Not really Pynchon but starts with Lot 49...

[Laura Kelber]

Basically, TNOTR is a Sherlock Holmes  homage ( including direct quotes) set in a medieval abbey. Clever, huh? No.

Laura

Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

>I have never really wanted to read it because I want books, no matter
>how WHATEVER [postmodern, very modern, linguistically playful and
>rich, allusive as Pynchon; nothing like these] that are still about
>THE WORLD, ultimately.....which Pynchon's work is...deeply, we know.
>
>Further searching leads me to learn that lots of commentators link
>TNOTR's mysteries as akin to the mystery end of Lot 49...and other
>such works...and it seems that a 1990 issue of Pynchon Notes might
>elaborate on Eco's allusive borrowing from Lot 49, maybe.
>
>On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:53 AM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think so, too: massively overrated. (But then, I never read more than 5
>> pages of it.)
>>
>> 2015-04-09 16:49 GMT+02:00 David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Eco's TNOTR is so over-rated.  It is just a pile-on of conspiracies that
>>> have been cooked up by others before him.  Questionable sources is just
>>> standard fare, not an allusion to COL49, IMHO.
>>>
>>> David Morris
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For the first time, I opened THE NAME OF THE ROSE. In English,
>>>> 1983 or 1984 pubbed.
>>>>
>>>> I know one meme about it---one reason I never aggressively went to
>>>> read it, pace fans, refuting is allowed---is ECO's line that IT--All
>>>> Books?--are mead out of other books and he mixes historical
>>>> reality and lotsa historical 'imagination" in this mystery.
>>>>
>>>> So, it begins with the story of a medieval manuscript, 14th Century,
>>>> discovered first in the 18th Century and now rediscovered---"third in
>>>> chronological order" sez the narrator---which narrator
>>>> then finds another manuscript that seems to be a kind of source and
>>>> the first one is no longer in the monastery library and is suspected
>>>> now to be a forgery......
>>>>
>>>> THIS is a conceptual allusion to the Crying of Lot 49s internal work,
>>>> no?...Or is this just generic...
>>>> a whole historical meme about old manuscripts?....
>>>>
>>>> I cannot be the only one who has asked about this hugely-read work,
>>>> right? yet I cannot easily find a
>>>> link on the interwebs.
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>-
>Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150409/26bae19e/attachment.html>