A Question about IV

[Robin Landseadel]

On Aug 30, 2009, at 1:35 PM, rich wrote:

> how do we reconcile the apparent superficial nature of IV overall with
> any in-depth reading--e.g. lots of talk about Aunt Reet and there sure
> seems alot of stuff being thrown down based on a character with only a
> couple of lines. I mean its in the nature of our Pynchon discourse
> mind you, so I'm not ragging on anybody. I'm still not convinced,
> however, that this book requires deep investigation of the obscure for
> some deeper insight.
>
> rich

I'm seeing all sorts of surrounding connections of the CIA to the  
founding of the internet. The simple fact that one of the centers of  
these sorts of activities "just happens" to be the spot where TRP  
wrote Gravity's Rainbow fascinates me and makes me want to know more  
about the CIA/Internet connections. It also happens that these defense  
department activities involved rockets, big-time, a subject that  
appears to have interest Pynchon. Haven't seen much [yet] about  
background of GR in IV but there's scenes in IV that echo with scenes  
in GR..

On top of that, there's plenty of intertwining of Raymond Chandler's  
leitmotifs, symbolic strategies & signifiers in Inherent Vice. When  
you get down to it, there's  plenty about genre writing itself. While  
it looks like you're not in this particular demographic, plenty of  
folks found Inherent Vice affecting & accessible in ways that the  
author's  other books aren't. I know I do. I don't think that Inherent  
Vice is any "slighter" than The Crying of Lot 49. Then again, I don't  
think The Crying of Lot 49 is slight at all.

It's true that Pynchon is up to ALL of his old tricks here, including  
the ever popular "come up with some symbolic stick-figures, give them  
weird-ass, corny names, shove 'em couple of lines and then kick 'em  
off-stage" routine but now  there's the virtue of being having the  
story grounded in a central character.

It strikes me that Pynchon is juggling quite a few balls in this one.  
Of course, if it's not working for you maybe it's time to read  
something else for a while, give it a rest. I'll bet more readers gave  
up on Mason & Dixon than any other book by Pynchon. Nothing  
superficial about that one.