ATD vs. V.? Overcoding or metaphor?

[David Morris]

I think the hollow earth segment in AtD was just a cheap throwaway.
It came and went without any real resonance with the rest of the book.
 AtD needed a much more active editor.  A lot should have been cut
before publishing.

David Morris

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:01 AM, David Patty <navan.ghee at gmail.com> wrote:
> What do you kids make of Pynchon's return to the Shaver-esque hollow earth theory in 'ATD'?
>
> Re-reading 'V.' (7:VIII) I was surprised to note that he'd discussed it before, albeit peripherally.  It's for entirely different purposes in 'ATD' than in 'V.', I think; cf. the Chums of Chance's 'shortcut' through the hollow earth, fending off Deros (cementing the association w/ Shaver), trying to escape out the other side before man's total exploration of earth invalidates yet-another fictional possibility*, whereas in 'V.' Vheissu seems to have been posited as merely one more theory for the soup, something to spice up the confusion.
>
> What do you-all think?  Did Pynchon see something unexplored in the idea and re-visit it, or--  as a certain wag on The Fictional Woods might suggest  --did he forget having written about it altogether & decide to tackle it anew?  Not that anything's ever either/or...
>