Tom's muse

[davemarc]

> From: MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: Tom's muse
> Date: Tuesday, March 04, 1997 9:43 PM
> 
[snip-a-dee-doo]
> 
> What if we say instead that CL49 is in fact Pynchon's *handbook* on how
to read a 
> Thomas Pynchon novel?  It is Pynchon's meta-novel--the novel about his
novels.  It is a
>  Baedekker guide to the land of Pynch.
> 
> It is the book that tells us how his other books operate.
> 
> My strongest grounds for this particular stab come from my reading GR
before I read CL49.  
> I remember clearly how reading CL49 made a lot of GR come into focus for
me, not exactly 
> explaining, but educating me in the fundamental mode of P's writing.
> 
I usually recommend that people exploring "authors" try to read their books
in the order that they were written, but in P's case I usually recommend
CL49 or Vineland first.  CL49 is like a key to P's style--it can ease a
reader into the complexities of the big 'uns.

Some weeks ago someone on the list raised a question about the use of CL49
in the classroom.  Not only do I think it a reasonable way to introduce
students to P in courses where really reading V or GR might preclude
reading any other book in the syllabus, but I also think that it's a great
means for an imaginative professor to teach students about the fine art of
re-reading.  I'd like to see a professor assign a book like CL49 to be read
twice.  It's just complicated and confusing enough to puzzle most everybody
the first time around while being considerably more accessible the second
time around.  

Do any professors encourage re-reading in their own courses?  I can't
recall any such foax among the bunch I know.  Most professors I know
"over-assigned," going for quantity rather than quality of reading and
analysis.  (I am aware of seminars that focus exclusively on GR or Pynchon,
but what about the more conventional classes?)

davemarc