"Of a Fond Ghoul"! ( Was "The Two V.s… )

[Tyler Wilson]

Thanks, Dave, for bringing this piece by Albert Rolls regarding the two versions of "V." to our attention. Interesting stuff. Mr. Rolls has another piece in the same journal titled "Pynchon, In His Absence" which discusses the contents of "Of a Fond Ghoul" and is also quite worth the read:
https://www.pynchon.net/owap/article/view/27/59
In this piece--as well as a couple others I run across but which won't come to mind right now, and in any case probably all stem from the same source--it is mentioned that "Of a Fond Ghoul" was one suggestion made by Pynchon for the title of what would become "V." ("Down Paradise Street" and "Dream tonight of Peacock tails" or something similar were another two, if I recall.) 
Like I said, I've read this a few different places and it is not anything that anyone with a strong interest doesn't already know, likely. However, I've never run across anyone making any commentary on this choice for a title. Not even a subtle textual wink or "ha-ha!". The other potential titles I can understand and take seriously in some small measure; there are links to the text. If there are any with "Of a Fond Ghoul" then I just don't see them, though it is easy money that I've just missed something. I can understand, kinda, the somewhat general appropriateness of the phrase to the "V." of the story, but it is just so goofy. Which Pynchon certainly is, but never with the titles of his books. 
I find it much more likely P. was joking and having fun with language as is his wont:  If one says the phrase in an exaggerated Hollywood Italian accent, it sounds an awful lot like the Italian word:
"vaffanculo‏"
Given Pynchon's penchant for puns and wordplay, the often sophomoric sense of humor and the fact that a similar play on words appears in  "Against the Day" ( http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0611&msg=111564&keywords=vaffanculo%26%238207%3b ), I'm fairly certain that Pynchon was proposing--in fun--to Cork Smith that his debut novel be titled (more or less):
"Go Fuck Yourself!" 
Just my two cents, and perhaps not worth stating explicitly. Only, it strikes me as a healthy perspective to keep in mind when sifting the words for the man.
--T


> From: against.the.dave at gmail.com
> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 20:08:57 -0500
> Subject: The Two V.s of Thomas Pynchon
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> 
> The Two V.s of Thomas Pynchon, or From Lippincott to Jonathan Cape and Beyond
> Albert Rolls
> 
> Abstract
> 
> Two versions of V. were issued in 1963, one in the U.S. and one in
> England, because errors that had crept into the first American edition
> were found and corrected in time for the British edition’s release.
> Pynchon would be able to get the corrections he had made for the
> British edition into the American paperback the following year. The
> fact that the first U.S. edition needed to be corrected was forgotten,
> and with the exception of those printed by Bantam, the U.S. paperback
> publisher, all other U.S. editions are reproductions of the
> uncorrected first American edition. This paper traces the editorial
> history of V. after its publication, detailing the differences between
> the corrected and uncorrected editions of the novel.
> 
> https://pynchon.net/owap/article/view/33
> 
> The issue, in any case, should have been settled, indeed had been
> settled in Britain and in the United States for about twenty years —
> between 1967 and 1986 — while the corrected Bantam edition was the
> only U.S. text being reproduced, but the problem resurfaced when
> Bantam lost the rights to reprint its edition and Lippincott's fiction
> catalogue was taken over by Harper and Row in the mid-1980s. The text
> of the first Perennial reprint — which also seems to have been
> produced using the original Lippincott edition, even though the
> chapter titles are centered rather than flushed to the left — followed
> the original American text to the letter and the later reprints
> continue to do so, with the exception of the introduction of new typos
> after two resettings, one in 1999 and the other in 2005. Meanwhile,
> the text that continues to be printed in Britain follows the Cape
> edition. Consequently, since 1986, the two versions of V. that were
> issued between 1963 and 1966 have been available to readers, and as in
> 1963, the corrected, near definitive edition has only been the British
> one, a Vintage paperback in its present manifestation, while those in
> the U.S who have been relying on the Perennial imprints, or the newly
> released Penguin e-book, have been reading an unauthorized text.
> 
> https://pynchon.net/owap/article/view/33/72
> 
> Orbit: Writing Around Pynchon
> 
> https://pynchon.net/owap/index
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120713/1fa8b279/attachment.html>