V. vs CoL49

[Arturo Gonzalez]

Hi All,
There hasn't been much action in the group lately, so I thought I'd 
bring up my thoughts regarding TP's first two novels.  

My first reading of TP was "Under the Rose" back in the 10th grade, and
I remember thinking "wow!" when I finished reading it.  This guy
was something else, I thought, but I didn't pick up anything else until
my sophomore year in college.  Given my impression of Under the Rose, I
picked up V., and this reading was followed by more "wow"s.  What
impressed me the most at the time, I think, was the layering and 
evolution of the stories, plots, and what not.  Next, I picked up
GR, and again was mystified.  Lastly I picked up The Crying of Lot 49, and
boy was I disappointed!  This story seemed to be hollow and without much
direction.  I thought I was alone in my disappointment until I picked
up Slow Learner and to my surprise found that Pynchon was also
disappointed with CoL49.  To paraphrase him, he had forgotten everything
he had learned about writing.

However, in my limited research, the consensus in literature seems
to percieve CoL49 as a superior work than V.  Now, I am not, nor
do I for a moment pretend, to know much about literary criticism, but
I was curios to throw out my position on this point.  Maybe this 
will illicit some conversation going, and also enhance my
appreciation of TP's writings.

Art

"In my head, there is a mirror
"When I've been bad, I've been wrong
"Food for the Saints that are 
"quick to judge me"
----Tears For Fears, "The Badman's Song"