What makes TRP's writing his?

[Paul Mackin]

Brian's list seems OK as far as it goes, but what about things we _don't_
expect to find in a Pynchon book (and perhaps are glad of it).

It would be hard to conceive of a Pynchon character finding it 
necessary in the closing pages to express anything resembling
remorse for what they might have done. Say like Humbert Humbert comes
close to doing in _Lolita_. 

(Did anything remotely like this  happen in VL? It's been years
now, and I really don't remember.) 

You can't exactly say that P. is an amoral writer. But his
character interaction seems to be on a different plane. To take a trite 
example, Slothrop's attraction to little girls is not compulsive
enough to be considered a character flaw (nor is the little girl
affected very much). So, what's to be sorry for when summing-up
time comes?  

It's my impression that the Slothrop/Bianca type relationship is fairly 
representative. It's true, of course, that sentimental regret can occur 
in the books--S's over his dead pal Tantivy. And there's the Cosmic 
guilt _They_ must feel. But missing is that element we all 
eventually experience in our lives--of wishing we had somehow done things a 
little differently.

Again, maybe VL is an exception. P. is getting older. And, as usual,
I stand ready to be corrected.

					P.   

On Mon, 19 Feb 1996, Brian D. McCary wrote:
 
> Which raises the quesition: What makes Pynchon's writing uniquely his?
> What characteristics should a piece have before it may properly be described
> as "Pynchonian"?  I know what I think of when I think of him:
> 
> 1)	Wordplay, crosscultural puns, meanings in names, ect (see recent posts)
> 2)	Overt theams of paranoia, and specifically cabals and coverups
> 3)	Pop Culture Hooks
> 4)	"Encyclopidic" historical and scientific referances
> 5)	Use of basic science concepts as central metephors and structuring
> 		devices (entropy, ballistics, organic chemistry, ect)
> 6)	Nondeterministic story lines, the dissolution of Slothrop and V
> 		being the prime but not the only examples
> 7)	Rapid stylistic intercutting (low comedy to high tragedy to 
> 		introspection)
> 
> I'm sure I missed a couple, and I'm sure you listers will be happy to add
> you perceptions.  My question is, which are most uniquely his?  2 seems to 
> be the one I find in most books with reviews refering to him, and they 
> always seem to disappoint me, since I am more strongly drawn to 5, 6, and 7.
> I suspect I am in the minority on this one.  What does everyone else think?