It just isn't that impressive. It's just the shortest and easiest so people who get filtered by big books pretend it's a masterpiece so they can claim to be a Pynchon fan.
I'm currently reading V as my first pynchon book and at the beginning I was really liking it and there are some occasional pages which are really interesting but also a lot of parts seem to be so fricking nothing (but also weirdly interesting in the ennui of them)
I'm about 200 pages in btw
>ennui
Part of the point and a good chunk of how he supports and explores theme. Most of the novel actually does work towards theme but there are a few bits which really serve no purpose and he has a tendency to digress a bit further than need and introducing secondary themes which don't quite work towards the primary theme but are often quite good. The big problem is he still had a bit too much of the Hemingway influence which is not quite compatible with his own style, GR is where he sorts this all out and his own style becomes dominant, where he figures out how to use those digressions which are so much a part of his style.
He pulls most everything together later in the novel.
cool stuff
I think that there's some part of the book which more speaks to the subconscious at least for me. Sort of throwing shit against the wall (idk I might be making shit up)
>speaks to the subconscious
That is the Hemingway influence, theme is kept in the subtext largely separated from story. Anyone who is not autistic or a terminal plotgay has a natural understanding of subtext and they parse it on a subconscious level, it is part of how we communicate. V. shows the faults in Hemingway's methods, it imposes a limit on complexity of theme and scope, V. requires going over multiple generations and all that showing makes the novel read more like a collection of related novellas.
Pynchon addresses this in GR, he accepts that telling is not a sin so he has the characters discuss theme related topics and has the narrator provide context which allows the digressions to be briefer and more focused. But he sacrifices scope for complexity in GR and he goes all out on representing theme in all of the complexity of reality.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Totally off topic, but where should I start with Delillo?
>he sacrifices scope for complexity in GR and he goes all out on representing theme in all of the complexity of reality
This is a quality post from beginning to end.
I started with Bleeding Edge. It helped that it was set in the 21st century so I got a handle on how he incorporates pop culture references in his writing. I tried with TCOL49 and GR a few years ago and couldn't get into his style. After starting with BE I read Vineland, IV, V and am on GR right now. This order was perfect for me but YMMV
Vineland let me down me only because I was marathoning his books and there was a lot more gags and meandering than his other novels imo. Some of the passages were downright beautiful and it has some of his most endearing characters I've encountered so far but there was no "pay off" like there was when I finished his other books. I felt like I didn't get much insight into things I didn't already know. It's a slow burn and leans more toward melancholy than paranoia. Also the ending was dragged on far too long. It took me a week to get through the last 70 pages of the book.
>lot 49
it's easy to read, a good intro, but you won't get a real taste for pynchon. >V
imo the ideal place to start. It's not as easy as lot 49 but at the same time it's much better, and a closer representative of what pynchon is all about. >GR
diving head first. anything can happen starting from here, you can love it or you can drop it within 10 pages
I’ve read Inherent Vice and most of Bleeding Edge and I have to say I am extremely confused. To me the prose reads similarly to what’s usually called reddit slop around here. I’m struggling to see the greatness here, it’s like a poor man’s don delillo
Pynchon’s my least favorite writer for sure, because my least favorite thing in books is goofs, gags, jokes and rambunctious behavior, and his books are filled to the brim with this. Every novel is like one of those novelty snake cans, you open the book and POP you get a face fulla snakes and you wince silently. The homosexual, the redditor, to do it. And then you think “what’s he gonna do next, this shithead” and you pick the book back up and BZZZZ you get a shock and “chrissake” you've been pranked again by "the old Pynchmeister", that loser. “Did that Pynch?” he "sez", laughing “yukyukyukyuk”. Watch him as he shoves a pair of plastic buck teeth right up his mouth and displays em for you – left, right, center – “You like these? Do I look handsome?” Pulls out a mirror. “Ah!” I wish I was exaggerating. And you're in physical pain cringing as he snaps his suspenders, exits stage right, and reappears hauling a huge golden gong
It's a difficult question. If you start with AtD or BE you will think that he sometimes tries too hard in V. or GR.
But if you start with GR and L49 and then you read AtD you woulf probably think that he stopped trying or that he just didn't give aa shit anymore. And you would be right.
If you want to start reading Pynchon, I suggest you read his late works, except Mason & Dixon. Proceed to Crying of Lot 49 and V, then Gravity's Rainbow, if it all makes sense to you now.
The one that clicked with me first was Mason and Dixon. I actually tried Crying Of Lot 49 first but didn't find it impressive.
It just isn't that impressive. It's just the shortest and easiest so people who get filtered by big books pretend it's a masterpiece so they can claim to be a Pynchon fan.
I read a handful of Pynchon books before TCoL49 amd enjoyed it. Treated it like a blueprint for his other books which made it more entertaining.
I'm currently reading V as my first pynchon book and at the beginning I was really liking it and there are some occasional pages which are really interesting but also a lot of parts seem to be so fricking nothing (but also weirdly interesting in the ennui of them)
I'm about 200 pages in btw
Which ever interests you the most.
>ennui
Part of the point and a good chunk of how he supports and explores theme. Most of the novel actually does work towards theme but there are a few bits which really serve no purpose and he has a tendency to digress a bit further than need and introducing secondary themes which don't quite work towards the primary theme but are often quite good. The big problem is he still had a bit too much of the Hemingway influence which is not quite compatible with his own style, GR is where he sorts this all out and his own style becomes dominant, where he figures out how to use those digressions which are so much a part of his style.
