Why was this novel so quickly dismissed? Is there ever going to be a reappraisal?
It's better (and funnier) than the overrated Mason & Dixon, and the tone is much closer to what I loved about Pynchon's writing from V. to Gravity's Rainbow. Also it seems (at times) like one of the first large-scale critiques of 21st Century America.
I have no expectation of it being as brilliant as GR, but it has to be one of the the most overlooked novels of the past 10 years...
>Why was this novel so quickly dismissed?
overextension
On professional reviewers, probably (my hunch is that was kind of a private joke...) but for casual readers (and by "casual" I basically mean average Pynchon readers, so...) it's incredibly enjoyable.
Everything that isn't GR is quickly dismissed because Pynchon doesn't do exactly what people expect, and, let's face it, most critics of Pynchon don't know how to think about him.
>Pynchon doesn't do exactly what people expect
I fucking hate it when he doesn't, in fact, come back on stage hauling a huge gong.
It's underdiscussed here, sure, but I don't see a lot of people dismissing it. It's probably the case that a lot of people just haven't read it, that's all.
Mostly I think the average person who'd even consider reading it would've already finished all his other books and have been at least somewhat burnt out on him by that point.
I marathoned Gaddis's entire oeuvre back to back but things just ground to a halt with Pynchon after I finished everything of his but Against the Day. I'll still read it eventually but I still need some time to take a step back from him.
I haven't read a Pynchon novel in a few years, and have no external pressure to hurry or read something else. That's probably the best way to enjoy AtD.
The urge to "marathon read" a writer's ovure (particularly writers of "doorstoppers" like Gaddis or Pynchon) is a bad idea. Then, yeah, you just become frustrated.
This entire board is filled with total frauds who act like they've read (and understood) everything and are completely full of shit. That's why the "bookshelf thread" is pretty depressing because a.) every book looks new and barely touched b.) each book is usually a pretty daunting reading experience in itself, nevertheless and entire shelf full of...ugh..."litcore" and c.) maybe one of those books will get read.
This board is enjoyable because there aren't many places to talk about philosophy/literature, but don't buy Ulysses, Infinite Jest, The Recognitions, and Don Quixote one day at the store and then get pissed because Ulysses is too challenging to read fast enough so you can move on to Cervantes or something.
Harold Bloom's an obnoxious old man who's had his entire like to read "the western canon"... You're all probably in your twenties and shouldn't feel anxious to read everything ever written.
That felt good.
I mostly agree but Gaddis is manageable because he only wrote five books and only the first two of those can really be called doorstoppers.
What's a better book to read after finishing Gravity's Rainbow : this or M&D ?
M&D is typically considered better, but you can go with either one.
Against the Day, no question.
I strongly urge you to read other writers for awhile before reading another Pynchon novel or either book will wear you out.
That being said Against the Day is more like Gravity's Rainbow (with less over-the-top experimentation) and I think M&D is really overrated.
I'm actually reading this now! I've just reached Iceland Spar, will probably take a break to read a novella (generally how I read Pynchon works). I am loving it. His writing in this is fantastic, and much closer to V. and GR as the OP said. It reminds me a lot of a western so far. It also seems much easier than M&D and GR, around the difficulty of V. I would say. I'm really enjoying it so far. I'm also really taking my time. Started it last week and have read it daily but am only on page 120 or so.
It's a dumping ground for loose ideas he'd flirted with since around the time of V. Same process: V. took Under the Rose and other short stories and bricked them up with the Stencil/ V. mortar, Against the Day uses the Chums of Chance where separate plot elements fail to come together naturally.
nobody actually "reads" Pynchon. We just know he's so good from the Praise he gets from Bloom and the odd 60 or so pages experience we've all had with him here
It's very big and I'm only just exploring his works. Give me some time.
Yeah, I'm going to read Notes from Underground next because of how many times people have told me to. Then I might read a couple of other shorter pieces before going into another Pynchon. I just wanted to know what to do next.
