Lineland as Pynchon Authority (redux)

[Meg Larson]

----------
> From: Gary L. Thompson <glt at tardis.svsu.edu>
> To: Jules Siegel <jsiegel at pdc.caribe.net.mx>
> Cc: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: RE: Lineland as Pynchon Authority (redux)
> Date: Wednesday, May 14, 1997 7:43 AM
> 
> > [etc.]
> 
> One of the great things about consumer choice is that you don't have to 
> keep reading. Really. Close the book. No one has to read Pynchon; he's 
> not for everyone. Hit the delete key and move on.

> By the same token, Jules seems a little uncomfortable with those of us
who do read TRP, get it, and appreciate it for what it is and what he asks
his readers to consider.  No slams intended, but . . .
> 
> > Is this the Thomas Ruggles Pynchon, Jr., fan club?
> 
> . . . uh, yeah, I guess it is--we're all fans of the Man and His Work. 
That's why this the Pynchon-L, and not the Grisham-L.
> 
> > I feel as if I'm forbidden to say anything from the heart about Thomas
> > Pynchon's work because I'm not ready to nominate him for the Nobel
Prize and
> > have some frankly negative observations about his material and
techniques.
> 
> It's not so much what you say, Jules, it's the tone we resent.  You
almost accuse us of going to the extreme in our devotion, yet you seem bent
on going to the other extreme in your criticism of him, and us.  This ain't
the Pynchon-Bashing List. 
> 
><snipping Doc here> 
> This is a cheap shot. The _Slate_ reviewer committed a gross violation of

> reviewers' ethics by not finishing the book he was reviewing. To point 
> this out is not Mickey Mouse.

> I agree completely.  I don't know what offends me more--that he didn't
finish the book, or that he had the cojones to admit it in his review.  I
have no problems with negative or less-than-glowing reviews, but I expect
at least a semblance of ethical fair play.  As I asked last week, where can
I get a gig like that?  I've read only parts of dozens of books that I'd
like to get paid to review.
Have to drop that Kinsley a line . . .

> > Anyone who really knows some of the sources of Pynchon's work is
> > automatically disqualified from speaking his or her true thoughts. 
> 
> It's a little hard to complain that others don't respect your authority 
> if you have undermined that yourself (here I mean the early posts I saw 
> about how e-mail is public and anyone can publish whatever is desired 
> from it, without authors' permission--and about how your book is an 
> absolutely new thing in the history of the world [it can be valuable and 
> a good read without exaggerated claims]).
>
Dr. T has a very good point here, and I think that Jules' tone, again, and
his relentless defense of himself and his book have led the list to this
point.  And while I don't defend his tone, I think some of the flames were
unwarranted.  However, you get what you ask for.
 
<snip>> 
> This environment isn't a democracy--it's an anarchy, at least so long as 
> the owner of the list permits it to be. Hierarchies and structures 
> emerge, but they are based on rhetoric. If you use rhetoric, it's a 
> little hard to complain about it.
> 
I like to think of the list as consensual anarchy, if you will.  And as Dr.
T suggests, that consumers have the choice to Not read TRP, Jules has the
same choice--Don't stay on the list.  
> 
Meg