Book Review of Gravity's Rainbow, by Thomas Pynchon

[Phillip Grayson]

I didn't mean to be harshing on Henry James, only to say that I might have
written something ignorant and critical of him as a young man first getting
at his books, and that a friend chopped them up with an ax for an art
project.  I like James a lot now, actually.  That was kinda what I was
saying.  Kids who care a lot about literature need to read a lot and love a
lot of things and they do need to hate a lot of things too, to figure out
what it is they care about with this art and all that.

If this guy is 42, though, then I don't know what to say.  I'm almost 30
and I'm as ignorant as possible about literature, but I would be ashamed to
read and write like a child.

Sorry.
phllp

On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Stephen Fawcus <s.fawcus at btinternet.com>wrote:

> I think he's in his early 40's
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 24 Aug 2012, at 20:48, "Monte Davis" <montedavis at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Well said. It’s a certainty that he’ll outgrow it… a likelihood  that
> he’ll be more embarrassed ion retrospect than by any counterblast we come
> up with… and a distinct possibility he’ll come to value P more highly than
> Vonnegut.****
>
> ** **
>
> PS to all: no more harshing on Henry James! This means you!****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-pynchon-l at waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Phillip Grayson
> *Sent:* Friday, August 24, 2012 3:24 PM
> *To:* Mark Sacha
> *Cc:* Phillip Greenlief; rich; Prashant Kumar; Dave Monroe; pynchon -l
> *Subject:* Re: Book Review of Gravity’s Rainbow, by Thomas Pynchon****
>
> ** **
>
> I don't know, I liked it a little.  I assume this is a youngish kid,
> sorting out his aesthetics.  I think I did more or less the same type of
> thing when I was 20-22, venting about Henry James and Charles Dickens and
> other amazing writers that I was trying to get around.  I was lucky enough
> that I still got the internet through a phone line then and just wrote
> these rants to myself, but they were prolly fairly similar.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> Of course it's hilariously off-base, and he makes the mistake of quoting
> TRP at length and then assuming that it's evidently bad writing, when,
> well...****
>
> ** **
>
> But I think smart kids have to go through this contrarian phase, and it's
> good for them.  The fact that he can't support his arguments and just falls
> back on rhetorical tics is something he'll prolly/hopefully get over before
> too long.****
>
> ** **
>
> Preferring Vonnegut to Pynchon isn't a necessarily terrible thing.  I
> could buy that, respect it.  He won't write about Vonnegut, of course, but
> teenagers are better at being angry than anything else (except I was good
> at basketball), so it makes sense to lay it out like this.****
>
> ** **
>
> It's a silly, shallow failure of a criticism, but this is something we've
> prolly all done as readers.  It's not a bad first effort at thinking about
> a serious book you didn't respond to.  I knew this brilliant kid in college
> (who's now a very good lesser known poet) who photo'd himself chopping
> Henry James books into kindling.  Obviously neither of these are very
> sophisticated criticisms, but I think it's good for young kids to get
> passionate about these things; I'm not opposed to it all that much.****
>
> ** **
>
> phllp****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Mark Sacha < <msacha1121 at gmail.com>
> msacha1121 at gmail.com> wrote:****
>
> I imagine it taking him much longer to compose that rant than the alleged
> six hours it took him to read GR. That he poses this obviously fabricated
> figure as an argument for the novel's lack of substance is absurd,
> especially judging by his bio, which seems to indicate that he considers
> himself a serious critic. But I guess it's more cogent than some of his
> other arguments, which include supposed "hipster" sentimentalities, that
> it's "low-grade MFA writing", or that it's "boring as shit".****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Phillip Greenlief < <pgsaxo at pacbell.net>
> pgsaxo at pacbell.net> wrote:****
>
> *From:* rich < <richard.romeo at gmail.com>richard.romeo at gmail.com>****
>
>
> one wonders why go to all the trouble blathering on about something you
> hate.
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> PG:****
>
> ** **
>
> absolutely - in my own experience of composing reviews, i have never been
> interested in tearing something to shreds - i'd much rather write about
> something i'm excited about and would like to share with others. he
> certainly is working very hard to tell us how right he is and how wrong
> pynchon and all his admirers are ...****
>
> ** **
>
> the things that bugs me the most is the smarmy glee that he seems to
> exhibit while dis-ing TRP. typical holier than thou, i'm the smartest
> motherfucker in the room antics that so turned my stomach in graduate
> school.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120824/8401286e/attachment.html>