Pynchon's reply

[kelber at mindspring.com]

And continuing to beat the dead horse:

Driblette's diatribe (angry because Oedipa's asking the right questions):  "'You guys, you're like Puritans are about the Bible.  So hung up with words, words.'"

This could be Pynchon's irritation an author's words being overly interpreted (for that matter it could be any author's; Arthur C. Clarke responding to those who insist on the HAL-IBM connection, for example).

But then Driblette/Pynchon contradicts himself, seeming to praise the interpreter (critics, directors, adapters) over the writer:  "'That's what I'm for.  To give the spirit flesh.  The words, who cares?'"

Laura


-----Original Message-----
>From: John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com>
>Sent: May 18, 2009 11:07 PM
>To: pynchon-l at waste.org
>Subject: Re: Pynchon's reply
>
>Doesn't the SL intro also state something to the effect that P
>considers "plot" one of his weakest points? (I sort of agree)
>
>In which case, the letter to Hollander is probably disingenuous, or at
>least provoked a little self-reflection on P's part which ended up as
>an admission that he's not that sharp a plotter.
>
>I'm also fascinated by the way his non-book stuff often alternates
>between strong, confident, pointed assertions and self-deprecating
>confessions of laziness, erring, procedural laxity etc.
>
>I think these caveats should be taken with a grain of salt. But I also
>think P isn't a Total Mastermind in total control of every aspect of
>his writing.
>
>On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 4:28 AM, Rob Jackson <jbor at bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ... the amusing sign-off contrasting "silence" with "English" ...
>>
>> "Heretofore, the naming of names has gone on either literally or as
>> metaphor. But now, as the Duke gives his fatal command, a new mode of
>> expression takes over. It can only be called a kind of ritual
>> reluctance. Certain things, it is made clear, will not be spoken
>> aloud; certain events will not be shown on stage." --Lot 49, pp. 49-50
>>