[Ian Livingston]

I have to agree with John about Against the Day and Inherent Vice.
Mostly because I think he's right, but also because I found when I
read the collected works of Thomas Pynchon, as you might say, being
all the novels and Slow Learner, back-to-back-to-back a couple of
years ago, it seemed to me that all the works fit in their places just
right, as the works of a maturing mind enriched with the power of
profound insight and the sense of humor that must necessarily (I
think) accompany sustained observation of humans. That's leaving aside
what the critics amply comment upon, being the factors of prose style,
character development, and whatnot. I intend to read them all again,
and maybe again after that. But Against the Day again is next for me,
by dint of my choice of course of study.

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net> wrote:
> Carvill John sez:
>
>>Whether you enjoyed it or not, surely by dint of your presence on this
> forum, your interest level in Pynchon per se is such that you basically
> *need* to read any and all of his books more than once?
>
> Umm... no. Whoever the author, some first readings leave me thinking "coulda
> used that time better," and some leave an... *itch* that eventually pulls me
> back. IV gave me only sporadic pleasure and left behind no itch at all. It
> may be a flawed discrimination -- but as I'm neither teacher nor critic with
> aspirations to well-grounded views of "the Pynchon oeuvre," I'm content with
> it. Could be just age and crotchetiness; YMMV.
>
> -Monte
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Klaatu barada nikto