Suggestions

[Terrance]

jbor wrote:
> 
> Perhaps more perceptive, certainly more sympathetic, is Michael Wood's _New
> York Review of Books_ review of _GR_, if memory serves.

Perhaps more perceptive or sympathetic to what? 
The Locke essay is certainly perceptive, more perceptive
than many full length studies. 
It's one the best Reviews there is of any P novel. 
> 
> Locke's NYT review discloses somewhat stereotyped notions of "romantic love"
> and what should or can constitute emotional attachment or affection imo. He
> also misses the entire point of the final section of the novel, as the whole
> constructed realist/Modernist literary artifice comes tumbling down (i.e.
> de-constructs).

Discloses stereotyped notions of "romantic love" on the part
of the author or the reviewer? Homosexual love? What? 


Locke has it locked, going to Freud, Rilke, Melville, there
is nothing insensitive or
less than sympathetic here, his criticisms of P are spot on
and he doesn't miss the deconstruction, a critical reading
of the novel.