AtD - well, whadda ya know ...

[robinlandseadel at comcast.net]

Truth to tell, there is a quality that Pynchon very much admires (and to some extent, shares) in Rilke, an ability to evoke the presence of the otherworldly and imbue that presence with a cosmic sense of significance. It's hard to find that particular quality in "Vineland"; to begin with, one is having altogether too good of a time to think or feel such things. On the other hand, for me, "The Crying of Lot 49" has (ultimately) the greatest metaphysical "Shock & Awe" of any of his books. However, it is arguable that I have read it altogether too many times and read altogether too much into it. Let just say that S. F.'s Transbay Terminal has images I can draw on anytime, and Oedipa's little journey to an alternate reality located somewhere in California feels just a bit too close to home. It's altogether too easy for me to picture some covered trash receptacle, just across from "Fun Terminal" with "w.a.s.t.e." painted on the little swinging door through which you push your disposable
s.
 -------------- Original message ----------------------
 And what exactly distinguishes these "millenium" novels from the others?  Is it just page length, or is there a common set of themes, rhetorical devices, techniques, characters, etc. that these works are supposed to share that are less evident in his other works?  Considering that GR & M&D are the two that are undisputably in the running for such a label, what do they have in common that the other works don't?

-Chris