IVIV (12): 195-197

[Robin Landseadel]

On Nov 5, 2009, at 5:32 PM, alice wellintown wrote:

> To apply the standard and reading stance of VL and IV
> and CL49 to the Romances is a mistake.

And who sez that's what we're doing?—you, just you. I never claimed  
that the California books were to be read as being on the same scale,  
have the same general intent as the big books, the ones you have  
determined to be romances. That's your world, dude. Shall you project  
a world? Could I or anyone one else stop you from projecting your world?

> That's what I have argued and I
> have listened to the other side for over a decade now. We needn't
> agree. But, please....never tell me to take drugs. That is just wrong,
> dude.

Can't get there from here, Sobchak.

> The political or California novels
> are failures.

Kinda like saying Pynchon's life is a failure, as these are his most  
autobiographical books.

> Goodbye,
>
> Terrance

I don't believe you. I'm sure the first chance you get, you'll hoist  
another sock puppet and see if anybody salutes. Too bad you decided to  
vent and vacate. We could have gone much further on "feminist"  
readings of Pynchon, throwing  "Reclaiming" and Gimbutas and Gaia into  
the mix. This might have gone somewhere if you weren't so enthralled  
your own genius that you had to leave before any light leaked into  
your hermetically sealed view.