Pynchon fax

[jbor]

on 29/4/04 10:46 PM, Malignd wrote:

> All I’m suggesting in this string is that Pynchon
> could easily have more actively participated in the
> world of letters without doing damage to his privacy,
> and his readership would now be far richer for it.  It
> need not have thrust him into some imagined cult of
> celebrity.  That it might be problematic for Pynchon
> now is a situation largely of his own creation.
> 
> One might argue that he does write the occasional
> article and their infrequency adds to their weight.
> But by that measure, It’s doubly disappointing that
> his public comments to Japanese Playboy were so banal
> and inept. 

Whether they were comments made publicly by Pynchon (or whether they are in
fact his comments) has still not been substantiated. It's worth recalling
that references to the Wanda Tinasky letters appeared in refereed journals
and bibliographies too when they were being attributed as Pynchon's
handiwork. But I agree that if it is Pynchon speaking in that Japan Playboy
piece, and if it was something which he assented to do, then it's a very
real disappointment. The flip tone and facetious comments about tobacco
shares and rodeo clowns belie the argument that the "subway" remark was
sincere, or that he was attempting to make some brave political stand.

And recall also his most recent public "appearance" -- on the prime time
Simpsons tv show as a cartoon version of himself wearing a plain brown paper
bag over his head. There's also the clown he sent to receive the National
Book Award, his self-imposed exile in Mexico, jumping through the window to
avoid Norman Mailer, the fuss he made over the publication of his letters,
and ringing up CNN in 1997 to ask that video footage of him not be shown
(where he stated that he is someone who "doesn't like to talk to
reporters"). Note also the lengths he went to *not* to be interviewed
one-on-one by David Hajdu -- he faxed his written reply to Hajdu's research
questions about Fariña via an intermediary!

The Wikipedia has this to say: "Around the publication of his third novel,
Gravity's Rainbow in 1973, Pynchon became notorious for his avoidance of
public view", which is a fair enough comment in my opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pynchon

I've never called him "reclusive", and wouldn't, by the way (that's
Millison's lie), and I don't agree that he's a loon or timid either; I have
called him "elusive", and "absent and anonymous", however, and I do think he
has nurtured this image or reputation deliberately. The question is why.

best