Critical Thinking

[Kai Frederik Lorentzen]

Myself I don't have this that much with novels anymore. I argue in my 
mind with philosophers, social scientists, or mystics. Not with 
novelists, whose works I consider more to be like symphonies or poetry. 
To argue with Pynchon about, say, his take on the Balkans question in 
AtD does not appear to be fruitful to me. It's like argueing with Ezra 
Pound on Confucianism when you read The Cantos. Gravity's Rainbow way 
back was different insofar as it contains historical facts which were 
hard to find in middle of the road history books. Of course it still 
interests me what my favorite novelist think about this and that - like 
Thomas Mann's changing attitudes towards the West over the years -, but 
basically it's all about melody and rhythm.

On 18.09.2012 15:41, rich wrote:
> something ive been mulling over in my mind recently--do you find
> yourself having conversations with the novels you read (and indirectly
> the novelist I suppose), I mean arguments, questions, confusions,
> anger at times, too. I wonder why despite feeling somewhat negative
> about Pynchon's last two books I continue to engage them. Far be it
> for me to want to be one of those guys or gals who harp ad nauseum
> about the things they obviously hate. I mean if you dont feel the need
> to argue with the writer you're reading, that must mean something.
> Pynchon has really annoyed me the last few yrs (much of which
> admittedly is not his fault--Ive changed, he hasn't or maybe he has
> who knows).  there seems to be some benefit for me to argue with him.
> guess i'll just continue on with that
>
> rich
>
>