I just finished a reread of GR last month, nearly 30 years after my first read. This conversation has me eager for a third reading after a much shorter interval. Looking forward to the next conversation.
This was a great discussion on one of the best strangest most mind-melting works of fiction! Thanks for sharing Pynchon Notes as well. I had never heard of it. Another great resource! Keep up the great work fellas!
I had finally pulled the trigger on a bucket list item and bought a first edition first print of GR. I love this book and sadly, it wont reach its proper place of honor in culture again until after Pynchon is gone.
What a beautiful channel you have here! Pynchon changed my brain chemistry nearly 20 years ago, and I revisit GR, like Seth does, a lot. I still haven't got to the 'end' of it, in terms of using up its inspirational, philosophical, and emotive powers. I think that makes it a pretty great book, and I'm heartened that people keep coming back to it despite the challenge, even now. As much as that fetishisation of 'big brainy books' can be kinda silly, people *never* know what they're really getting in for with this book - it has a habit of cracking people open, either in an aesthetic sense, or an intellectual one, or even an emotional one (despite some people's idea of it being 'unfeeling'). It's so cool to see a podcast that really seems dedicated to solid, long, and open conversations about great books. Big fan!
Watching this vid today - the convo about convention subversion has it occur to me that “A Thousand Plateaus” by Deleuze and Guattari could not have been written nor culturally invested without GR’s precedence. I read GR around 1974 shortly after its release amid a severe paucity of correspondence or adequate commentary. Thanks for the YT!
Big fan of moiré. The most frequent places I’ve seen a moiré in a car, driving towards an overpass/walkway with fencing on both sides. You could say I amore a moiré
@booksosubstance Well, to start, Pynchon's sense of humor is insufferable. The silly names, insistent slapstick, zany musical numbers, and long-winded puns exasperate me. His folksy, Americana-inflected mode (Well lookie here at 'ol Slothrop! What is he up to now? Aw, shucks, another boner. Gee-gosh, I wonder where that cherry throbber's leading him next.) could not be less endearing. Furthermore, the constant joking undermines any chance for suspense or real tension to arise, let alone pathos. When Pynchon composes certain sections with a straighter face (I'm thinking right now about Pokler's story) I don't believe him. Not a word. A phrase I found myself saying often was "Too little too late." The persuasive power of Pynchon's dramatic mode is nil next to all his specially conditioned mollusks, ratty pig suits, and custard pie fights. While I understand the theme of mass dehumanization and commodification they're meant to bolster, the novel's sex, violence, and sexual violence come off as badly dated counter-cultural shock fodder. Much of the novel does, actually. While reading, I was often reminded of R Crumb, Ralph Bakshi, and Frank Zappa, three other artistic geniuses forged in the 1960's. They all traffic in the same hyper-explicit, grotesquely detailed, baldly cynical wackiness that was, in its day, cuttingly subversive. I find it boring. On average, the cast members are caricatures, if that. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. Plenty of great art deals in caricature, but Pynchon's trying to say something about what oppressive power structures do to people, and there are no people here. Some might say that's the point. In a world run by colluding technocratic governments and capitalist incentive structures, there can be no people, no character, no depth. Your choices are controlled, your consent is manufactured. Great. But what's the use of illustrating dehumanization when we can't see what's been lost? Slothrop's background illustrates this perfectly. He was literally sold to Jamf and doctored. He's doomed from the beginning, "deconditioning" notwithstanding. Wouldn't Pynchon's idea of the obliterated self be more convincing if Slothrop had gotten a chance to develop an intact one? When we meet him, he's already a bundle of conveniently placed compulsions and ticks. What's actually been lost when he fades away towards the end? Nothing. Nothing has been lost because Pynchon didn't give him that much personality to lose. By extension, the depiction of paranoia in this book strikes me as somewhat disingenuous, especially considering how self-consciously artificial a book it is. Pynchon references and gestures at real world conspiracies all throughout but seems to view the invented conspiracies within his own story as inevitabilities beyond anyone's control, his own included. Of course, everything's a plot, as Bodine says. Pynchon made it so. These are his plots at the end of the day. He alone gets to decide how valid the paranoia in his book is, and yet he looks on his creation with Zola-esque arrogance, like he just conducted a social experiment and not predetermined a series of fictional outcomes. That's my impression, anyway. It's like Stephen Crane trying to demonstrate the idea of determinism through fiction. Of course, these characters have no free will, they were literally authored. Nothing was really shown. Finally, though I could say more, I found the book a bit repetitious, especially after the five-hundred page mark. How many ways can you find to voice the somewhat basic observation that war, technology, and capitalism are oppressively intertwined? Was it that unclear? Stylistically, too, Pynchon repeats himself. While the prose is undoubtedly beautiful throughout, Pynchon has a habit of reusing devices. Once you've read one crowded room, busy street, or bleak battlefield, you've read them all. They're just lists. There are so many set pieces in this novel that amount to little more than a florid paragraph-length list, the items and people in which no one touches or notices. Nothing has any real texture. Pynchon will also occasionally "theme" a setting, such as during banana breakfast or when talking about the child city run by a child mayor, with child police officers, who will take you to child jail if you're walking outside without your child guide. This is not inventive. It's lazy. Just stick the same noun in front of ten other nouns, and you've generated a quirky, flavorful paragraph. Anyone can do this. Then, of course, there are the musical numbers, which I started skipping after a point. You get the idea.
