Pynchon's reclusiveness: Life Magazine article?

[Victoria Harding]

Dear Pynchonians,

Otto's message about Pynchon's appearance on The Simpsons and his
pixyish way of being a recluse reminds me to ask the assembled
aficionados here about a Life Magazine feature I think I remember from
the 60s or even late 50s? maybe not so early, with Pynchon's
reclusiveness/elusiveness turned into a photo-tease in which he
participated, views of him from the back, in silhouette, blurred as he
crossed the image, and in other indiscernible ways, with a few childhood
pix mixed in.  

Is this a real memory?  I have always thought it was, and have hoped to
see it mentioned here to confirm it.  Because of this memory, Pynchon's
supposed reclusiveness has always seemed to be a comically perverse form
of publicity campaign.  

(But of course a pale imitation of Salinger in this, a real recluse in
comparison to the Pynchon invisibility circus, genuinely inaccessible --
except through his work, big exception, and, one can think, the point of
genuine reclusiveness.  Life did do a feature on him, I know, but
without his cooperation, I think.)

In any case, any info about the Pynchon Life Magazine article I think I
recall will be welcome:  Google hasn't helped.

Victoria




Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 06:36:01 +0200
From: Otto <ottosell at yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: NP re. fake pics and other hoaxes

Sorry, but I think you're exaggerating a little bit. First of all is 
Pynchon no victim, and he certainly doesn't feel so; watch his first 
Simpsons-appearance. He's making fun of his "reclusiveness" (or what the

media are making of it).

If only the hoaxers are the reason for the hoaxes why isn't someone 
like, let's say DeLillo or Frantzen, a "victim" too? Why and especially 
only Pynchon? He made the first step. Remember the Irwin Corey 
appearance at the National Book Award in 1974.

I did only read those three Wanda-letters that were online and it was 
indeed as obvious as that stupid photo that the person who had written 
those letters wasn't him.

Mostly illegal -- well, I'll let Mrs Jacksons lawyers to decide this.
Not ethical -- it definitely wasn't very nice of Mr. Anderson to play 
the Pynchon-card to get his letters read.
Abusing his right to privacy -- well, James Boone (who is now working 
for CNN, did see him several times recently) did that.

According to the interview I seem to have missed the denial. If someone 
could give me the information please.

regards

Otto