Vineland

[kelber at mindspring.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Taylor <neon.taylor at gmail.com>
Sent: Aug 8, 2005 9:54 AM
To: Chris Crocker <cwec03 at yahoo.com>
Cc: kelber at mindspring.com, pynchon-l at waste.org
Subject: Re: what should I read? and top 169 list.

So, I just finished 'Vineland'; throughout, I kept feeling how
unsatisfying a read it was, esp. coming off of GR... I thought that it
was a bit too choppily written, not flowing nearly as well or
naturally as GR or Crying.  It was like someone imitating TRP more
than the real thing; seemed like the Slow Learner collection was a bit
better conceived.  Is that just me, or does anybody else have an
opinion on the subject?  I thought the end picked up quite a bit, last
50-100 pages made it worthwhile again, I guess.  It just lacked
intensity and the characteristic humour was lacking slightly- half
cocked jokes.  Maybe the uber-/socio-satiric nature of the book
forecast this from the outset.  Thoughts?

I agree that Vineland was his least good, although I know some people ascribe that honor to COL49.  Vineland is the one book I wouldn't recommend to anyone as an intro to TRP.  The strongest part was Frenesi and her flirtation with fascism.  Prarie also seemed to be fighting an attraction to fascism at the end.  TRP made this point in his intro to Orwell's 1984 -- that post 9/11, in particular. many Americans seem to feel the secret lure of fascism.  The weakest part of Vineland was TRP's critique of TV and pop culture.  It's a waste of his talents; like sending a highbrow restaurant critic to Burger King.  The result may be entertaining, but  it's basically trivial.  Since reading the book, I try to use the phrase "fecoventilatory collision" as often as possible.  "Soft-off" is good too.