Pynchon's reply

[Michael Bailey]

Dave Monroe  wrote:
> I would think that by now we
> should all know better than to take "authors" at their word, esp, when
> said word is about their words ...
>

Though I rarely disagree with you, Dave, please include me out of that
refusal to suspend disbelief - I think he was calling it like he saw
it

> Meanwhile, do you really think Pynchon was influenced to any extent,
> if at all, by Patrick White?   Maybe you should risk asking.  How amny
> of y'all HAVE read that one?  Me, I quite liked it, perhaops precisely
> BECAUSE it's so far-fetched and circumstantial, demonstrating a
> healthy, associative imagination on it's author's part so rarely
> displayed here.  I'd almost thjink  ...


Dave is here referring to an article by Rob Jackson in the Pynchon
Notes, for those of us who may not have known that.
(I have list-nanny inclinations...will try to find said article on post a link)

> Pynchon or of anyone else's reading of him) here.  He's at least put
> his cards on the table, while the rest of us consternate over anteing
> up, even ...
>

you can't claim that about me.  I've stated all my grand unified
theories of Pynchon here several times.
Now if I could only remember them...and if only they were coherent...

Also, how about Glenn Scheper?  There's no negativity or pusillanimity
in his interpretations, which - though outre - are thought-provoking
and valuable.



-- 
"For the moment not caring who you're supposed to be registered as.
For the moment anyway, no longer who the Caesars say you are." - GR, p
136