SLSL "TSR" Buddhist or Bud Man- the banality of plot

[Mutualcode at aol.com]

I don't share your bias. I know that there are people, even on
this list (especially on this list?), who would be extolling the
excellence of these works, but for the "Introduction," and who 
now feel obligated to point out how bad they are.

Likewise, there are those who seem to enjoy goading anyone 
who might find something good to say about these tales. Their
motives for that- I can only speculate upon.

I do agree with you, however, that because they are, unlike 
the letters of Ms. Tinasky, not apocryphal, they are extremely 
fascinating, especially for those with an ear for phrasing- 
both literal and thematic- who can key them into an understanding
of the later masterpieces. Hollander, who can chop with anyone,
is spot-on with that observation.

It is my bias, of course, that the shorter works are gems. 
Maybe you just have to be a fan.

repectfully


In a message dated 12/11/02 7:47:48 AM, paul.mackin at verizon.net writes:

<< In other words these stories
aren't interesting because they are good but because Pynchon wrote them.


Tendentiously,

P. >>