TP and Nabakov doing SF that isn't
Paul Mackin
mackin.paul at verizon.net
Sat Jun 23 10:18:54 CDT 2012
On 6/23/2012 5:56 AM, Matthew Cissell wrote:
> Some days ago I mentioned Adam Roberts treatment of TP and asked how people felt about categorizing TP as SF. Someone (sorry, I don't remember who) mentioned that at the time it looked like SF that was being done in the so-called New Wave period (Female Man, Crash, etc).
>
> I'll throw in on that now. Without explaining my view in great depth let me say that what TP has done strikes me as a way to write SF without it looking very SF. I don't equate SF with robots and gizmos (as someone said), but for many people robots and spaceships are a big part of SF. In TP the rocket stands in for the spaceship as the automaton stands in for the robot (i'm sure someone must have made this point before, but you'll forgive my ignorance). THis is a thought in the back of my mind when I read TP.
>
> The other night while trying to read myself to sleep I picked up my collection of Nabakov short stories (Penguin "Collected Stories") and started one that I had somehow missed the first time through. At the end of the collection is a piece called "Lance". (Please forgive me if this well known to you good folk or has been posted before in some way.) On the second page I read the following (a long quote but worth it if you don't know it):
>
> I not only debar a too definite planet from any role in my
> story-- from the role every dot and full stop should play in my
> story (which I see as a kind of celestial chart)-- 1 also
> refuse to have anything to do with those technical prophecies
> that scientists are reported to make to reporters. Not for me
> is the rocket racket. Not for me are the artificial little
> satellites that the earth is promised; landing starstrips for
> spaceships ("spacers")-- one, two, three, four, and then
> thousands of strong castles in the air each complete with
> cookhouse and keep, set up by terrestrial nations in a frenzy
> of competitive confusion, phony gravitation, and savagely
> flapping flags. Another thing I have not the slightest use for is the
> special-equipment business-- the airtight suit, the oxygen
> apparatus-- suchlike contraptions. Like old Mr. Boke, of whom
> we shall hear in a minute, I am eminently qualified to dismiss
> these practical matters (which anyway are doomed to seem
> absurdly impractical to future spaceshipmen, such as old Boke's
> only son), since the emotions that gadgets provoke in me range
> from dull distrust to morbid trepidation. Only by a heroic
> effort can I make myself unscrew a bulb that has died an
> inexplicable death and screw in another, which will light up in
> my face with the hideous instancy of a dragon's egg hatching in
> one's bare hand. Finally, I utterly spurn and reject so-called science
> fiction. I have looked into it, and found it as boring as the
> mystery-story magazines-- the same sort of dismally pedestrian
> writing with oodles of dialogue and loads of commutational
> humor. The clichиs are, of course, disguised; essentially, they
> are the same throughout all cheap reading matter, whether it
> spans the universe or the living room. They are like those
> "assorted" cookies that differ from one another only in shape
> and shade, whereby their shrewd makers ensnare the salivating
> consumer in a mad Pavlovian world where, at no extra cost,
> variations in simple visual values influence and gradually
> replace flavor, which thus goes the way of talent and truth,
>
> Now how many things can you find that make you think of TP? More importanly it was published in 1958 (while VN was still teaching at Cornell) in "Nabakov's Dozen", when TP starts writing. Might this have been part of the fertile ground that allowed the seed to take root and grow? Whaddya tink?
>
> curious mc
>
So young TP decides, I'll include in my masterpiece all the stuff my old
teacher hates (agony of influence) and make him like it.
But there will be plenty there for anti Nabokovs as well, because I will
be so deucedly clever that a profitably significant portion of my
readers will think GR IS science fiction and as far as they are
concerned they won't be wrong.
And GR will also be for readers of Scientific American--folks who try to
follow Real Science, or even remember a few college courses, will find
much to recognize in the book--a sort of content Nabokov would normally
have as little interest as in as gadgetry but will see the art Pynchon
has imbued therein.
And there will be something for God lovers. Spirituality seekers--a
tough sell to Vladimir but the Pyncher can swing it.
And music aficionados--classical and jazz--will find stuff of technical
interest.
And political types . . . .
All things to all people--all who read above grade level.
What do you want it to be?
In other words, whether it's genre or literature, is a matter of
audience reception.
P
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list