Problems of Paranoia [...]

[Eric Rosenbloom]

jbor wrote:
> 
> > Joyce led a public life, and Pynchon leads a private one as
> > testament to letting readers be the writers.
> 
> Indeed. But, in placing himself as just another schmo in this way, as a
> reader *he* is also a writer and what he has had to say in his texts is
> (sometimes? usually? always?) quite interesting and worth the effort of
> engaging with, interpreting etc.

Exactly. Pynchon the writer is unavoidable, but Pynchon the man stays
out of the way, letting the reader engage him at the interface of words
on paper. He thwarts the effort to explain away something by saying,
like, Oh yeah, that happened to him in 4th grade, which doesn't mean
anything or explain why it's alluded to in the text, or indeed what it
means if you didn't know that bit of biography. In contrast, so much of
James Joyce does in fact refer back to the man who wrote it. It doesn't
have to, but it is testament to Joyce's attitude towards his art.

Both of them make reading a very participatory and satisfying activity.
My metaphors of writer's torment and reader's paranoia informing their
respective texts is awfully simplistic, but the nonpresence of Pynchon
the man is testament to Pynchon's attitude towards _his_ art.

Yours,
Eric R

P.S. That mimesweeper footnote sure is an irritating new feature here at
work. Sorry.



**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************