He pulls most everything together later in the novel.
cool stuff
I think that there's some part of the book which more speaks to the subconscious at least for me. Sort of throwing shit against the wall (idk I might be making shit up)
>speaks to the subconscious
That is the Hemingway influence, theme is kept in the subtext largely separated from story. Anyone who is not autistic or a terminal plotgay has a natural understanding of subtext and they parse it on a subconscious level, it is part of how we communicate. V. shows the faults in Hemingway's methods, it imposes a limit on complexity of theme and scope, V. requires going over multiple generations and all that showing makes the novel read more like a collection of related novellas.
Pynchon addresses this in GR, he accepts that telling is not a sin so he has the characters discuss theme related topics and has the narrator provide context which allows the digressions to be briefer and more focused. But he sacrifices scope for complexity in GR and he goes all out on representing theme in all of the complexity of reality.
Totally off topic, but where should I start with Delillo?
>he sacrifices scope for complexity in GR and he goes all out on representing theme in all of the complexity of reality
This is a quality post from beginning to end.
White Noise
You should start by pynching on deez nuts lmao
you're so funny, kys
humorless homosexual
I started with GR and then V. A fun ride, if incomprehensible at times. Inherent Vice and Bleeding Edge are much more grounded.
The Crying of Lot 49 should give you a good taste. After that, you might as well just jump into Gravity's Rainbow.
Why not try publication order? It was good enough for the ol' Pynchter himself
I started with Bleeding Edge. It helped that it was set in the 21st century so I got a handle on how he incorporates pop culture references in his writing. I tried with TCOL49 and GR a few years ago and couldn't get into his style. After starting with BE I read Vineland, IV, V and am on GR right now. This order was perfect for me but YMMV
>YMMV
Get the frick out of here
Sorry my s.o. texted that to me the other day.
Your sexual offender texted you that garbage? Doubly rude.
I also started with Bleeding Edge. Now I'm reading Against the Day. Maybe Vineland next but I'm not sure how good it is.
Vineland let me down me only because I was marathoning his books and there was a lot more gags and meandering than his other novels imo. Some of the passages were downright beautiful and it has some of his most endearing characters I've encountered so far but there was no "pay off" like there was when I finished his other books. I felt like I didn't get much insight into things I didn't already know. It's a slow burn and leans more toward melancholy than paranoia. Also the ending was dragged on far too long. It took me a week to get through the last 70 pages of the book.
>lot 49
it's easy to read, a good intro, but you won't get a real taste for pynchon.
>V
imo the ideal place to start. It's not as easy as lot 49 but at the same time it's much better, and a closer representative of what pynchon is all about.
>GR
diving head first. anything can happen starting from here, you can love it or you can drop it within 10 pages
pynch on my balls
I’ve read Inherent Vice and most of Bleeding Edge and I have to say I am extremely confused. To me the prose reads similarly to what’s usually called reddit slop around here. I’m struggling to see the greatness here, it’s like a poor man’s don delillo
Pynchon was already an established writer when DeLillo got started, son.
two of his worst books—not really a fair comparison if you’re comparing them to the best of delillo
Good to know!
>postmodern isn't high literature
yeah we know, there's some value at the very least but not to the max
crying of lot 49 for a taste
or jump into the deep end with gravity's rainbow
I just think you should read lot49 before gr in general
Crying Lot & Gravity then Sotweed Factor toss the rest it's the literary equivalent of The Caretaker album
You'd recommend Sotweed but not Mason & Dixon? Personally I loved both.
All his books are a timeline of American history. Start with Mason & Dixon
Me, Judge Holden recommends starting with Gravity's Rainbow!
Whoever eats shit without Holden's knowledge does so without Holden's consent
upvote
Pynchon’s my least favorite writer for sure, because my least favorite thing in books is goofs, gags, jokes and rambunctious behavior, and his books are filled to the brim with this. Every novel is like one of those novelty snake cans, you open the book and POP you get a face fulla snakes and you wince silently. The homosexual, the redditor, to do it. And then you think “what’s he gonna do next, this shithead” and you pick the book back up and BZZZZ you get a shock and “chrissake” you've been pranked again by "the old Pynchmeister", that loser. “Did that Pynch?” he "sez", laughing “yukyukyukyuk”. Watch him as he shoves a pair of plastic buck teeth right up his mouth and displays em for you – left, right, center – “You like these? Do I look handsome?” Pulls out a mirror. “Ah!” I wish I was exaggerating. And you're in physical pain cringing as he snaps his suspenders, exits stage right, and reappears hauling a huge golden gong
you should be a pynchon impersonator
How come noone posts the one about the boys in detention? Is my favorite
What's that?
Post it.
Gravity's Rainbow
V because the part about the boy with the screw for a belly button gave me a hearty chuckle and a day without laughter is a day wasted anon 🙂
It's a difficult question. If you start with AtD or BE you will think that he sometimes tries too hard in V. or GR.
But if you start with GR and L49 and then you read AtD you woulf probably think that he stopped trying or that he just didn't give aa shit anymore. And you would be right.
Am I the only one here that liked Inherent Vice the most?
I think the movie helped me appreciate it more.
was the movie that bad?
How would a bad movie make you appreciate a story more?
because the story is told differently? how is that even a question?
Read his first published story, "Mortality and Mercy in Vienna," found below
http://www.pynchon.pomona.edu/uncollected/vienna.html
>Read his first published story
That’s ‘the small rain’
Thank you for the correction.
"The Small Rain" appeared in the Cornell Writer in March 1959.
"Mortality and Mercy in Vienna" was published in the Spring 1959 issue of Epoch.
If you want to start reading Pynchon, I suggest you read his late works, except Mason & Dixon. Proceed to Crying of Lot 49 and V, then Gravity's Rainbow, if it all makes sense to you now.
better suck my dixon