How people read the Pyncher (was Re: Charles Hollander's Essay)

[Dave Monroe]

Oh, hey, forgot, my name ...

--- cathy ramirez <cathyramirez69 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>  
>  A common complaint about VL is that when the 
> insidious and ambiguous THEM/THEY/FIRM/Gnostics are
> exposed through overt political references,
> Pynchon's paranoid prose, certainly one of the
> things that makes GR a great novel, suffers or is
> even reduced to political/nostalgic screed.
> 
> I'm not saying that Dave Monroe shares this opinion.

Actually, I kinda sorta do.  Political, definitely,
nostalgic, to a certain extent (both true of all the
texts, I think), but I'd take issue with "reduced" and
"screed."  However, "Them" as a ... remainder, excess,
whatever, this I believe I agree with, is interesting,
at any rate, but I'm curious as to specifics, insofar
as "they" can be specified here.  Cards, table ...

> The benifits of Thoreen or Hollander are many. But
> the most important thing that these politically
> perceptive critics do, as far as I'm concerned, is
> to provide not a way into the texts, but a way out
> of them. Of course Pynchon's texts provide a way out
> all on their own. Just as there is no way out for
> the characters in his books, there are many ways out
> for the reader.

This is in interesting way to put all this, but,
again, my question is, what are you getting at?  Ways
in better than ways out?  And what are they?  And so
forth.  Amen ...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com