Pynchon-Tinasky

[Dave Monroe]

I think good points about attribution of those letters
are being made all around here.  But I think the best
point is that--Foster, Cockburn, Hollander (and I'd be
curious as to what he'd say about the complete set, I
think his paper was one of the very early publications
on the question, written well before all the letters
were available), hell, Pynchon himself, whoever,
notwithstanding--the case is ultimately far from
closed.  If it ever indeed proves closeable.  So why
discuss it?  Well, it's interesting, for starters. 
Can't recall why it's come up recently, but ... but
still hoping to get to the novels, V. in particular,
tonight, so ...

--- rosenlake at mac.com wrote:
> Terrance wrote:
> > 
> > jbor wrote:
> > > In my experience it's only a weak or jealous
> mind which finds it necessary
> > > to hide behind a false persona in order to spew
> insult and venom at others,
> > > and Pynchon's is neither of these imo.
> > >
> > > best
> > 
> > But is he the Bag lady under the bridge? In my
> experience
> > with bag ladies under bridges
> > only false personas hide behind spewing insults
> and venom.
> 
> It could be argued, as Terrance suggests here, that
> it is because many
> people may find Tinasky's voice a bit harsh, or well
> beneath the nuanced
> prose of his obviously long labored over work, that
> Pynchon, as the
> letters became widely available, felt the need to
> deny them as his. His
> repeated instances of doing so could be seen as
> damning, whereas a
> "famously reclusive" writer need not have said
> anything at all. "Damned
> if you do, damned if you don't", I know, but also
> "He doth protest too much."
> 
> --
> Eric R


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/