Gore's rosebud

[Steven Maas (CUTR)]

On Fri, 28 Feb 1997, Rodney Welch wrote:

> Is there a difference between admiring a writer like Thomas 
> Pynchon and licking his boots? When I read the posts from this list, 
> I'm not so sure. Steven Maas (Oedipa's brother, presumably) 

Even a less-than-close reading of CoL49 would tell most readers that Maas
is Oedipa's married name.  If I were a Pynchon character's brother
(interesting thought that) it would presumably be Mucho.

> tells us that 
> Gore Vidal -- who is only the greatest literary essayist alive, fer 
> Chrissakes -- doesn't really have a right to an opinion on Pynchon. Why? 
> Because Vidal is an "also-ran (as a novelist at least, I haven't read
> his essays)" -- in other words, Mr. Maas is fully prepared to launch an 
> idiot attack on a writer whose work he barely knows. 

As I said, as a novelist he is an also-ran.  Is he in a league with TRP? 
If not, he's an also-ran.  As I also said, I'm not commenting on his
essays because I haven't read them.  Nowhere did I say Mr. Vidal doesn't
have a right to an opinion on TRP; I said his opinion is funny--that's
funny haha _and_ funny strange. 

> And then we get this 
> juvenile comment: "Excuse me, Mr. Vidal, but others of us value genius 
> when we stumble upon it on our own." JEE-zus! "Excuse me, Mr. Vidal"! Oh 
> my! Gore's just going to run behind the bookcase in fear of Mr. Maas's 
> brutal tongue now isn't he?!!? Oh, the savagery! Oh the humanity!!

Oh goody, A personal attack! I was feeling so left out of the recent spate
of these.  My comment preceding the one quoted here (and left out of Mr. 
Welch's post) was about Mr. Vidal's claim (as discussed on this list) that
Pynchon is only of interest to academics. Mr. Welch's comments here are a
standard ploy--if you don't have any substantive ammunition, try a series
of haymakers.  Not to say his comments don't rate a chuckle.

> Not to be outdone, a Mr. Craig Clark chimes in with his opionion, based 
> on reading one book and browsing another, that Gore Vidal isn't up to 
> Pynchon's level, either. Let's get some intelligence on the table, shall we? 
> The fact that Mr. 
> Vidal has not written a Gravity's Rainbow doesn't keep him out of the 
> debate -- he's a practicing novelist 

Maybe if he keeps practicing. . .

> and a brilliant essayist who has 
> delivered more lasting commentary about the United States in the 20th 
> Century than anyone who subscribes to this list likely ever will.

A pretty broad claim.  There seems to be quite a diverse group of
subscribers here.

> And, as 
> at least some people have noted herein, he has a lot to say about Pynchon 
> that is worthy of attention.

"Worthy of attention" is a very loaded phrase.  Are you claiming Mr. 
Vidal's opinion of Pynchon is more "worthy of attention" than, say, SJ
Gould's (if he _has_ an opinion on Pynchon), an essayist of a different
stripe?  Do you really believe that because Mr. Vidal is a--what, a "man
of letters"?--his opinion about Pynchon is more "worthy of attention" than
another intelligent person's opinion? 

> Vidal is a superb writer and an 
> exceptionally close reader; all of his opinions on literary matters 
> deserve close attention.

Did I read something about "boot-licking" somewhere?

	Steve Maas