historical or not? [was Re: Pynchonian Rorschach]

[Vaska]

Jody, on the warpath once again:
>Vaska, responds to Henry:
>>I see your point, Henry.  But it's not entirely fair to put it down to a
>>question of genre: _GR_ and _V_ are not exactly historical novels either....
>>
>>Also, I wouldn't want to blow the "historical accuracy" issue out of all
>>proportion: for the most part, _M&D_ seems to have been mightily well
>>researched.  This impression may reflect my ignorance, don't know, but my
>>guess is that Pynchon has simply become a little inattentive here and there.
>>And if that's true, it *is* news.
>
>Great big assumptions are being made by the reader/critic if the
>writer/narrator  is judged as "inattentive" based on felicity with a
>particular history. It would seem less spurious to point out such
>differences, and leave speculation as to the attentiveness of "the author"
>to those with an axe to grind. Such speculations are usually more revealing
>of the mind of the axe wielder.

I have -- pointed out those errors [which others had pointed out before me].
Have a look at some of the earlier posts.  And do drop that axe, will you?

Vaska

P.S. Felicity?