Re: IVIV (15) 273—7000 Romaine, Los Angeles 38

[alice wellintown]

If you could construct a reading from IV that would be another matter,
but you are now slapping together several huge conspiracy theories and
dozens of conspiracy texts to make your reading intelligable. That's
projecting a reader-response world onto the text. The fact that the
event threads that you are stitching together  happened in California
and Washington and Nevada at around the time that, either the author
lived close by or one of the conspiracy figures did, and so on,  is
not anyhting explicit. If it is implicit, you have not argued that
convincingly. Not to me or those who find reader-response political
conspiracy readings of Pynchon a poor approach, but to anyone who has
a bit of critical rigor.  I suspect you are not convinced of your own
strong misreading and that is why you are so keen to silence my
critique of it; that might slit this thin spun thread and allow the
fates to unwind a muted posthorn.



2009/11/22 Robin Landseadel <robinlandseadel at comcast.net>:
> I've got a swell idea—you stick to looking for Inherent Vice's connections
> with "The Great American Literary Tradition" and I'll stick to looking for
> connections to the time and place where the book is set. There's always
> political content in Pynchon's books that is relevant to both the specific
> time and place where the novels are set and also to the time when the novel
> is published. Every time anyone comes up with political threads in Pynchon
> that connect to modern day spying, clandestine operations and the political
> food chain as it now stands, you respond like you just did. I have no clue
> as to what you motive is, but you started out by calling the book "crap" and
> you haven't let up since. The threads pointing to Howard Hughes are
> explicitly stated in Inherent Vice. The directions you're attempting to lead
> us aren't.