This was the last Pynchon I had left to read. I was worried it would leave me disappointed but I ended up thoroughly enjoying it. It's made me go back and re-read inherent vice.
So what is the animosity towards it? It's not Pynchon-lite either, the narrative at times is as difficult or even more so than the most demanding passages in GR.
If anyone has put off reading it because they fear disappointment or a waste of time I urge you to give it a shot if you enjoy Pynchon.
I need to re-read Vineland along with Inherent Vice but I basically consider them spiritual sequels or two sides of the same coin, Inherent Vice I enjoyed a lot more considering I thought it was clearer and less dense than Vineland but both are still fun novels.
For sure. I really hope he puts out atleast one more novel.
Probably comes from Harold Bloom hating it and claiming it wasn't even written by Pynchon. Salman Rushdie liked it but it could be because Pynchon supported him when he had his fatwa/hiding thing going on.
I'm of the opinion that there's no consensus among Pynchon fans as to which is his best novel.
>claiming it wasn't even written by Pynchon
He's such a fanboy it's embarrassing.
He said that when it came out initially. He loves Mason & Dixon but I haven't heard him comment on AtD or the more recent novels.
DFW also voiced dislike for it. But I think it was because everyone was comparing him to Pynchon and it really pissed him off
DFW was a smug moron. I can't stand his personality which is why I can't bring myself to read him.
He also said Mao II was a failure, but it's a brilliant novel that has aged well.
I didn't hate it but it's not that good. I understand why it is the way it is, and what he was trying to accomplish with it, but the end result is underwhelming. Even Bleeding Edge had more of an impact.
I'd like to see one more novel along the lines of Mason & Dixon, Against the Day and Gravity's Rainbow, any reports of him working on anything new?