Editing Pynchon?

[Carvill John]

Ok, ok, you didn't mean it as a compliment, we are clear on that. I know, opinions differ, and I'm not wanting to discount yours. Quite the opposite: as a long-time Pynchon reader (see, I didn't say 'fan') and p-lister, it's interesting that you didn't like ATD. I'm guessing there were certain sections, and some aspects, you liked? Where did the book go wrong for you?

And what do you think of IV so far?


----------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 08:53:15 -0500
> Subject: Re: Editing Pynchon?
> From: fqmorris at gmail.com
> To: johncarvill at hotmail.com
> CC: hraudask at sun3.oulu.fi; pynchon-l at waste.org
>
> It wasn't meant as a compliment. But I also said "opinions differ."
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Carvill John wrote:
>>
>> Come on, David. Sloppiness is arguable (and a tad insulting), I agree it is baggy but it's built that way: not so much 'fat' as 'big boned'.
>>
>> But decline in skill? I don't think so.

_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1