Yes! More on the Simpsons!

[Otto]

----- Original Message -----
From: "jbor" <jbor at bigpond.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: Yes! More on the Simpsons!

> >> The neon sign pointing to the house and the placard he hangs over
> > > his neckplay around with his reputation as a recluse -- as we know,
> > > he's a famous American author who has never once given an interview,
> > > or done a book signing tour (i.e. those "free autograph[s]" he's
> > > hawking to passers by) -- and, again, for viewers who don't understand
> > > he refers to himself as "a reclusive author".
> >>
> > > It's an understatement to say that Pynchon is extremely reluctant to
> > > agree to be interviewed, but let's not forget that he did, in fact,
> > > agree to a faxed interview with David Hajdu for the book
> > > Positively 4th Street.
> >
> > Pynchon also made statements to CNN, around the time that M&D was
> > released, in which he expressed his dislike for being photographed
> > (at least for the media) and expressed scorn for media descriptions of
> > him as "reclusive." So the imagery and wording of his Simpsons segment
> > can certainly be considered a kind of in-joke with regard his positions.
>

I can only agree to this. He plays with the media instead of being abused by
them; he makes fun of the image of himself they have created.

> And don't forget that Pynchon actually interviewed the band members from
> Lotion, but I'll stand by the assertion. I believe that even Hajdu himself
> subsequently referred to the two fax replies he received from Pynchon when
> he was doing research for his book as "correspondence", and explicitly not
> "an interview" -- and so I think it's fair to say that the exchange
> between the two of them was actually quite a different thing to what any
> reasonable person would consider as an "interview". That being the case,
> it's true that Pynchon has never willingly *given* an interview --
> specifically,
> he has never spoken to a member of the press in order to publicise
> himself, his opinions, or his work.
>

Apart from the Playboy-interview you don't accept as authentic. But let's
forget about that. In fact he himself stays in control over the doses of
himself he exposes to the public. Like the Simpson-appearance or the
"1984"-foreword.

> I also don't think that the call he made to the CNN people to ask them not
> to broadcast the video footage supports the idea that he does not guard
> his
> privacy to an extreme degree (and it's this incident which seems to me to
> be
> the in-joke behind the "as much as I like cameras" line from the Simpsons
> episode). As to the "reclusive" tag, he reportedly said something to the
> effect that he believed that "recluse is a code word generated by
> journalists ... meaning, 'doesn't like to talk to reporters'", which
> pretty
> firmly establishes his scorn for journalists, and the unlikelihood of him
> ever giving, or having given, an interview to one.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/US/9706/05/pynchon/
>
> We've been over this a number of times, I know, but it's still worth
> getting the facts straight.
>
> But, yes, that he refers to himself as "a reclusive author" in the clip
> does make fun of the reputation he has garnered, even if that reputation
> is warranted to a very large degree and is one which he has actively
> nurtured throughout his career.
>

He has only insisted to keep his privacy, the reclusive verdict comes
from the media, and making fun of it in that Simpsons-episode seems
(to me) an appropriate dealing with it.

"Thomas Pynchon's House-Come On In" and nobody takes notice,
while the "reclusive Pynchon" is the running gag of his career. Great!

Otto

> Whether he had a hand in writing or modifying the script for his cameo
> appearance on the show, or merely agreed to say what was written for him,
> seems irrevelant. I agree that the vocal characterisation is well done.
>
> best