intellect for . . .

[Benjamin L Nussbaum]

zach spiller wrote:

}It seems to me that intellectual "showing-off" was not what Benjamin
}Nussbaum was referring to in writing about the massively intelligent and
}creative nature of Pynchon and (perhaps) other writers.  It appears to be
}adopting a sense of "play" (albeit, at times, very serious play) in one's
}approach to the work and viewing it in terms of the chaotic web of
}connections reading something like _V_ or _GR_ can spark in a reader.  This
}is certainly not the same as appreciating intellect for intellect's sake...

}Anyone think I've misinterpreted or interpreted correctly?  How's about it?

	not showing off per se, but something quite close to it.  in other 
words, in much modern art the work seems to spotlight some element of 
the artist's personality that the viewer/reader/listener  can buy into, 
sympathize with, revel in, etc.  its an important part of the overall effect --
it adds to the work immensely.  for example with vonnegut there's a sad  
wryness with a wink; with kerouac (who seems misunderstood to me) a certain 
type of nostalgia and sadness (i.e. adios, king); with pollock, fervor; 
with de kooning another type of fervor altogether.  its very easy to extend 
this to alot of music, other authors, artists, etc.  
	
	the point being the reader/viewer/listener can sympathize, can dig, 
can applaud what he see's or at least appreciate that it took something 
really exceptional and rare (being a philosophy major i have to drag in the 
original sophists:  any excellence is a pearl in a muddy, muddled, 
unexhilirating world).  and maybe the r/v/l can begin to take on some of 
that attitude or feel some of the artists deep fervor, deep wryness, deep 
sadness, deep anger, etc, and this is a desirable effect.  

	to wrap this up, its a good thing for pynchon to flaunt his 
intelligence, to bring it up, to say look what i can do, to make us say 
"wow!" and he does--or at least i think so, but this is plenty long enough 
already.  actually i'm not sure if i believe any of this, but any comments? 
is there some other quality that pynchon perpetually, noticably exhibits, 
is perpetually working into his writing?