more slow learner intro

[kevin at limits.org]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, jbor wrote:

[snip]

> Because of this I believe that of all the pieces in the
> collection this autobiographical reminiscence is perhaps the most
> significant, and I certainly agree with Pynchon and MalignD about the
> unevenness, even mediocrity, of some parts of the stories. The fact that it
> is the one and only quasi-autobiographical text which Pynchon has published
> seems to me evidence enough to credit the notion that he is being
> straightforward: he would have been under no obligation at all to write a
> foreword and so I think it is safe to assume that he had wanted to write it,
> and that part of the reason that he wanted to write it at all is because of
> the unevenness and immaturity of some of the stories themselves, which is
> just what he says. I get the impression in the intro that it's as if he has
> *had to* dust these stories off and publish them.

This discussion may at least give us some insight into Pynchon's
unwillingness to write more pieces like the _SL_ intro and be, in general,
more of a public figure.  "Mr. Pynchon, is your friendship with
Mr. Rushdie genuine, or just an ironic gesture designed to demonstrate the
superiority of your own works?"  :)

I also get the impression that _SL_ was published somewhat
begrudgingly.  Maybe he needed the money.  At any rate, he seems to have
made the best of it.  Pynchon must have realized that _SL_ would be
devoured by students of all kinds, and the introduction is a good piece of
advice to those who would look too closely.  I've read more than one
graduate thesis written in the 70's or early 80's that examines the
science in "Entropy" as if it were conceived by Einstein and implemented
by Joyce, or perhaps even more dangerously, they examine the concept of
entropy in Pynchon's early work without acknowledging that he had refined
both his ideas and techniques between, say, "Entropy" and _V._.