Webb Traverse

[Daniel Harper]

On Wednesday 18 April 2007 17:19, you wrote:
> On Wednesday, Apr 18, 2007, at 17:08 US/Central, Daniel Harper wrote:
> > My own fear is that we're eventually going
> > to start seeing relevance where there is none....
>
> That's the favorite sport of this list -- "not that there's anything
> wrong with that"!
>
> Ray

I think it's partly a nod to Pynchon's famously obtuse style, partly to his 
reticence to talk about his own work or to provide biographical details. To 
use a topical example, when discussing Kurt Vonnegut's work, we can look at 
certain sequences or turns of phrase as being reflected in his wartime 
experiences, or his experience as an advertising writer, et cetera. But since 
Pynchon doesn't give us that kind of meat, we start spending huge amounts of 
time piercing the veil of something that might just be pretty straightforward 
in and of itself. 

For instance, if Pynchon had a neighbor circa 1970 who was way into Tarot, it 
might explain huge swatches of ATD and (I am learning) GR. Not that the 
literary significance would dissipate, but at least we'd gain a toehold into 
understanding the use of such in those works.

On a related note, are there any "professional" lit-critters on this list? In 
other words, does anyone here actually get paid (in some sense or other) to 
do this?

-- 
No reference to the present day is intended or should be inferred.
--Daniel Harper
countermonkey.blogspot.com