEC.COM> boyajian@akov68.DEC (JERRY BOYAJIAN) writes: >The tv series title is pronounced "vee", whereas Pynchon's book's >title is, as I understand it (I haven't read it), pronounced "five" This is puzzling, since the letter "vee" is a major motif in the book (e.g., many characters' names begin with V, and there are place names like Vhiessu (sp?) used throughout the book) and the title in this context I think refers to the letter "vee" rather than to Roman numeral "V". What's the source for this reading of the title? -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (03/03/86)
In article <1746@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> mmar@sphinx.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) writes: > Gaddis has the complexity and playfulness of Pynchon, and the >audacity of the more obvious experimentalists, but also an important >underlying seriousness Pynchon largely lacks. The heat-death of the >universe -- what a stupid thing to worry about when you get right down >to it. Sex, art, and religion -- now those are important things to worry >about. Entropy is in fact an important theme in Pynchon's work, but to refer to his use of it as a silly obsession with the heat death of the universe is to oversimplify. Grossly. In Pynchon's work, entropy is the central fact behind things falling apart in our human world, esp. communication. I see nothing 'stupid' about this notion. As to seriousness, Pynchon seems to be saying Hell, we've had enough seriousness and see what it's gotten us: the arms race, concentration camps, torture, terrorism wherever we turn. Gimme a pie in the face, old buddih; gimme Pig Bodine, and baby Tyrone, and Benny Profane. The appropriate 'serious' literature for our age is a stack of Zap comix. -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly
putnam@steinmetz.UUCP (jefu) (03/04/86)
In article <1316@brl-smoke.ARPA> floyd@brl-smoke.ARPA (Floyd C. Wofford (MMW) <floyd>) writes: >I was able to pick up copies of both "V" and "Gravity's Rainbow" in >a Goodwill outlet a couple of years ago for about 10 to 15 cents a copy. >One might wish to try keeping a look out in their local outlet. Also the Salvation Army, which sometimes has real bargains in among the junk. >I am curious about anyone's comments about John Barth. I got a copy >of "The Sot-Weed Factor" in the same way. Having not had enough time >to read either of them (time.. I never have the time to read all >the stuff I would like to) I am interested to find out if I should >make the effort sooner. I liked "The Sot Weed Factor". I think it is worth reading sooner. This does not so so much for the rest of Barth, which gets very difficult with not a lot of reward. I once heard someone say that he expected nobody to actually finish "Giles Goat Boy" and he thought it might be better that way. From an english professor, that was amusing. >Somehow I have Barth and Pynchon labelled in the same general class >as I have Richard Brautigan, Kurt Vonnegut, Tom Robbins, etc. This >is a rather vague and arbitrary grouping I understand, but they all >seem to have a similar feel to them. That's all that is implied here, >so please, no flames. I would much rather read a juicy book list. This is not intended to be a flame, but i would never put Barth and Pynchon in with Brautigan, et al. I _might_ class Barth and Pynchon together, and throw in Gunther Grass and Gabriel Garcia Marquez and ... but only with reluctance. Certainly anyone reading Vonnegut or Robbins and enjoying them should not assume that they will like Pynchon or vice versa. Both Barth and Pynchon are a good deal denser than any of Vonnegut, Robbins, Brautigan and similar types and require a lot more work to read. Of course, you can get much more out of them. Barth, for example, like to steal plots and characters from all sorts of places and dump them in together, and stir well. If you dont recognize where he stole them from, the story wont be half as much fun. -- O -- jefu tell me all about -- UUCP: {rochester,edison}!steinmetz!putnam Anna Livia! I want to hear all.... -- ARPA: putnam@GE-CRD
mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) (03/09/86)
In article <698@rti-sel.UUCP> wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) writes: >In article <1746@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> mmar@sphinx.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) writes: > >> Gaddis has the complexity and playfulness of Pynchon, and the >>audacity of the more obvious experimentalists, but also an important >>underlying seriousness Pynchon largely lacks. The heat-death of the >>universe -- what a stupid thing to worry about when you get right down >>to it. Sex, art, and religion -- now those are important things to worry >>about. > >Entropy is in fact an important theme in Pynchon's work, but to refer >to his use of it as a silly obsession with the heat death of the >universe is to oversimplify. Grossly. In Pynchon's work, entropy is >the central fact behind things falling apart in our human world, esp. >communication. I see nothing 'stupid' about this notion. > Yes, guilty as charged. I knew it was a gross oversimplification the minute I saw my fingers type it; but I kept it anyway, in a polemical spirit. Certainly it's a charged metaphor with bearing on matters closer to home, as Bill points out. >As to seriousness, Pynchon seems to be saying Hell, we've had enough >seriousness and see what it's gotten us: the arms race, concentration >camps, torture, terrorism wherever we turn. Gimme a pie in the face, >old buddih; gimme Pig Bodine, and baby Tyrone, and Benny Profane. The >appropriate 'serious' literature for our age is a stack of Zap comix. > I hope we're talking about the same thing. By 'seriousness' I don't mean long-faced solemnity. And I agree that seriousness is quite compatible with a comic novel (hell, take _Ulysses_). But Pynchon isn't truly comic, though his work is filled with hijinx (which are fun all the way through _V._ and parts of _Gravity's Rainbow_, but can get tedious in the latter -- e.g., the submarine scenes). I say he's not truly comic -- he's striving for profundity underneath the hijinx, and it's an annoying sort of striving, whose idea of depth is bleakness. -- -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
floyd@brl-smoke.ARPA (Floyd C. Wofford ) (03/10/86)
