Does Pynchon Produce Only 'Masterworks'?

[János Székely]

I hope it's not a spoiler to say I think IV is closer to perfection,
to say the least, than VL.
Well, "light" (at least on first reading). Remember, Rossini is
"light" compared to Beethoven.

János

2009/7/7 David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>:
> V. is a difficult book to follow, but less so than GR, and for similar
> reasons.  They both revolve around an abstract theme/object/person.  But the
> episodes in neither are "tenuously connected" - they are connected
> by chronologies that are often hidden and require the reader to make the
> connections.  And they are connected by abstract themes and intentional
> conundrums. That's why it's hard to understand what message or meaning the
> author intends.  I am much more interested personally to what I see as their
> contemplations on universal issues than Pynchon's novels that are much more
> specifically political and less abstract - my personal taste.  That's also
> why Beckett's trilogy is one of my favorite literary works (Becket also
> happens to be extremely funny, like Pynchon).
>
> But I don't think VL is anywhere as deeply developed than any of the books
> that came before it.  I'm guessing that's the same reason that the reviewer
> calls IV "throwaway," meaning "lightweight," something I don't look forward
> to in reading Pynchon
>
> David Morris
>
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Carvill, John <john.carvill at sap.com> wrote:
>>
>> People can go ahead and get bored!
>>
>> I take your point, but I think I could easily conunter your argument by
>> saying, look, V. is (structure-wise) just a bunch of tenuously connected
>> episodes, jumping randomly around from one time period and location to
>> another, and you could quite easily shuffle many of the chapters around with
>> no real positive or negative effect on the coherence of the book as a whole.
>>
>> If I were escaping the proverbial burning building, and having harvested a
>> mumber of other Pynchon books, had to quickly grap either V. or Vineland
>> just before I dived clear of the flames, it would be a tough call. For what
>> it's worth, I found V. an incredibly tough read first time round, certainly
>> it was the hardest to read of all P's books, for me. A second reading was
>> easier, but by then I'd read ll Pynchon's other books.
>>
>> <<People are going to get bore with this conversation, but here goes
>> anyway.
>>
>> V's structure kept changing centers, in locations, times and main
>> characters, constantly.  The most constantly changing character being the
>> many incarnations of V. and her myriad of different stories and locations.
>> And one's not too sure that they are one being until the end (and even then
>> they can hardly be literally so).  But even with all these characters and
>> stories, nothing ever seems extraneous.
>>
>> VL by contrast, is mostly a chronological story centered around one family
>> with numerous flashbacks and a few secondary characters and their stories
>> and histories.  Seems pretty straightforward to me.>>
>>
>>
>
>