Ironic Distance in Thomas Pynchon's "Entropy"

[Monte Davis]

If I ever encounter someone who believes Pynchon "applies modern science to
fiction," whatever that's supposed to mean, I'll be sure to direct her to
Seed, Heffernan, you, and your crowd of straw men..

 

Does it help to bring to his fiction more familiarity with science than
"looking up a few things in a good science dictionary or at Wikipedia?" I
think it has helped me - but I went through my own CV here the other day
precisely to emphasize that my own readings - for whatever they're worth --
do not depend on my being a scientist, or having a "sheepskin" in science. 

 

All they really depend on is an openness to the possibility that there's
more to Pynchon's stance w/r/t science and technology than your warmed-over,
regurgitated Jacques Ellul.  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul>
"The dominant theme of his work proved to be the threat to human freedom and
religion created by modern technology. His constant concern was the
emergence of a technological tyranny over humanity." See? All I need to know
is in Wikipedia. Do you think a Pynchon reader could benefit from knowing
more of Ellul than that? Careful there: by the bogus "logic" you apply to
me, if you say that you're saying that one needs to be a Christian anarchist
sociologist / law professor to read Pynchon better. (Hey, this straw-man
crap is easy!)

 

All my readings really depend on is a reader who doesn't stick her fingers
in her ears, stamp her little feet, and chant: "I don't care much about
science and technology, and neither does my BFF Tommy Pynchon!" So why not
cut back on the mood swings, or drinking, or Alice's little helpers, or
whatever accounts for your vapors on this subject, and try again? 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130614/0efb5025/attachment.html>