It just me or is this BORING as FUCK? does it get better? fucking slow learners was way better than this shit...

it just me or is this BORING as FUCK? does it get better? fucking slow learners was way better than this shit, even the writing was better imo when this receded jawline faggot didn't grow an ego yet

Attached: 416H5I78CvL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (332x499, 28K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_Steppe
twitter.com/AnonBabble

it's pretty unfunny too, Pynchon has a really juvenile sense of humor.

You fell for the meme kiddo

Yeah, V. was a slog. Just skip ahead to Mason & Dixon. Much funnier.

>shitting on pynchonian slapstick

you need to go back

Hijacking thread to ask another Pynchon question.
Currently reading GR, what the heck is the kirghiz light? I have found no actual explanation to it anywhere.

Along with Suttree one of the two best American novels in the past 60 or so years. Don't parade handicaps. It's boring and why no one responds..

How does one in to Pynchon? Or do his novels generally speaking explain themselves?

to the ussr

>he doesn't like goofs and gags

Read The Crying of Lot 49 and Inherent Vice back to back and you'll start to understand what he's about.

>i want my literature to be fun!!!!
hahahah go away

Don't worry, it definitely gets better.

Don't worry about it too much. It's probably the biggest mystery in the book.

My reading of it is that the Kirghiz Light is a device to symbolize the mysterious nature of the USSR's power and a reference to future Soviet nuclear tests. I've found no reference to any folklore or other sources that could have served as a model for it.

this book was anything but boring for me in the beginning. it got more difficult as it went on, but I don't know... probably one of my favorite books if I'm being honest.

I really enjoyed both V and The Crying of Lot 49. Should I go straight to GR or is there something else I should read before?

I'd read M&D first, it's less demanding, more human, and sweetly sad.

What about Bleeding Edge? I really want to read something involving contemporary conditions.

>Paul Thomas Anderson stole the beginning of V. when he wrote The Master.
anybody else notice this?

They are relatively similar, been awhile since I have seen it or read V. though

Bleeding Edge is SHIT, it's basically Vineland with Gurrrrl Hack0rzzz xDDD. Lots of cringe, especially if you are even remotely up to date on technology.

It's a pretty comfy book, I would rank it fairly high too.

Sorry, you probably don't know Vineland if you're just getting into Pinecone. What I meant is that Bleeding Edge also has the wacky conspiracy theory and way too much promiscuity.

I'm sure it has a meaning, but it's hard to pin down exactly what it is. For me, I had a feeling of what it meant and what it was connected to while reading, but I have a hard time articulating what it means. I think it has something to do with the Kazakh Steppe, or the Kirghiz Steppe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_Steppe
I think this is a good explanation.

I'm reading him in order. I think his work makes the most sense that way. If you just want to get your feet wet without diving into V. right away, people usually suggest The Crying of Lot 49 or Inherent Vice.

Go straight to GR. Have fun!

I could write a better novel than Bleeding Edge myself, and I say that as someone who loves Pynchon's other work. Pynchon didn't understand the internet very well. It's not too much of a black mark on his record, considering his prior achievements, but he should've recognized he was out of his depth trying to make heavy use of the web in his fiction.