"Difficult"?

[doktor at primenet.com]

Greg Montalbano writes:

[snip]

>I've had the feeling, of late, that everyone from the whining,
>carping reviewers to many of the folks on this list seem to find reading his
>books REALLY TOUGH GOING;  tough but rewarding, tough but annoying, tough
>but intellectually stimulating, etc etc etc
>
>Am I the only one who takes exception to this?

[snip]

Anyone who claims Pynchon isn't difficult is either bragging or so
alarmingly bright it's scary.  TRP writes with long, irregular sentences;
sometimes I run out of breath halfway through 'em and have to start over.
He uses words that even well-read, intelligent people don't know.  It's
sometimes hard to figure out who is saying what in his dialogue.  He rarely
provides detailed physical descriptions of his characters, making it hard
to visualize the action.  He drops obscure references all over the place.

All of this does make Pynchon difficult, much more so than 99% of the books
that are sold at the bookstore where I work.  I know people who are
intelligent and love to read but who can't--or won't--hack Pynchon.

I fall into the difficult-but-rewarding camp, but understand that a lot of
respectable folk don't want to do that kind of work when they read.  And I
think that is a defensible position.  There's much to be said for clarity,
brevity and verisimilitude; in fact, I have insisted upon it when I've
taught.  I tend not to eat lobster, because although I love the taste, the
labor-to-nutrition ratio is just too high for me.  Guess I have a higher
tolerance for labors literary than culinary, but I fully understand and
sympathize with those who don't.

--Jimmy

  http://www.angelfire.com/oh/Insouciance/