WE KNEW IT! We knew it here from that writer-handyman guy who overheard a phone call InWoodstock...there are bits of Pynchon in Dylan, I say, have said...

[Mark Kohut]

Doesn’t matter who the novelist is. (Must be in the book). No, it is not
Pynchon. Because this novelist tells the journalist interviewing him that
Pynchon introduced him —this novelist—to Bob Dylan.

People who know people often introduce them to other people they know. If
they know them well enough that that might work for both people.
This novelist knows/(knew if he is no longer alive,)  Thomas Pynchon and
was introduced to Bob Dylan by Tom.

This book is about the second half of—or middle third—of Dylan’s career so
beyond the sixties.

Pynchon goes to California midway (or so) in Hadju’s book. Yes, no
interactions between them in this book. Major part of any “confirmation of
friendship” piece of the puzzle.



On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 2:06 PM Mike Weaver <mike.weaver at zen.co.uk> wrote:

> There's no mention of Dylan and Pynchon meeting in Hadju's Positively
> 4th Street, but Hadju quotes many times from a fax interview he
> conducted with P and a letter from P to Mimi Farina.
>
> Talking about the contrast between Dicks craving for attention and
> Pynchon's aversion
>
> > As Pynchon recalled (later, in a letter to Mimi), “I know it’s dumb to
> > have an anti-photograph Thing, but it’s how I am. Dick used to kid me
> > about it—what’s the matter, you afraid people are going to stick pins,
> > pour aqua regia? So how could I tell him yeah, yeah, right, you got it.”
> You know about this?
> Episode 16 - Rainbow Quest by Pete Seeger: Mimi and Richard Farina
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRuuZY8otz0
>
> cheers
> Mike
>
> On 11/02/2026 15:59, J Tracy wrote:
> >   I would not be surprised if Pynchon knew Dylan, but the paragraph does
> not hold together logically. The first obvious break in logic comes in this
> line: "The phone call, and that detail entered the story, which out of
> respect or obliviousness didn't then connect the dots. “  It would be the
> writer, not the story who ( not which) out of respect or obliviousness
> would connect the dots( a story cannot be oblivious or act out of respect)
> .  But confusion also comes from the question of who the interviewing
> writer/journalist is. That confusion is seriously amplified by the next
> sentence:  “The novelist was telling the journalist that Thomas Pynchon
> introduced him to Bob Dylan.”  Who is the novelist in this sentence.? Isn’t
> Pynchon the novelist who was being talked to? It’s like saying the Pynchon
> was telling the the journalist that Thomas Pynchon introduced him( who is
> the him?) to Bob Dylan. I honestly don’t see how this can be forced into
> coherence.
> >
> > This is not an argument to be argumentative. i was sincerely curious,
> but the paragraph felt strained and blurry, so I re-read it and felt even
> more like something was off so I tried to parse the logic, which IMO fails
> to cohere.
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Feb 11, 2026, at 10:11 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ??????
> >>
> >> "The novelist was telling the journalist that Thomas Pynchon introduced
> him
> >> to Bob Dylan."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 10:03 AM Laura Kelber <laurakelber at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The novelist was sitting for a print interview about his book? Not
> >>> Pynchon.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026, 8:35 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> https://x.com/whitecitycinema/status/2021440442177552639?s=20
> >>>> --
> >>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >>>>
> >> --
> >> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>