answering jody Re: pynchon-l-digest V2 #1582

[Dave Monroe]

... again, Jody, ev'ryone, just a little touchier even than usual, is
all.  Do, I believe, realize what you meant by "elite," even if I don't
much count myself a member.  Was recently reminded of my "prole" status
when an internet acquaintance reached out and touched me via
p(hono)-mail.  Apparently did not sound as expected, owing no doubt to
my Polish-American Sout' Side a' M'waukee (as in M'waukee, 'Sconsin)
origins (Dedalus and Lt. Slothrop will know what I'm getting at here;
for the rest of you, those "Saturday Night Live" Chicago "superfans" of
several seasons past might be an appropriate caricature).  Strangely,
didn't really have the accent a decade ago, to the point where I had an
unwitting linguist thinking I was from Bawston (the Irish side o' the
family, no doubt).  Worked it up when I almost went to grad school, just
for contrast, and it's only gotten worse, so ... but as a member of the
solid lower middle class without portfolio, at best, I guess I got a
little defensive, first in jest, then in earnest.  Case closed, I think
...

But I would note that, as I've been hauling around all the Pynchoniana
again these past few months now, I've been perhaps prejudicially
"surprised" by the various and many people who've gone to the trouble to
strike up a conversation.  Pynchon's more "popular" than many would
think.  Which to my mind modifies that question you raise.  Pynchon's
"target" audience notwithstanding, how might he be read nonetheless?  By
"those who know," whoever they might be, as well as "those who don't"?
Who are "they"?  To what extent can Pynchon, that author, those texts,
regulate, can be expected to regulate, much less guarantee, what
"either" (of a theoretically infinitely many) audience "knows"?  Is
there a "correct" reading?  Can there be?  Charles Hollander, for
example, I think answers those last questions in the affirmative, and I
think he might be correct, albeit to a certain extent, in certain
circumstances, but not to, in all (theoretically infinite) extents,
circumstances ... but, again, all I ask is, if one is going to invoke
some seeming "correct" reading in arguemnt with, refutation of, another,
presumably "incorrect" one, please, be specific at least ...