Reading Pynchon

[Paul Mackin]

On 2/26/2012 3:55 PM, David Morris wrote:
> Fiction has a long history of being something to figure out. Nabokov 
> made intricate fiction puzzles. Joyce too, but different. TRP also.

l prefer to let my unconscious figure everything out.

The reason the answer to Mark gets repeated a few times is that there is 
something wrong with my computer.

P
>
> On Sunday, February  26, 2012, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net 
> <mailto:mackin.paul at verizon.net>> wrote:
> > You're not boring us, Mark.
> >
> > I DO want to toss out what for me is a good way to read Pynchon.
> >
> > For me, fiction isn't something to figure out.
> >
> > This is notwithstanding the fact that Pynchon is a difficult writer 
> and it is often necessary to go to the reference library in order to 
> know what he is talking about.
> >
> > No problem.
> >
> > My solution ISN'T to degrade meaning, but rather to elevate the 
>  meaning of meaning.
> >
> > Instead of seeking meaning for the rational mind (which some 
> p-listers seem to find necessary and others clunky) I would rather 
> find meaning for the Soul.
> >
> > Pynchon's greatest strength as a writer is his gift for stimulating 
> the imagination. The originality of his words is often breathtaking.
> >
> > This gives us pleasure on a conscious level--it also washes over our 
> Unconscious, our Psyche, our Imagination, if you will, whatever you 
> want to call that part of us beyond the rational, beyond time even. 
>  James Hillman would probably call the process soul building.
> >
> > This is the MEANING I want. (my soul needs help wherever it can get it)
> >
> > P
> > 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120226/75d17fa6/attachment.html>