Pynchon's Interview

[Terrance]

John Bailey wrote:
> 
> Was there ever a time when Gravity's Rainbow was a standard or even
> occasionally listed text on university syllabaloozas? That's not a
> rhetorical question, I actually want to know, and have no honest idea if it
> was. 

I'm sure it was never a standard in Universities here in the States.
Certainly not to the extent that CL49 was and still is. 

I'm pretty sure that around these parts this was never the case, but I
> could imagine a difference elsewhere (elsewhen). 

My guess is that GR was read more in the 1980s than in either the 1970s
or 1990s. 
I think M&D will replace GR to a certain extent now. 




COL49 is still a staple in
> several courses here, but I agree with Terrance here in that it probably
> isn't the best introduction to Pynchon. Then again, none of the books or
> stories really prepare you for any of the others. I personally love VL as
> well, and this is the book I'd most routinely recommend to friends with
> little interest in 'difficult' fiction, but even if they dig VL, doesn't
> mean they'll want to go any further. Why should I even care?

VL is interesting as a work on/of feminism. Also, TV and the current
interest in the 1960s, Bush in the White house and the "War on
terrorism"  makes VL an ideal book to teach now. It's shorter, more
readable. One could design a course around James Berger's essay, even
blast the halls with Let it Bleed and Be! 


> 
> Why should we care if Pynchon is taught at University?

I care. Choices are going to be made. Someone is going to make them. For
some reason I feel more qualified than the faceless Registrar to make
these decisions.  What does it matter?  Choices will be made. Do we read
this or that? Maybe reading M&D or VL will make people better lawyers? 


> Lots of things aren't taught at University.

True. Choices have to be made. Lots of departments don't exist anymore.
Who killed Homer? Hey, and what happened to labor studies? Do they teach
labor in Latin American Universities, Monica? Did labor studies go south
with Mollie's Job? 


> Lots of things are.

Lots of good things and cool things and while I would teach Madona (the
pop star), I can't help but feel a bit sad to see Milton go. Again.
Melville is an interesting case. The Melville people fought very hard to
get him onto the syllabi. It's a fascinating tale. 


> Lots of things are learnt at University which aren't taught there (and vice
> versa).

I like to think that lots more is learnt that isn't taught than taught
and not learnt, but I'm not quite into my after-youth yet so this too
may pass. ;-)


> Universities are often controlled to a large degree by money. It's the
> difference between a lecturer or tutor saying 'hey if you liked that, try
> reading Pynchon' and a registrar or whoever saying 'hey you can spend our
> budget on Pynchon.' I'm being facetious in part but I've got a point. I
> don't think the University is the best place to learn about Pynchon, is all.
> Not that it's a bad place, but I learnt more studying (say) Eliot and Weber
> and Kant than I would have studying Pynchon, because Pynchon draws upon
> these sources. Really, though, most of what one learns at University is how
> to learn (without being told what to learn).

I kinda think it's kool to read Melville & Pynchon together. 

http://www.swarthmore.edu/Humanities/pschmid1/engl52b/engl52b.html

http://www.english.swt.edu/PVL/PVLG&F.html

http://www.majorweather.com/pandm/

http://www.swarthmore.edu/Humanities/pschmid1/engl52b/engl52b.f2001.html