In article <672@steinmetz.UUCP> putnam@kbsvax.UUCP (jefu) writes: >This is not intended to be a flame, but i would never put Barth and >Pynchon in with Brautigan, et al. I _might_ class Barth and Pynchon >together, and throw in Gunther Grass and Gabriel Garcia Marquez and ... >but only with reluctance. Certainly anyone reading Vonnegut or Robbins >and enjoying them should not assume that they will like Pynchon or >vice versa. Both Barth and Pynchon are a good deal denser than any of >Vonnegut, Robbins, Brautigan and similar types and require a lot more >work to read. Of course, you can get much more out of them. Barth, >for example, like to steal plots and characters from all sorts of places >and dump them in together, and stir well. If you dont recognize where >he stole them from, the story wont be half as much fun. >-- > O -- jefu > tell me all about -- UUCP: {rochester,edison}!steinmetz!putnam >Anna Livia! I want to hear all.... -- ARPA: putnam@GE-CRD And it certainly is not taken to be a flame. It is taken to be a discussion of styles of various contemporary writers. This is good. I learn and hopefully others do too. That is also an excellent use of the net. I thank you for such thoughtful and insightful comment. I read 'One Hundred Years of Solitude' several years ago and it still remains one of the unique reading experiences I have enjoyed. Anyone who refuses to read it doesn't deserve a second chance. To compare Pynchon to Marquez is remarkable. I didn't think anyone in the U.S. was writing with the feel of anyone south of our territorial borders. You whet my appetite for both Barth and Pynchon more. floyd@brl.arpa
krantz@csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) (03/11/86)
/* csd2:net.books / mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) / 5:25 pm Feb 27, 1986 */ In article <947@h-sc1.UUCP> wilson_3@h-sc1.UUCP (bradford wilson) writes: > > Bravo! "Gravity's Rainbow" is one of the more significant works >of 20th century literature (and will eventually be reecognized as such). >What makes Pynchon more sophisticated than Vonnegut is both his style, esp. >use of tense and person, and the wide range of material he draws upon >to form his literary-imagery melange. Certainly Pynchon is much more accomplished than Vonnegut, but that's not really the relevant comparison. The style, organization, and tone that Pynchon seemed to have created for his _V._ seem a less impressive achievement after you discover that he could have learned most of it from a book published a few years earlier, _The Recognitions_ by William Gaddis, the most important American novelist of this half of our century. (GulP! at that unhedged claim.) With two huge masterpieces and a respectable minor work, he has a serious cliam to that accolade. Coincidentally, that's almost the count for Pynchon (you'd have to add the stories in _Slow Learner_), but of course you don't tally things up that way. What matters is the quality of the individual works, and I suggest that _The Recognitions_ is IT among American novels of this century, i.e. yes, right there with or past the best of Faulkner, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Pynchon if you insist, etc. Gaddis has the complexity and playfulness of Pynchon, and the audacity of the more obvious experimentalists, but also an important underlying seriousness Pynchon largely lacks. The heat-death of the universe -- what a stupid thing to worry about when you get right down to it. Sex, art, and religion -- now those are important things to worry about. I acknowledge that to count _JR_ as an additional masterpiece, you have to give it my slightly nonstandard reading. Most people read it as a sour satire on the world of business, and as such a pretty good one of its kind, but not a first-rank book overall. In my reading, we shift the focus from JR himself to the three main adult characters, and you get a rather deep munching on problems of responsibility. Also some remarkable technical innovations. (To get this reading you have to discount the title a bit, but so what?) The advice people have been offerring here--get started on Pynchon with his short novel, _The Crying of Lot 49_--does not really carry over for Gaddis. His recent short novel (well, it's 261 pages, so short only by comparison) _Carpenter's Gothic_ is probably hard to take. Let _JR_ give you a tutorial on how to read Gaddis's indirect narration. Further advice: when you read _The Recognitions_, don't be put off by the density of the prose in the first 50 pages or so. Things get clearer pretty soon; and in fact if you return to that opening after finishing the book, you'll see that it's actually fairly easy to follow (now that you know what's supposed to be going on). -- -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar /* ---------- */
krantz@csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) (03/11/86)
First, the usual disclaiming apology for the persiflag preceding. Why is it that :q! gets you out sometimes, but not others? Cheez!! > The style, organization, and tone > that Pynchon seemed to have created for his _V._ seem a less impressive > achievement after you discover that he could have learned most of it from > a book published a few years earlier, _The Recognitions_ by William Gaddis, > the most important American novelist of this half of our century. (GulP! at > that unhedged claim. > -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago Mr. Marks had better gulp. (Be advised, the following is NOT a flame...) The notion that Mr. Gaddis, talented as he is, has achieved a body of work whose stature approaches that of MY patron novelist, E.L. Doctorow, seems to me to be rather ludicrous. Doctorow's _Welcome To Hard Times_, _Ragtime_, _Lives Of The Poets_, and _World's Fair_ are all masterful works of fiction, and _The Book Of Daniel_ is, to my mind, the finest novel published since World War II, with the possible exception of the afore-discussed _Gravity's Rainbow_. Gaddis can write, and can write quite well. But don't put him up with the biggest boys (and girl - Toni Morrison's in the top four or five, for me - see _Sula_ and _The Song Of Solomon_.) The pronounciation of _V_ is "vee". Any rumors to the contrary are to be patently ignored. - Michael Krantz "Springsteen, literature and thou..."