Sot-Weed

[Paul Mackin]

On 2/4/2012 11:54 AM, Krafft, John M. wrote:
> I should probably stay out of this: why dis other peple's idea of fun? But ...
>
> Way back when I was just getting into Pynchon, the big guys claimed Barth was the real thing, an intellectual('s) novelist, unlike Pynchon. I found Barth intriguing, challenging, often funny, but often smug and tedious. (Can anybody read Goat-Boy these days? Maybe: I admit I haven't since 1973 and don't intend to.) When M&D came out, several reviewers complained that we didn't need Pynchon's go at something Barth had done better a generation earlier. So I reread (even taught!) Sot-Weed, and was ... disappointed. How could I ever have found all those fart jokes and rape jokes amusing? I still occasionally think about possibly doing something with Letters someday, but maybe it won't reread well either.
>
> John
>
>
I confess to not really liking postmodernist Barth.  (his earlier novels 
were good)

I imagine once GR was out, intellectuals had to stop classing Pynchon as 
not worthy. Am I correct?

I remember thinking V. and Lot 49 were not very "intellectual"--for want 
of a better term.  Kind of "popular," compared to what was passing for 
intellectual in the sixties.  But then came GR and the world wasn't the 
same--at least for a few years.  (perhaps the earlier novels only 
appeared intellectual with age)

P