NP; Good as Gold

[Jochen Stremmel]

I think that's what Heller intended: that you are puzzled. He's a great
puzzler.

(In nearly any other context I'd say you're right: incredulously goes with
the grain.)

Am Sa., 5. Jan. 2019 um 03:47 Uhr schrieb Mike Jing <
gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>:

> I'm puzzled by the word "credulously" in the following passage:
>
> Several questions rose simultaneously in Gold’s mind and broke into pieces
> against each other in the burbling struggle to get out. “Together? Found
> out? How? How together? Are? What do you mean found out? What do you mean
> together? How are we together?”
> “Like this. He knows all about us.”
> “Knows all about us? How did he find out?”
> “From the children.”
> “From the children? How do the children know?”
> “I told them.”
> Gold looked at her steadily with a troubled eye. “You told them? You told
> your children? What did you tell your children?”
> “That we’re lovers.”
> “Lovers?”
> “You keep repeating everything I say.”
> Gold was lacking the necessary equilibrium for timely repartee. “Is that
> what we are, lovers?” he asked credulously.
> “Of course, darling,” answered Linda with a smile. “I’m your lover and
> you’re mine. What did you think we were?”
> Gold did not hesitate long to give the answer that first sprang to mind.
> “Fuckers.”
> “Lover is so much sweeter,” said Linda Book with the ethereal sensitivity
> of a poetess, “so much richer in meaning and value, don’t you think?”
> “Don’t you have to be very seriously in love to be a lover?” asked Gold.
> “Oh, no,” she corrected him. “All you have to be is a fucker.”
>
> I can't quite make sense of it. Shouldn't it be "incredulously" instead?
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>