Pynchon's reply

[Rob Jackson]

Maybe I'm reading it wrongly ...

Pynchon wrote one letter to Hollander back in 1981 and plainly told  
him he was barking up the wrong tree ... the comments Pynchon makes in  
the letter aren't just about releasing a compilation of the short  
stories, they're also directed at an interpretation or interpretations  
put forward in a letter or (more likely, on the basis of the comments  
about "responding to your letters" and the amusing sign-off  
contrasting "silence" with "English") a series of letters we haven't  
seen ... Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that Hollander was  
floating some of his interpretive ideas in these letters which he  
developed later on into his critical articles ...?

Pynchon seems to be saying quite plainly in the reply that Hollander  
is barking up the wrong tree ... Hollander keeps barking up that tree  
for 25-odd years nevertheless ... Note that Hollander's  
interpretations are absolutely predicated on imputing intentionality  
to the author ... Wouldn't it be more "logical" (to cite "Mr. Spock")  
to believe the author's own contradiction of such an imputation than  
to suggest that he'd actively write a false letter of discouragement  
to someone he doesn't know from Adam ... ?

Now Hollander turns around and seemingly betrays not only the author's  
privacy but his own interpretive wrongheadedness for a sack of  
cash ... I mean, good luck to the guy for the windfall and all ... but  
isn't there something wrong with that picture too?

I'm of the opinion that all the Wanda Tinasky, Unabomber, CIA stuff  
over the years has actually done a huge disservice to both the man and  
his work ... so perhaps am viewing the ramifications in a harsh light  
and do apologise to Hollander if there's more to it than just that.

best regards

>
> Dear Charles Hollander,
>
>    It's nothing personal-- only that this year my new year's
> resolutions include no complaining and no free advice to anybody about
> what they should be doing with their lives, and responding to your
> letters would have meant doing one or the other.
>
>    At the same time, though, you write too well for me to be
> discouraging you from it,  I just don't think you ought to be writing
> about me. The sad truth is that you're giving me much too much credit.
> My own research is nowhere near as deep or as conscientious as yours.
> It is, in fact, as shallow as I think I can get away with, because I
> don't write "novels of ideas."  Plot and character come first, just
> like with most other folks's stuff, and the heavy thotz and
> capitalized references and shit are in there to advance action, set
> scenes, fill in characters and so forth, and the less of it I have to
> do, the better for me cause I'm lazy.  Sorry to have to be the one to
> tell you.  If you reverse polarity and read for mistakes, you'll see
> this-- there are more, what Mr. Spock calls "errors", in Gravity's
> Rainbow, for instance, than there are true facts.  And this is the
> result of research habits and procedures about which "slovenly" is as
> kind as one can get,
>
>    But, there I go-- complaining again.
>
>    So, as for collecting and publishing those old short stories, the
> answer is no. It was nice of you to want to believe I had some
> underlying coherent vision in mind, but I didn't. All it is is a bunch
> of early attempts-- insufferably smart-assed, juvenile, and worst of
> all not thought out.  Viking is also making noises about reprinting
> them, and they are getting no for an answer just like you.
>
>    As long as I've been complaining, I might as well make with the
> free advice here-- you are too good to be wasting your time and energy
> writing about somebody else's stuff.  You ought to be doing your own.
> If your March 20th letter is an indication, you already see this and
> are doing something about it, so I don't feel like that much of a
> busybody telling you.
>
>    Of course silence is hard to interpret.  If it wasn't they'd call
> it "English," or something.
>
>    Yours truly,
>
>
>    Thomas Pynchon
>