False dichotomies:aca/non-aca

[MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu]

This academic/non-academic duality polarity dichotmy is nonsense.  Was I a 
fucking academic in 1970 when I found V. on a friend's bookshelf and fell in love 
twice in one day?  Or in '73 tripping over GR more times than my feet can tell?  
Can't--academics--who don't seem to be spoken of very highly--read for fun too?  I 
asgree completely that a lot of academic criticism is bullshit, but so is a lot of 
non-academic opinionizing (cf.  As The Tom Turns, our very own p-list soap 
opera!)  We all have to separate the pigs from the pokes, you know.

But really,  does wondering how something works mean you are missing the 
experience?  Does believing that knowing how something works enhances your 
fun in digging it make one an effete egghead?   Does knowing what a cello sounds 
like mean you can't appreciate a symphony?  silly silly

john m


>I second this.  I may be the least "academic" of all the readers on this
>list;  came upon Pynchon's works as they were published, and read (and
>re-read) them all for no other reason than the fun, the challenge, the
>wonder, and the joy of it.  Couldn't really imagin being "forced" to
>read them for a class.
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Jules Siegel wrote:
>
>> It's fun. I liked V. --after certain reservations (and their amusing
>> resolution), which I will discuss later on-line for all-- but the Rest
>> of his work was not my cup of tea. I am, perhaps, obsessively devoted to
>> clarity and accessibility, not only as a writer, but also as a graphic
>> designer. I am also unimpressed by much of what passes as "academic"
>> literature and "fine" art. I think performance art and installation art
>> are mostly doper hoaxes. I'm into hyper-realism and traditional
>> typography.
>
>Just because Pynchon is read and studied by academics does not make his
>work "academic."  The academics on this list may disagree, but they have
>no more "claim" to Pynchon's work than do others.  The thing I've never
>been able to figure out is why so many people want to take a book (GR)
>that's so much fun to read and turn it into work!  Talk about yer Puritan
>heritage.  As for clarity and accessibility, much of GR is as clear and
>accessible as Dr. Suess.  Sure there are passages that leave me wondering,
>but--just like mysterious customs encountered while visiting exotic
>lands--that's part of the fun.
>