Top 10 Reasons Why AtD Sucks

[Henry Winkler]

10.  I don't like the title.

9.  None of the plotlines were interesting, particularly the main revenge
plotline.

8.  Intentional or not, the coincidences were ridiculous.

7.  Enuff with the talking dogs, Mr. Pynchon. They have worn thin.

6.  The characters in this book are equal to their wacky names and that is
it. They have no depth.

5.  No bad sex scenes? You need to read Penthouse forum for comparison,
then.

4.  Yes.

3.  Not brilliant. These three shadow puppets are insufferable. I hated all
three of them.

2.  The entire book.

1.  They suck.


On 6/21/07, Daniel Harper <daniel.e.harper at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/21/07, Henry Winkler <rushm0r3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 10.  The title.
> >
>
> What's wrong with the title? It's obscure, evocative, multilingual
> perhaps... much like Pynchon's works in general, and ATD in particular.
>
>
>
> > 9.  Multiple boring plotlines.
> >
>
> I think for every one that you find boring you'll find one that is utterly
> amazing. And those that you find boring might be those that I find amazing.
> Even GR has its slow bits.
>
>
>  8.  Lame coincidences.
> >
>
> Intentional by the author, making points about the characters and themes.
> Even Voltaire did it.
>
>
>
> > 7.  Yet more talking dogs.
> >
>
> And?
>
>
>  6.  Absolutely no depth to characters.
> >
>
> I disagree. ATD has some of the best characters in all of Pynchon's works.
> And Pynchon keep in mind is by no means a "character-centered" author.
>
>
>
>  5.  Awful sex scenes.
> >
>
> I've read a lot of bad sex scenes... and ATD contains none as far as I can
> tell. Some of them are not particularly erotic, but those are not intended
> to be.
>
>
>
> > 4.  Because Michiko K. says it sucks.
> >
>
> Did you even read her review?
>
>
>  3.  Entire Yashmeen-Reef-Cyprian menage-a-trois.
> >
>
> One of the greatest sequences in any of Pynchon's works. This is the
> character work you say doesn't exist earlier. Absolutely brilliant.
>
>
>
> > 2.  Purple prose.
> >
>
> Example?
>
>
>  1.  The Chums of Chance.
> >
>
> What's wrong with them? Sure, they're a hokey literary device, but all of
> Pynchon's works use hokey literary devices as intentional nudges to the
> audience that this is a fictional world.
>
>
>
> Your trolling is not as entertaining as you think it is.
>
> --Daniel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20070621/c2e2fc25/attachment.html>