NP Witt List (was something Pynchon-related at some point, maybe)

[Peter Giordano]

Andrew said:
[...]
>Novelists do indeed usually choose to avoid the architectural planning
>and careful carpentry required of an historian but we were talking of
>Pynchon, no?  He made sure a whole lot of his material fitted snugly
>around the relics and then fantasised like crazy around this
>framework. His novels cannot easily be criticised as to their veracity
>on historical grounds. On grounds of plausibility, yes. But not
>because there is evidence to say that the things he recounts never
>happened.
I say:
I simply cannot agree that "Novelists do indeed usually choose to avoid the
architectural planning and careful carpentry required of an historian ..."
- I can cite dozens, if not hundreds of novels which contradict this
statement - I do agree with Andrews assessment of the methodology in M&D
but I wonder why he suggests that Pynchon's novels can be "...criticised
... [o]n grounds of plausibility" - Perhaps it depends on how plausible one
finds the LED to be or the mechanical duck - For me, they fit seamlessly
into the narrative and added to what Pynchon was creating but I would
hardly consider them to be plausible

I said:
>> 5) It is possible to use facts to lie - And lies are not artistic
>> acheivements
Andrew responds:
>It is also possible to lie (artlessly or otherwise) and reveal facts.
>I don't really need you as big brother to police my interpretation of
>other people's `lies'. Maybe your grandmother might be more interested
>in hearing your moans about liars.
I say:
At what point do the comments above become a form of censorship?  How can
my raising an issue which has been in national news, is directly related to
information passed around on the internet about living authors, and is
directly related to the way information about Thomas Pynchon is passed
around on this list be construed as an attempt to be "big brother to police
[his] interpretation of other people's 'lies'"?  Perhaps Andrew works from
some sort of official list of allowable topics of discussion but in my
opinion he can't have it both ways: either the list is open for whatever
topics are deemed to be worthy by each of the individual member (in which
case, I am free to discuss the issue of relability in the Pynchon myth) or
the list limited to the topics chosen by whoever edits the list - And the
statement "Maybe your grandmother might be more interested" implies (in my
opinion) that Andrew presumes (as do some others) to know what is of
interest to all the members of the list - I did not raise the issue out of
the blue - I raised it because it was NATIONAL NEWS - When I've raised the
issue before, or when the issue has been discussed by Doug or others it is
because of a specific current event on the list, or in life - Andrew is
certainly entitled to his opinions but then again so am I

Peter Giordano
Williams College
Williamstown, MA