I guess he’s got a new novel out about 9/11 or something, or at least set right at that time.
I typically like finding an author and then reading all their works. Is this guy worth it or is he one of those that only the “true literati” can appreciate?
Start with “Crying of Lot 49” and if you like it, move in to “V” and “Gravity’s Rainbow.” Reading Pynchon is a lot like reading James Joyce, except I get the jokes with Pynchon.
I love those three, but find most of the rest just not as interesting. “Inherent Vice” felt like a ripoff of the “Big Lebowski.”
Worth reading, absolutely, but as someone who draws my nickname from one of his characters (someone else is using ‘slothrop’ as a nick) I don’t feel the later stuff is as incredible.
x2 - start with ‘crying of lot 49.’ it’s more short and more accessible but still a great examplar of his style. he’s a sort of polymath who seems to have read everything, ever, and his novels tend to be sprawling epics that visit many places and topics in very clever ways.
some people compare him with david foster wallace - ever read him?
-mike
Life, Letters, and Epicurean Philosophy of Ninon de L’Enclos
.
x2 - start with ‘crying of lot 49.’ it’s more short and more accessible but still a great examplar of his style. he’s a sort of polymath who seems to have read everything, ever, and his novels tend to be sprawling epics that visit many places and topics in very clever ways.
some people compare him with david foster wallace - ever read him?
-mike
I haven’t tried Foster, but I will give him a shot this winter.
Like the OP I tend to zero in on a writer and run through their whole work. That gives mixed results—it’s great for writers like Borges, it’s a blast for someone as uneven but prolific as PK Dick, but I wish I hadn’t read 1Q84 by Murikami, because it made me just about hate everything he’s ever written.
I hate the idea of someone needing to be literati to enjoy books of a certain type. I think the way Lit gets taught in many high schools and colleges is craptadtic, because people are being instructed that they need to somehow discern the author’s intent from books rather than being shown how to recognize good writing.
x2 - start with ‘crying of lot 49.’ it’s more short and more accessible but still a great examplar of his style. he’s a sort of polymath who seems to have read everything, ever, and his novels tend to be sprawling epics that visit many places and topics in very clever ways.
some people compare him with david foster wallace - ever read him?
-mike
I loved Infinite Jest by DFW but had to give up on Gravity’s Rainbow about 50 pages in because I was so confused.
I may take a second shot at Pynchon with some of his more “accessible” novels as suggested in this thread.
I don’t think Pynchon is that like Wallace, but I haven’t read Pynchon like I’ve read Wallace. I actually knew Wallace as an acquaintance – his suicide was a tragic loss. So much talent, and so young.
I liked V a lot but also couldn’t get into Gravity’s Rainbow.
I can’t imagine reading all one author’s books at a go - that’s a project!
for the big sprawling encyclopaedic novels, another suggestion is george perec’s “life: a user’s manual.” best i’ve read in a long, long time.
-mike
I liked V a lot but also couldn’t get into Gravity’s Rainbow.
I can’t imagine reading all one author’s books at a go - that’s a project!
I binge read authors and binge watch directors from time to time — easy when it’s Harper Lee, confusing when it’s Malick, and exhausting when it’s Kubrick. Great way to kill off a summer and still feel all literate and stuff.
George Perec looks interesting.