Siegel/Hollander (was Re: & etc.

[jbor]

----------
>From: Doug Millison <DMillison at ftmg.net>
>

> before Pynchon blocked it.

It seems odd that the apocryphal contents of a bunch of personal letters
which are not in the public domain, and which Pynchon has actively "blocked"
from being published, are being proposed as "corroborated" evidence (without
*any* quotation or precis of said letters mind you), whereas *published*
autobiographical and non-fiction pieces are said to be lies, or "put-on", or
mere modesty, and a quite cogent, even-handed, and somewhat entertaining
memoir based on direct personal contact with the man over a period of years
is discounted as "uncorroborated ... mud-slinging".

> Believe Siegel, if
> you wish; he also claims

It's not so much a matter of believing Siegel as *knowing* that what Doug
claims about others here (and himself) is so often false.

> As far as I know, Hollander works from multiple sources, too, as do other
> researchers who have gathered quite a bit of biographical information about
> Pynchon.

Including Siegel's 1977 _Playboy_ article.

> he cut and re-shaped some of that material in ways that do not
> always jibe very well with the way some of those discussions actually
> unfolded here on Pynchon-L, and his revisions generally tend to make Siegel
> look better at the expense of the interlocutor in question

I'm afraid that that sounds suspiciously like the pot calling the kettle
black, Doug ....

> Not sure what to make of the rather enigmatic parentheticals,

Siegel posted to the list as himself. Hollander posts pseudonymously.

best