The revolutionaries of May

[Dave Monroe]

2009/7/27 Carvill, John <john.carvill at sap.com>:

> (1) This stuff about what IV reveals (or hints at) about how GR might be 'about' 70s LA/America/etc., is far and away the most intriguing reading I've seen so far, and I can't wait to see how you develop it further.

I've long taken something along these lines as given.  GR ends up in
70s LA.  The War seems as much Vietnam as WWII (as ... as ...).  CF.
the truism about SF, that it's always "really" "about" its own
sociohistorical context,  As is most everything ...

> (2) The more I think about it, and factor in your comments, this popular critical idea of Inherent Vice being part 3 of a California trilogy makes less and less sense. If anything, I'd say that IV is (obviously) very close to Vineland, in a lot of ways, yet seems (to me, right now) relatively distant to COL49. Which would mean, if there's any kind of LA/California trilogy to be triangulated, then it's GR/VL/IV, rather than COL49/VL/IV.

For my two cents worth, and at the risk of positing symmetries,
binarism, what have you, I've (IV?[!]) been wondering if one might
eventually divide the novels thus: Lot49/VL/IV, GR/M&D/AtD, with V.
split between them/at (of course) their point of divergence.  Not
just, the short novels vs. the big books, but the historical vs. the
(roughly) contemporary (though that of course tends to get more than a
bit complicated in any givn book, so ...).  Not trhat thhat lends one
much of, if any at all, interpretive purchase or whatever, but ...

Of course, the more cynical (and, perhaps, the more realistic), might
(and have) split them as, the personal projects vs. the fundraisers,
but ...