ATD: ad: Pynchon excerpt from new novel

[XXX]

Spencer T. Campbell wrote:

> Yikes, and really 'genious' spelling there, too.
>
>
> On 8/4/06, Spencer T. Campbell <spencer.t.campbell2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, I certainly wasn't trying to pass any kind of premature
>> judgment on the novel itself--based on the title, the blurb, or any of
>> it.  And 'dreadful' was, I admit, hyperbolic.  But, if authentic, I
>> should like to think that the fact that it's filthy with pop-western
>> cliche marks it as some kind of broad genre parody, as opposed to an
>> attempt at the kind of genuine and aching drama that Pynchon has
>> achieved in his other books.  I mean, "in classic throwdown posture"
>> or "trying to aim it as straight as a shaking pair of hands would
>> allow"...these are TV cues, not penetrating scene-setting.
>>
>> So my point was that, if it's a moment of caricature, it's odd that
>> Penguin would choose to excerpt as advertisement.  I have every faith
>> that Pynchon is sharp as ever, but this passage isn't particularly
>> sharp.
>

the question to ask isn't why would Pynchon do something stupid but 
rather what is perhaps really quite brilliant about promoting his book 
with this particular passage?

I offer the connection between Uncompahgre plateau and the Kinosha Pass 
as one Pynchon would realize some of his cleverer devotees would be 
likely to pick up on. Voila people start jabbering about it. And of 
course it does matter in the least whether theres any actual connection 
in the story or not.

Please don't make me eat crow later on. I like crow but it disagrees 
with me.

P.the

>>
>> But Pynchon is difficult to excerpt (genious point, I know).  A lot of
>> the power of individual passages is the endpoint of pages and pages of
>> mounting incident or symbolic sleight-of-hand.
>>
>> In short: don't think a few paragraphs and some chatter mean this
>> phone-book's a clunker, but don't undestand penguin's marketing
>> strategy, either.
>>
>>
>> On 8/4/06, Dave Monroe <monropolitan at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Dont like it on the basis of a title, a blurb, and
>> > MAYBE one page?   Don't read it, then, I guess ...
>> >
>> > But then don't complain about it, either ...
>> >
>>
>