AtD - well, whadda ya know ...

[jd]

I would be inclined not to include Vineland in his Big Four if only
because it seemed his least experimental, most "main stream" sort of
story.  But when you look at that idea behind it...  the fascination
with facism, the cultural movement...  all the elements are there for
a rollicking good Pynchon tome.  I'm not saying I don't like it as a
book, but I don't think that it can be quite held to the level that
his other books are...  it doesn't come off to me as the multi-layered
commentary that he's capable of.  So maybe this was, in fact, one of
the four that didn't come out on paper like it appeared in his mind -
or, it did, and it just doesn't have that same draw as his others (for
me at least).  So I guess I'd rather consider it an "in between"
novel, like I consider col 49 to be (I don't think that's a part of
the four, either, though it is good as well) than a "failed project".

On 8/7/06, Ya Sam <takoitov at hotmail.com> wrote:
> If Vineland is that failed project (still don't wanna believe it) then
> probably we'll have to satisfy ourselves with this quartet. I'm not sure
> that Pynchon will be able to write another BIG novel from scratch. It is
> ironic that Vineland as a salvaged Mothra novel should be so spectacularly
> Mothra-less. That novel is a maverick in Pynchon canon, longer than short
> pieces (and Lot 49 may be regarded as a very long short story) and much
> smaller than big novels, no wonder there are so many heated discussions
> around it. I prefer to suspend my judgement of this particular work as I
> still understand it too little in terms of its cultural background.
>
> >From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> >To: "Ya Sam" <takoitov at hotmail.com>
> >CC: tyronemullet at hotmail.com, pynchon-l at waste.org
> >Subject: Re: AtD - well, whadda ya know ...
> >Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 15:27:15 -0400
> >
> >as has been noted b/4 maybe pynchon just ditched parts of that mothra book
> >and took remains for vineland
> >
> >V, GR, M&D, AtD--not a bad quartet I'd say ( I say I say I'll say after
> >I've
> >read that paartickulaar last'un)
> >
> >foghorn romeo
> >
> >On 8/7/06, Ya Sam <takoitov at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>Absolutely right, Pynchon mentions the four great novels inside his head
> >>after V. was published. Most probably he considered it just a rehearsal. I
> >>don't think Lot 49 was part of that scheme, as it is indeed too short.
> >>Could
> >>'Vineland' have been a failed 'millennium book'? Don't know, and don't
> >>wanna
> >>beleive it either.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >I believe V. was already written--the letter excerpt that was posted in
> >>the
> >> >NY Times from Pynchon in 1964 mentions 4 books under way--pbly 49, GR,
> >>MD,
> >> >and maybe AtD (they are not named, of course)--but maybe 49 is not
> >> >included.
> >> >gah...
> >> >
> >> >who knows. just idle speculatin
> >> >
> >> >rich
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On 8/7/06, Steve Maas <tyronemullet at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>Just curious why you'd leave V, out of that conjecture?
> >> >>Steve Maas
> >> >>
> >> >>----------------------
> >> >>Rich wrote:
> >> >>yeah, definitely not Vineland but Lot 49 fits--so in 1964-65 Pynchon
> >>may
> >> >>have had in mind/progress on 49, GR, M&D, and AD as the four books.
> >>maybe
> >> >>49
> >> >>isn't one of 'em--one could argue that, too
> >> >>
> >> >>rich
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>_________________________________________________________________
> >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
> >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> >>
> >>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>