Bullshit Authenticity (Again)

[mantaray2 at earthlink.net]

>>>>But out in the lawless swamp of cyberspace, Mr. Vonnegut and I are one.

>>>>Two: Cyberspace, in Mr. Vonnegut's word, is "spooky."

BFD, man. I got that email in my box the same time someone said it was a
hoax. My response was, I think: AND?
I pay more attention to the words than who writes them usually; this column
sounded like Vonnegut's boring, blunted witticisms so I went with it. But
the fact that it was not "Vonnegut, Writer" who wrote it and some hack that
did means nothing to me. It probably only means something to either writer
who wants to make a buck off of it, or some scholar/student/lawyer who can
try very hard to use it to make a buck. That's why I love Pynchon and
DeLillo. They realize it's the self-serving capitalists who have to blow
their own horn everytime they write something stupid down. Let the words
breathe.

As for the notion of authorship in the information age being a serious
"issue:" yeah, right. The notion of authorial intent can equally destroy an
interesting reading of a work as enhance it. Plus, it never is really
established anyway. Otherwise us wankers would be out of a PList.

> And the act of selling
>off stories and fables about the "real" Pynchon only serves to underscore
>exactly what Pynchon warns us of in his writing -

Which is? They are also part of his mystique and his popularity. I would
probably never have picked up GR if I didn't hear the Disappearing Author
story from a friend. Pynchon's invisibility has melded with these fables
and stories. he has become a text through this so-called disinformation as
much as he would've been were we trying to establish his highbrow
"authorial intent." (It's usually only the purists/Modernists/elitists who
think there's a difference). Didn't my MAO II quote do anything for you
all?

>When people make claims about an
>author one should question the source of the claims and unless those claims
>can be verified they should be rejected -  Pynchon's talent should (and
>does) speak for itself

Well, Pete, now that just about negates anything you have to say, doesn't
it? How can we possibly verify that "Pynchon's talent speaks for itself."
Take a vote? Your claim about claims is dead before it leaves the ground.
If Pynchon's talent spoke for itself, we wouldn't have to reject anything.
His talent is part of the game. I think you took your Flame War with Jules
way too seriously.

Wanda Tinasky forever!

MantaRay2


P.S. Finally a subject to go off on. You guys have been about as
interesting as Jerry Reinsdorf's U-Haul bill lately.