Pynchon's negative thoughts on GR

[Albert Rolls]

Gerald Howard: "As most Pynchonians know, Corlies Smith — universally called Cork — was Pynchon's editor from the very start of the author's career. [...] On October 20 [1969] [Cork] wrote again to [Edward Mendelson, perhaps Pynchon's most astute and devoted academic critic,]: 'Sorry, nothing new on Pynchon's novel.' On March 5, 1970, Pynchon wrote to Cork to apologize that he was not going to make an April 1 deadline and asking that it be moved to July 1, 1970. He thanked him for his forbearance and ended by expressing his worry, with what degree of irony only he can say for sure, that the novel 'could be the biggest piece of shit since The Crying of Lot 49.'" 

http://gravitys-rainbow.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Gravity's_Rainbow_Reviews

-----Original Message-----
>From: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Feb 11, 2011 10:28 AM
>To: Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>, P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>Subject: Re: Pynchon's negative thoughts on GR
>
>As P said about Ian & Sylvia's eternal love song, He is
>always saying---see Slow Learner---that the stuff he uses 
>in his books is ALWAYS for the reasons of his art in those
>books........
>
>Basic Lit 101 and we have to keep trying to read him with that in mind, imho.
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
>To: P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 10:15:12 AM
>Subject: Re: Pynchon's negative thoughts on GR
>
>> wasn't it in the letter to the Dude?
>>
>
>which I can't find online now, but there was a thread on this list
>about it a couple years ago.  The full text was made available
>somewhere at the time. I believe it sold at auction for a hefty price.
>In it he expresses disagreement with the notion that GR is
>historically or scientifically rigorous.
>
>Dave Monroe probably remembers.
>
>I don't think Pynchon actually says anything to deny that it is a
>fantastically great novel, just that people are giving him credit for
>a hypertrophied science bone (or words to that effect) when his
>outstanding parts are the artistic ones (which he doesn't actually
>say, but I read it in his non-denial of that charge)
>I said something like the above back then, but not nearly so succinctly.
>
>
>
> 
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. 
>Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
>http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html