Well I just reread Vineland and the news is still bad...

[Mark Kohut]

Fonz,
   
  In his letter to Cork Smith, TRP's editor for GR, he spoke of working on three books at once. (revolutionary fictions or crocks of shit, to paraphrase TRP himself and the Fonz).  One was GR. 
   
  In his review of Vineland, John Leonard, former editor of The NY Times Book Review alluded to the common belief in NY literary circles that TRP had been working on a Big Book--or books------secret reports of which must have helped him get his MacArthur Award. Literary insiders know/often knew where he lived and that he was writing steadily. Later editor of the NY Times Book Review, Rebecca Sinclair, knew how to ask for a review of Marquez--which ran on the front page in 1988. 
   
  During those 17 years, there is almost-certain evidence he was writing ATD and M & D as well as Vineland....they are so dense, so unique in their exploration of TRP's vision....they are full of self-sampling, so to speak, common allusions--and common to GR---and present a grand overarching vision, with  GR , of History, American history in particular and the Meaning of Life, so to speak almost stupidly.
   
  MK
   
   
  

Henry Winkler <rushm0r3 at gmail.com> wrote:
    I had the same reaction as Ray to AtD. Boring. Unlike GR, AtD was a grind. It took months to read because the writing was overripe and there was no real plot to give narrative tension. But what I was wondering, though, is why the decline in quality after GR? It's interesting to look at the publication dates of Pynchon's books: 
   
  V..................1963
  CL49.............1966
  GR................1973
  Vineland........1990
  M+D..............1997
  AtD............... 2006
   
  Note the famous or notorious 17 year gap between GR and Vineland. WTF happened during those years people? We may never know, but one thing we do know is that the quality of Pynchon's books declined after that time. 
   
  Fonzi
 
  On 6/13/07, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:   I don't think there's any doubt that GR is superior to all other of
Pynchon's books.  It is more dense, more intense, more poetic, much 
more obscure and more experimental.  I think it was both a product of
its time and of Pynchon's prime.  Also, I'm sure he's not smoking as
much dope or dropping as much acid as he was back then.

AtD doesn't suck, and mediocre Pynchon is still superior to most
other's best.  But I still think Vineland was a big stinker.

David Morris

On 6/12/07, Paul Mackin < paul.mackin at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2007, at 5:05 PM, robinlandseadel at comcast.net wrote:
>
> >  what is it that makes GR superior to AtD? 
>
> My sneaking suspicion is that GR ISN'T really superior to AtD, or isn't THAT much superior.
>
> Our disappointment with the latest book may be mostly a product of the passage of time.  Thirty five years ago Pynchon's innovative approach to fiction writing was still fresh.   It no longer is. 
>




       
---------------------------------
Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20070613/5f2f8605/attachment.html>