Suck

[Doug Millison]

I read the suck.com article and it's pretty typical of the suck approach to
just about everything.I happen to know at least two of the people who write
regularly for Suck, but I don't think either of them wrote this piece.

The piece has suck's usual sneering tone, a tone actually better suited to
the web sites they usually trash in this fashion. Suck generally doesn't
manage to do much but skim the surface when it turns its attention away
from naval-gazing, i.e., focusing on the Web itself.

It doesn't appear that the writer has actually read M&D -- merely alluding
to some sort of general feeling that people are finding it unreadable.

What's to disagree with? That the author of this piece doesn't think
Pynchon's a great writer? Why bother?

The article also succumbs to another perennial Suck weakness -- a fondness
for using fancy words and often getting them wrong,  "patois" in this case.


Cordially,
Doug


At 11:06 AM 7/28/97, William Karlin wrote:
>See http://www.suck.com for a "provocative" article on Pynchon and
[...]
>what about the points raised in the piece?  I'd like to hear reactions to
>this....


D O U G  M I L L I S O N ||||||||||| millison at online-journalist.com
 SHOPPER:  He entered shop after shop, priced nothing, spoke
 no word, and looked at all objects with a wild and vacant stare.
   --E.A. Poe (cited by Rem Koolhaas in S,M,L,XL)