IVIV (0) This Lively Yarn

[Carvill, John]

Heh. Yet again I salute your photographic memory of Pynchon.

> 
> > (a)  Can we agree it doesn't very forcefully suggest itself as
having
> > been written by Pynchon? 
> 
> Maybe not forcefully, but I would still say that it is a very safe bet
> that Pynchon wrote this. We know that he likes to be in control of how
his
> books are launched, playing a part in the design of the jacket u.s.w.,
> and I don't think he would entrust something as important as the book
> description to anyone else. 


Yehp, that makes logical sense. I know few people share my feelings on
this, but I still remain puzzled about the whole (non)marketing of
Pynchon's books, particularly ATD and IV. For example: has anyone yet
seen a newspaper ad for IV? For another example: why hide the fact that
it's Pynchon doing the voiceover? Possible answer: it's a fitting way to
do it: we know, but we don't know. Probable response from us lot: well
then why change your minds and admit it?! Could this all be part of a
'viral' marketing campaign?

You are right of course about Pynchon liking to closely control the
process but, well, I wouldn't like to see a 'loosely controlled'
marketing campaign.


> > (b) There's that playing with time again. Never too sure when we
really
> > are. 
>  
> I think the action can be accurately pinned down to early 1970
(probably
> from around February to early spring). On page 98, we learn that "It
was 
> late winter in Gordita." And later in the same chapter, on p. 107, we
hear 
> of "the epic surf that hit the north shore of that island [Oahu] back
in 
> December," and we hear that this surge coincided with the capture of
Manson, 
> who was taken into custody in December '69. Also the Manson case has
yet to 
> go into trial (which it did in June 1970).


Sure, but we do have to sort of figure it out. And it's still a little
tricksy, no? As with ATD, the date is never, or rarely, made explicit.
And then things do get sorta peculiar, what with all that LSD, etc.

>  
> Almost the same phrase appearing three times in a row on M&D, AtD and
IV -
> that can't be a coincidence.
> 
> > (f) 'Lively yarn' is just about the only phrase in here that I can
find
> > that suggests itself, to me, as a possible Pynchonism.
>  
> Once again, you're absolutely right. Pynchon has previously mentioned
his 
> propensity to spin yarns, so I'd definitely call it a Pynchonism, even
> though we may groan at the phrase.
> 

Oh no, I will never groan at 'yarn'! Yarn seems to me an inherently
funny word - like, say, 'menace'.


> > (h) Would Pynchon really make that 'if you were there, then you . .
.
> > or, wait, is it . . .' joke at the end? It's kinda stupid and
obvious,
> > so that does suggest a marketing department at work; on the oteh
rhand,
> > many of Pynchon's best jokes *are* stupid, so....
>  
> It recalls the "What year is this again?" from the end of the video: 
> another stupid joke which does seem right up his alley.
>  


Another excellent point.

Aha, just got another email re. yarns (and their spinners)...

<< Also, recall how Slothrop inserted "fantasies into the yarns he spun
for Tantivy back in the ACHTUNG office" (GR, 302). And in V., Victoria's
uncle returns from Australia, "bringing no gifts but his wonderful
yarns" (V., 72-73) - just one example of many in V. where Pynchon speaks
of yarns. Pynchon sure likes his yarns. >>


Yes, he sure does. In fact, I was sure he'd used 'yarn' in the ATD
blurb, but when I checked I found I was mistaken. 

Finally, reading the blurb again, I guess I do detect some Pynchon
humour in this bit:


"...whom she just happens to be in love with. Easy for her to say."


Cheers
J