Kathryn Hume's other Pynchon stuff

[alice wellintown]

A reader of fat and hysterical prose can expect flabby sentimental
passages and must give latitude to an author who will make use of the
widest possible range of vocabulary and willfully and wantonly wrap
consciously poetic diction in an ironic and parodic prose. To acuse an
author of P's stature of the errors of amatures and sophomores, a
habit that reviewers of Pynchon are now prone to, is one thing, but to
try that here is stupid. We the read the fucking books here. We study
them. We're not a bunch of fanboys; we can call IV a parodic failure.
But AGTD, full of flabby and sentimental prose, is just beautiful and
brilliant. The man has a rare talent, not one of the NYC copy cat book
in box chizlers or these midwestern writing school wannabeez. I like
many abook you recommend here, but not for the beauty, the imaginative
genius in them. Sure, these authors you read can write, but that's not
rare. Pynchon is a rare talent. Of course, not everyone digs him, but
you can not expect him to write like Roth or Updike. Can you? No, you
can not.



> Yes and maybe I'll just ignore your typically pointless rant.  I said
> nothing about Roth or Roth (or Roth) or Updike or anyone else.  I think this
> particular passage is not so great as others on this list.  I think it is
> writing trying to be poetic.