No Subject

[MalignD at aol.com]

> Thanks for responding and, I think, we agree that there's a lot in this 
> piece that's bullshit, but I disagree with your opening premise, i.e.:
> 
> <<Given the title of the piece, it’s not surprising or unseemly that 
> Pynchon should construct characters and voices to portray “the mind of Watts.”>>
> 
Or perhaps I agree.   Perhaps it's not surprising or unseemly.   What it is 
is lousy journalism.

The only value or interest this piece has is that it was written by Pynchon.  
 On it's own merits, it's really very bad--jejune and obvious, to say nothing 
of dishonest, which is the word for those invented quotes, unless one prefers 
"embarrassing."

Of course, according to Nightingale and, I guess, Otto, and others, it's all 
fiction, so it's surely jake with them that there's nothing in the piece that 
indicates Pynchon ever set foot in Watts.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20040927/e10c76cc/attachment.html>