Hubert, "Remedios Varo & Benjamin Peret"

[Terrance]

Dave Monroe wrote:
> 
> Yes, did want Eddins there (The Gnostic Pynchon),
> that's been bugging me all night, but I only quibble
> with Hollander for not following both forks in the
> road there (an option one has in a reading, if not in
> history).  

Why do think he neglected Varo? Could it be because his own
essay need Varro and not
Varo? Sure, take Varro out. What happens? The essay falls
apart like a house of cards. 
There is simply nothing in the text that tells us to read
Varo as an allusion to Varro. 
>From Varro Hollander builds the foundation for his house or
Estate. 

The fork in the road in history is history. Only Tyrone
thinks that maybe there is a way back, maybe after total
destruction brings total anarchy, but Tyrone's thoughts here
go against everything we know about Pynchon's view of
history. But, and you know this from reading Eddins, W.
Slothrop's love of the pigs and the Earth is also Orphic
(gravitational), like the Herero Eric, as opposed to
gnostic. 

> Grant's neglect of Hollander's Thelonious
> Monk/McClintic Sphere article is a glaring oversight
> in his Companion to V.   But I gotta run, so ...


I think there must be a reason why Hollander is not cited by
other critics. 
I don't have Grant's V. Companion, but I would guess it has
a pretty extensive Bibliography. It can't be simply that
Hollander takes on the Political Pynchon, I once thought
this was the case, because as you noted in your post to
Paul, there are several full length studies. I do think that
Hollander's work has limited value, aside from its being a
work of art in its own right (Pater), but he fails to
account for the postmodern paranoid condition and misreads
the central fact of P's fiction.