Not really Pynchon but starts with Lot 49...

[David Morris]

Pretensions, and a waste of valuable time.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 4:47 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:

> I love Sherlock, but didn't think Eco's pretentious knock-off had anything
> thought-provoking to offer.
>
> LK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> >Sent: Apr 9, 2015 3:05 PM
> >To: Laura Kelber <kelber at mindspring.com>
> >Subject: Re: Not really Pynchon but starts with Lot 49...
> >
> >After youth, I could not stand any Sherlock Holmes...dislike him;
> >dislike his sidekick and dislike the education in supposed logic.
> >(which I guess it REALLY is, but 'expense of spirit/logic in a waste
> >of shame"..or sumpin.
> >
> >On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Laura Kelber <kelber at mindspring.com>
> wrote:
> >> 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
>
> -
> 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/20150409/7891aa9c/attachment.html>