Vineland Underrated

[jbor]

>> Actually, he wrote that "Pynchon's overt left-wing views in Vineland may
>> have helped earn him the negative reviews", which isn't correct anyway.

on 26/9/03 9:56 AM, Carvill John at johncarvill at hotmail.com wrote:

> Can you please explain to me how a statement which hinges on the proviso
> "may have" can be categorically dismissed with "isn't correct"? Unless you
> personally penned all of the reviews in question, how can you be sure that
> the political views expressed in the book didn't affect the opinions of the
> reviewers?

Sure. The statement isn't correct on two counts. To begin with, the
assumption that "overt left-wing views", hopelessly ill-defined as that
category is, are Pynchon's, is inaccurate. And whether or not there are
"overt left-wing views" in the novel which are even equivocally endorsed, or
which are there at all, is doubtful.

And, the speculation about the substance and motivation of the negative
reviews is also incorrect.

> The satire may be aimed at the left, but the
> political viewpoint of the book is directed at the right.

Say what? How does that work? The bulk of the satire and criticism in the
novel is directed towards the 60s U.S. counter-culture, i.e. the
college-aged "left", both as they were then and what they became. While I
agree that sweeping generalities like "left-wing" aren't much use - "the
left" in liberal democracies isn't a monolithic bloc, after all, and
thankfully it isn't constrained by a doctrinaire conformity as it is under
totalitarian regimes - it's pertinent to note that there are quite a few
different and by no means complementary manifestations of "left-leaning"
politics, over several generations, represented in the novel.

Perhaps if you actually engaged with something in the text, or some of the
reviews, there might be something worth discussing.

best