FR online review

[Thomas Eckhardt]

Mario first brought that review to our attention, albeit in a way that 
drew Doug's ire.

Müller-Sievers makes some interesting points, some of which I find 
highly debatable. He argues, for example, that long-time Pynchon readers 
are being turned away by an increasing "poeticization" of Pynchon's 
prose style. Formerly, Müller-Sievers states, readers were able to 
separate the arcane and politically risky information from the literary 
form. From "M&D" onwards, he argues, form and content become more and 
more inextricably entwined. He indeed hints at an interesting 
development in Pynchon's writing there, I believe. But to suggest, in 
effect, that the fascination e.g. "GR" still exerts lies exclusively in 
the book's verifiable historical subjects and not in its prose style is 
ridiculous. Pynchon could have written about Deutsch-Südwest and the V2 
all he wanted, if "GR" wasn't the prose masterpiece it is, it would 
still not be more than an interesting read.

This said, I found the comparison between Pynchon's and Kleist's use of 
commas interesting. I also wholeheartedy agree that "AtD", even if it 
had no discernible point or unifying theme (Müller-Sievers says the 
novel's theme is WW I, me, I haven't found out yet), would still be 
"eternally justified" by the embarrassment of riches on every single 
page. On the other hand, I assume, having reached page 200, that 
Müller-Sievers' assessment of the novel as "utopian" underestimates its 
dark undercurrents.

Jim Jarmusch and Tom Waits are poor choices indeed. I like them, but for 
me their sensibilities don't seem to square with Pynchon's. The Scorsese 
of "After Hours" and "Age of Innocence", ok. Michael Mann, no, although 
I enjoy his work. Peter Greenaway, no, too abstract. Only the Knights of 
the Living Dead could do justice to Pynchon, i.e. a collaboration of 
Billy Wilder and Stanley Kubrick.

Thomas