Another question : which of the two is more serious ? I appreciate the humor of Gravity's Rainbow but it sometimes gets a little ridiculous and I generally prefer the more serious parts. Pynchon is really good at creating serious atmospheres when he wants to.
Don't project your inadequacy on others.
All of Pynchon's novels have that formula: heavy seriousness/absurd humor. Just comes with the territory.
I just couldn't stand Mason & Dixon, reinforced by its reputation, so I'm a little biased.
I can understand how someone can dislike M&D, since what he succeeds in doing it (for me, at least) is something incredibly tenuous and difficult: sticking in a bunch of bizarre, zany stuff like Washington smoking hemp, Vaucanson's duck, golems, huge vegetables, Rebekah's ghost, etc.., while simultaneously making Mason and Dixon very relatable and human characters with a touching friendship between the two. The first time I read it, I was underwhelmed, but I read it a year later and loved it, being able to synthesize it all much better in my head, and am still mindboggled at how all the other main characters in all the other books of his I've read seem to be silhouettes whereas Mason and Dixon are genuinely great characters, like masterpieces of characterization; if M&D was less difficult, Mason and Dixon could be as iconic characters in American literature as Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer, IMO.
Anyway, I should've mentioned that it definitely gains by a rereading, and I even am up to reading it a third and fourth time and will probably be doing that every once in a while (something I only do with my favorite books).
OP here.
Yeah too much "zany", without it being, ya know, funny.
The only chapter I enjoyed was Tom Hynes and his baby. I dunno, when Harold Bloom's on Charlie Rose calling it Pynchon's masterpiece, I kinda grind my teeth a little.
That's a pretty shitty opinion ya got there
I would agree. I have an opinion that the novel is shitty. Thank you.
ur just upset u can't understand Pynchon's magnum opus :)
Then, please, enlighten me.
Nice try, feed a man a fish he only eats for a day
Bloom doesn't have a clue. He's obsessed with himself and thinks he's Falstaff and everyone is entitled to his opinion because MUH GUSTO.
So every now and then he has to remind people that X is his favorite novel so far.
He knows he should like GR because of the WWII themes, but he has no idea about Pynchon. Pynchon's handling of characters goes totally against Bloom's taste, so he praises the comfy Mason & Dixon because Pynchon is writing characters normally.
>The Crying of Lot 49
>Inherent Vice
>Gravity's Rainbow
>Bleeding Edge (currently reading)
>V. (gonna read next)
After that I was gonna do M&D but I'm thinking I might actually do AtD first. It sounds like it'd be less difficult and more enjoyable, and it seems as if Pynchon might have intended it to be his magnum opus.
I read Pynchon
you completely missed their point. it wasn't simply that they are works of lengths, therefore you have to read a lot and get burnt out (which appears to be what you are responding to).
Their argument was that these are difficult and complex novels that benefit more from close reading and analysis, not just blasting through quickly to prove that they have been read so that you can authentically name drop them.
Maybe you didn't catch that from what the user was saying, but only affirms their point.
no, you don't.
honestly against the day is just too much to swallow
I read Pynchon
I like Miles
do u lads like Gaddis compared to Pynchon
I have read TCOL, V, GR and they're all great. Maybe I should pick up Recognitions or JR for a future read? I always see the two discussed together
*how do
basically this
this board is kinda pathetic when it comes to content, mostly because almost nobody gives their real view and opinions on a subject/book/author and just parrot critics, professors and memes, wich makes me think that they didn't read those book or just skimmed through them
I get the feel that very few people here actually care about reading and don't do it just for "street cred", so when you actually try to talk about Ulysses, GR and IJ the topic ends up being a shitpost fest
but still the best place on the internet, as far as I know, to talk about books, I just wish this board was outside of Veeky Forums, this alone would improve this place tremendously, no more fucking speedreading threads, shitalking translations of english books and ">subvocalization in 2016"
I think bookshelves are really personal libraries. I know when I buy books I don't read them right away, but I'm collecting a wealth of books to enjoy for the rest of my life.
When I finish one book, then I have options for what I want to read next depending what I'm in the mood for.