JS

[Doug Millison]

Magazines are full of well-written articles that are nonetheless 
self-serving, inaccurate, and biased.  The Pynchon-L archives also 
contain quite a bit of material in this vein.

In Lineland, JS played fast and loose with the posts he appropriated 
from Pynchon-L (which resulted, FYI, from a flame war that JS 
instigated during the last attempt at GRGR) by quoting out of 
context, selective editing, misleading paraphrasing, etc. -- all the 
classic devices of a journalist who is not afraid to let the facts 
get in the way of the story he's determined to tell.  At the time 
Lineland was published, I took the time to examine the Pynchon-L 
material  which JS lifted for use in Lineland, and was able to 
demonstrate to my own satisfaction his distortions; other Pynchon-L 
veterans know what I'm talking about; Lineland and the issues it 
raises were also aired in an excellent presentation at the 1998 
International Pynchon Week events.

Given JS's hack attack on Pynchon in Lineland, I doubt that the 
Playboy article represents a higher level of journalistic ethics. 
JS's hostility to Pynchon was quite obvious in his Pynchon-L posts, 
as well as in my own extensive, private email correspondence with JS.

In the Playboy article (as well as in Lineland and later articles) JS 
presents an uncorroborated picture of Pynchon:  JS making statements 
that are unsupported with evidence or witnesses other than his own 
(JS's)  memoir. It is impossible to distinguish, for example, by 
examining Lineland (or the original Pynchon-L posts which are the 
source for the Lineland text), between JS's words and what his 
ex-wife might actually have said about Pynchon.  In the absence of 
reports by others who may have known Pynchon at Cornell or in 
Southern California, it's impossible to know if JS is telling the 
truth.

I won't trot out the various insults that JS introduces or rehashes 
in Lineland, they are obvious.  Anybody who reads the original 
Pynchon-L archive material, Lineland, and the other articles will see 
the general pattern:  JS downplays Pynchon's abilities as an artist 
and elevates his own (JS's, that is; I especially like the "quotes" 
from his ex-wife in which she alleges calls JS and not Pynchon the 
true poet and genius), and he repeats uncorroborated allegations 
about unpleasant personal qualities that Pynchon supposedly embodies.

It is unfortunate that JS's obvious jealousy of Pynchon's artistic 
gifts and his obvious bitterness over Pynchon's brief relationship 
with Wexler make it impossible to know what parts of what JS has 
written about Pynchon might in fact represent accurate biographical 
information.

Pre-emptive flame defense:  Malign, I know that you have 
characterized this sort of post from me in the past as "hagiography" 
and I think you know that I don't agree with your characterization. 
I imagine that Pynchon is a complex human being, just like the rest 
of us, with a sometimes bewildering, sometimes delightful mix of 
qualities that will strike other human beings as positive, negative, 
desireable, undesireable, etc. I expect that Pynchon's biography also 
contains episodes that might expose a dark side, since that is true 
for all human beings. I look forward to a day when we know more about 
Pynchon the person, just as I have enjoyed learning more about the 
lives of the other great artists whose works I have enjoyed.


-- 

d  o  u  g    m  i  l  l  i  s  o  n  <http://www.online-journalist.com>