sex scene commentary / book commentary in general (ATD)

[gp]

I would wager that the Dig reporter has a shot at being the guy who's
never read GR.  Maybe Vineland or COL49.

I think I'd have the same impression of AtD though...  I don't know
how I'm doing it, because I definitely view Vineland, M&D (though I've
not given it an honest enough shot yet), and COL49 in the light of GR.
 But V. and AtD fall outside of that spectrum for me somehow...  my
mind is all on those novels and nothing else.  As far as I'm concerned
they stand alone regardless of how they call upon one another.

But going beyond that...  I would say that GR falls to the same
criticism as AtD in my mind.  This is not mass market material (though
it's nice to buy and have on the shelf to look all smart for having a
bigfat book on your shelf).  I still get lost by parts of GR, I'll
admit it, but I've learned so much from the book (and often the parts
I get lost at are not the same I got lost at before, which I
understand upon later readings) that I know that where I get lost
there are things worth investigating as opposed to sloppy writing.
Most readers, and most reviewers, aren't going to see past this, and
have to either go on gut opinion or what they think will turn a quick
buck.  If you get what I'm saying.  And you (I) really can't blame
them - how many books have you read that built themselves up to be
such wonderful, complex stories, upon further reading appear as mere
shams of what they pretend to be?  This is not, by any means, dime a
dozen material, and it's easy to let that "all that glitters is not
gold" mentality get the best of you, to let those childlike moments of
bewildered amazement pass away to become bitter distrust, until it
becomes such that ALL that glitters is not gold, and fortunes are lost
upon you.

In any case, while I am unabashedly a fanboy of Pynchon, you would
never hear me waxing poetic about M&D (unless it reveals more to me
upon further reading than it has so far) or Vineland, or even COL49
(which is an interesting story, and a good one, but one that to me
remains only that, especially if you refuse to acknowledge the other
writing of the author, if it was all you had to go on - I do use the
second person generously as I'm sure there are more than a few that
could beat me down in a verbal debate on the subject).

I think it will be interesting to see, in years to come, where AtD
lies upon the consensus line of academics in regards to Pynchon's
writing.  I don't think it could ever supplant GR for me (I know it
couldn't) on a personal level, but I would not be closed-eared in
regards to discussion on the topic.  I think that it is possible for
it to, on a personal level, become equal to GR.  If only because it
resonates to a less decade-endowed individaul such as myself, more
than any imagery of the world of the 60s, 70s, or WWII-era America
could ever resonate, if only because I never experienced it, if only
because I was not there.

(spoiler)

And remember.  Follow the bouncing ball.  A heavenwide blast of light.

It went on for a month.  Those who had taken it for a cosmic sign
cringed beneath the sky each nightfall, imagining ever more
extravagant disasters.  Others, for whom orange did not seem an
appropriately apocalyptic shade, sat outdoors on public benches,
reading calmly, growing used to the curious pallor.  As nights went on
and nothing happened and the phenomenon slowly faded to the accustomed
deeper violets again, most had difficulty remembering the ealier rise
of heart, the sense of overture and possibility, and went back once
again to seeking only orgasm, hallucination, stupor, sleep, to fetch
them through the night and prepare them against the day.

I do not know Gravity's Rainbow, I do not.  I don't know beyond basic
knowing, I don't know in the sense of having lived it, the world
during which GR was written, and that alone will always be a wall,
regardless of how greatly I regard the book.  But I know that.  And
perhaps because it is all that I know, perhaps because it is the
greatest thing I know, it can resonate that much more powerfully to me
and mine.  Perhaps Pynchon has become the man in two places, able to
live both moments at once, though having never lived the previous life
I can not judge by myself.  And perhaps that's the thing after all,
since it is likely rare to find a member of this list that lived
through the firebombing of London regardless of being alive through
the era of Pynchon's writing.

"There are places we fear, places we dream, places whose exiles we
became and never learned it until, sometimes, too late."



On 1/14/07, kelber at mindspring.com <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: gp <wescac at gmail.com>
>
> >I don't think reviewers are wrong to say certain things against the
> >book since, as I said in reply to another topic, reviews are for the
> >mass market, and this is not something a mass market audience could
> >handle (this is just brass tacks, folks) and that middle - man, if you
> >were reading this book on a deadline - for work, not pleasure - could
> >you really have written a glowing review if this were your only
> >knowledge of Pynchon?
>
> I know there are two schools of thought on this, but I think it's impossible for anyone who's read GR et al. to evaluate ATD in and of itself, without taking all of Pynchon's work into account.  There are (non-reviewer) people who are being introduced to Pynchon via ATD, and I think their perspective is an interesting one, but I can't recall reading any reviews by people who fall into this category.  If anyone knows of one, I'd like to read it.
>
> Laura
>