Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion

[barbara100 at jps.net]

Yes, I suppose it is just advertising.  But then how 'bout the great books
list Cat posted a while back?  Gravity's Rainbow showed up there on the
'most important works' list.  Why do you keep trying to disparage our Master
anyway? He's great, and a lot of really smart people in the world see it.
Why shouldn't I be looking there too? Because you say it's mere
subjectivity?  Well maybe when we get enough people together agreeing it's
all about 'the little black cat,'  it's not so subjective anymore.

Barbara




----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion


>
>
> barbara100 at jps.net wrote:
>
> > So, an objective reading is one nearest to the author's meaning, even
though
> > you don't think it's really possible to read objectively.  Too many
> > interpretive steps along the way, you say.  Okay,  I agree.  But does
that
> > mean we shouldn't try? Try to read objectively?  Why else would the
cover of
> > my copy of GR say "the most important work of fiction yet produced by
any
> > living writer"?  Surely not for the great insights into my flushing
cheeks
> > and my little black cat.  It may not be possible, but I still think we
> > should strive for objectivity.
>
> You mean, you CAN tell a book by its cover. Don't you know that even those
> notorious deceivers of the gullible you've so helpfully  warned us against
> namely the Washington Post and the New York Times would label statements
as to
> "the most important fiction yet produced by a living writer" as subjective
> opinion  not to mention  (in this particular case)  pure advertising.
>
>  You've going to have to show a lot of improvement before you make the
Cheney
> list.
>
>         P.
>
>
>