Not really Pynchon but starts with Lot 49...

[Mark Thibodeau]

Oh, man. I can't agree about Foucault's Pendulum, which I think is at least
on par with mid-level Pynchon (Lot 49 and Vineland for me).

I mean, I'm sorry, but give me Foucault's Pendulum over Bleeding Edge and
Inherent Vice any day.

But then again, they're so different that it doesn't really pay to compare
them. Perhaps reading Eco in French (much closer to the original Italian
than the American translation) has helped me appreciate his Continental
approach a bit more.

MT

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:

>
> > Eco's TNOTR is so over-rated. <
>
> Agreed. Same for 'Foucault's Pendulum.'
>
> But Eco's theoretical works are much better. Especially 'The Open Work'
> (Opera aperta, 1962) contains a number of instructive studies. On Joyce, on
> TV, on Zen in the West ...
>
>
>
> On 09.04.2015 16:49, David Morris wrote:
>
> 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
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150410/f1819f04/attachment.html>