Pynchon's interview

[MalignD at aol.com]

Quadlibet writes:

<<There is a fear in the professorship itself of not fully fathoming the 
depths of any of this authors. There is a need to delineate history in more 
linear and accesible terms. If we have Newton, we can cross over Leibniz. 
Parallel lines do not meet, because the student is rarely introduced to the 
concept of parallelism. Unless you seek to speacialize in physics or pure 
mathematics, you have no reason as a student to look beyond Euclid....>>

Might you expand on what you're saying here, and in the post generally, from 
which this was snipped?

You seem to be saying that writers are satanized by academics because of 
their difficulty.  Is that correct?  That Steinbeck will be taught before 
Hemingway and Pynchon and Burroughs never?  And this is because academics 
fear complexity?

I may have you entirely wrong and would like to be clear before commenting 
further.