Another smalltown librarian

[Tom Stanton]

>>At 01:24 PM 07/3/97 -0400, Joaquin Stick <dmaus at email.unc.edu> wrote:
>>Does Washington's improper use of Yiddish REALLY distract you
>>from what is being said? Does McClintic Sphere's similacrum of "hepcat"
>>speech distract from the message? Does the fact that the Northen Cali.
>>dope dealers not speak like Northern Cali. dope dealers make that much of
>>a difference from a writer whose oeuvre includes fabulism, farce,
>>purposeful exaggeration and paronomasia to excess? 

>At 08:26 AM 7/4/97 -0500, Jules Siegel wrote:
>It can if you have an emotional involvement with the reality that's being
>caricatured. Some of us who lived through those times believed in what we
>were doing. This is absurdly sentimental, of course, but I think you would
>have had to have been there to appreciate this. 

How many readers will have this level of involvement? A few hundred?
99% of these objections could be applied to any artist in any medium. Has
Van Gogh distorted the truth because his perspective is askew? Do we
dismiss Shakespeare because he deliberately twists facts to make political
points? Do we censure Ansel Adams because his photos are "too vivid"?

This discussion is absurd. All of TRP's work is fiction, not reporting, and
he is not obligated to portray these events in any way other than what he,
as author, chooses, just as we are not obligated to accept them in any way
other than what we, as readers, choose. This relationship is very different
from one where "facts" are being reported by a journalist & read by a public,
even though there are choices being made by the journalist, the editor, &
the publisher of any story. An educated or informed public, in this case,
realizes that the "facts" are selected & accepts these choices using what-
ever basis he or she believes in, be they political, social, moral, etc. 

>I received a letter yesterday from a Pynchon reader in Spain who read my
>memoir on the Internet and felt moved to tell me how much he liked it. He
>also sent me Vineland in Spanish. His letter goes into some detail about
>Pynchon's portraits of his time, which he takes to have been based on real
>experience.

It's a start, but anyone with a decent education knows this is a *story* of
the period, not a documentary.

>So you're saying that it's not valid for me to correct him about this? That
>it's not valid for me to feel some discomfort about seeing what was once my
>beloved world portrayed in what I perceive to be a coarse and unfeeling
>caricature?

Nonsense, of course you can argue the choices he made (as you have). 
The basis is what I would question. If the basis is "I was there & no one 
talked or acted like that" I would argue you are not the only authority on the
subject, and your memories of that age are just that, *your* memories. Any
"Vineland" reader who assumes the book is a documentary is also way off
base IMHO.