COL49 _Courier's Tragedy_

[MalignD at aol.com]

Must say, RJ, I'm with with Thomas on this.  I don't miss the points you're 
making, but I don't find Pynchon and Beckett similar.  Beckett's characters 
(to simplify a great deal) seek meaning where there is none to be found, 
listen for answers where there will only be silence.  None will come, but 
still they persist.  That's the absurdity of their situation.  I can't go on; 
I'll go on.  

Oeida's situation in COL49, it seems to me, is not an absurdist, meaningless 
void.  There is a pattern of signs and events that Oedipa perceives; indeed, 
there may be a Trytero or an intricately ordered hoax played on her by 
Inverarity.  (Or as is noted in the book; she may be imagining a Trystero; or 
she may be imagining someone playing a hoax on her.)  In all cases, 
nevertheless, there is pattern and structure, even if only of her own mad 
device.  How correctly to read the signs is a way of stating her problem; 
Beckett's chracters get no signs.

I also agree with Thomas that Pynchon's usual method of dense, connected layer
s of meaning is stylistically the opposite of Beckett's paring away, leaving 
nothing at last but a voice in a head listening to itself, wishing it would 
shut up.

Also, I don't think Stoppard an absurdist.  After Magritte, perhaps, or The 
Real Inspector Hound, but certainly not his major works, do you think? 

Best,

MalignD