Reading aloud...

[Gillies, Lindsay]

Ron Churgin:
"The uncanny thing about Pynchon was the feeling he gave me that he was
"reading my mind and writing directly for me.

chris stolz:
"The multiple tones of narration have
"something to do with it, I think, and so does the sense that the
"work isn't addressed to the reader as much as it is to a shifting
"implied audience...

PETER A WATTS:
"that the words are
"those of a disembodied voice.
"Like almost no-one else Pynchon is faithful to speech
"rather than writing, that is, leaves writing sounding like actual thought
"or speech rather than making sound like literature, "good" or "beautiful"
"writing.  All of these factors are powerfully present in GR; they make it 
both
"perfect and absolutely prohibitive of reading aloud.

"sounding like actual thought or speech rather than...sound[ing] like 
literature..." exactly what I was trying to get at re difficulties reading 
GR aloud.  The thing is a performance in the theatre of your mind, ergo 
ron's and chris's comments.  I suppose my reading "voice" is more naturally 
restrained, modulated in a way I find perfect for e.g. Fielding, but which 
give me personally more trouble reproducing more dramatic material with 
shifting narrative sources.  Fielding, for example, is very much the unitary 
narrative voice or story-teller.  while MPS is no joke or metaphor, it does 
seem like GR contains a multitude of narrative voices without a similar 
multitude of narrators.  And the commond GR mode of stage performance (e.g., 
musichall kitsch) which comes to life so immediately is not even a narrative 
mode at all.  I'll certainly try reading aloud again.  Thanks for the 
feedback!