Thank you! Coincidentally I just picked up GR again, having stopped about 400 pages in the first time around. Just reading 1 to 3 pages a day this time around, the survival shuffle to the finish line. Trained in 18th century lit, lotsa weirdness there, but not a fan of the big post moderns (to date) except The Tunnel.
Nixon to DJT: how did we end up here? Quartermaster Bodine in several Pynchon novels might have been the same q’master on Wm M Wood 1966-68 during my navy years.
![[Bad] - YouTube ВСЁ? (победа VK и прощание с подписчиками)](/img/1.gif)
That was brilliant, thank you!
You’re welcome, and thanks for watching.
Great episodes! Thank you for the good work!
Great comment! And thank you!
I just finished a reread of GR last month, nearly 30 years after my first read. This conversation has me eager for a third reading after a much shorter interval. Looking forward to the next conversation.
Awesome! Thanks for listening. It is a book that needs multiple readings. And one that would be fun to revisit after so much time.
The content I've been longing for!
The comment we've been longing for. Cheers.
Great episodes!
Great comment!
This was a great discussion on one of the best strangest most mind-melting works of fiction! Thanks for sharing Pynchon Notes as well. I had never heard of it. Another great resource! Keep up the great work fellas!
Thanks for listening. Make sure to check out the second part of the episode.
I had finally pulled the trigger on a bucket list item and bought a first edition first print of GR. I love this book and sadly, it wont reach its proper place of honor in culture again until after Pynchon is gone.
Sadly true. Congrats on the bucket list item check off. Any other books on the list?
What a beautiful channel you have here! Pynchon changed my brain chemistry nearly 20 years ago, and I revisit GR, like Seth does, a lot. I still haven't got to the 'end' of it, in terms of using up its inspirational, philosophical, and emotive powers. I think that makes it a pretty great book, and I'm heartened that people keep coming back to it despite the challenge, even now. As much as that fetishisation of 'big brainy books' can be kinda silly, people *never* know what they're really getting in for with this book - it has a habit of cracking people open, either in an aesthetic sense, or an intellectual one, or even an emotional one (despite some people's idea of it being 'unfeeling'). It's so cool to see a podcast that really seems dedicated to solid, long, and open conversations about great books. Big fan!
Many thanks!
Watching this vid today - the convo about convention subversion has it occur to me that “A Thousand Plateaus” by Deleuze and Guattari could not have been written nor culturally invested without GR’s precedence. I read GR around 1974 shortly after its release amid a severe paucity of correspondence or adequate commentary. Thanks for the YT!
Interesting connection! We'll have to look into that further.
Big fan of moiré. The most frequent places I’ve seen a moiré in a car, driving towards an overpass/walkway with fencing on both sides. You could say I amore a moiré
I finished Gravity's Rainbow last month. No novel that I've read in recent years has left me colder.
Oh yeah? What about it left you so cold?
@booksosubstance Well, to start, Pynchon's sense of humor is insufferable. The silly names, insistent slapstick, zany musical numbers, and long-winded puns exasperate me. His folksy, Americana-inflected mode (Well lookie here at 'ol Slothrop! What is he up to now? Aw, shucks, another boner. Gee-gosh, I wonder where that cherry throbber's leading him next.) could not be less endearing. Furthermore, the constant joking undermines any chance for suspense or real tension to arise, let alone pathos. When Pynchon composes certain sections with a straighter face (I'm thinking right now about Pokler's story) I don't believe him. Not a word. A phrase I found myself saying often was "Too little too late." The persuasive power of Pynchon's dramatic mode is nil next to all his specially conditioned mollusks, ratty pig suits, and custard pie fights.
While I understand the theme of mass dehumanization and commodification they're meant to bolster, the novel's sex, violence, and sexual violence come off as badly dated counter-cultural shock fodder. Much of the novel does, actually. While reading, I was often reminded of R Crumb, Ralph Bakshi, and Frank Zappa, three other artistic geniuses forged in the 1960's. They all traffic in the same hyper-explicit, grotesquely detailed, baldly cynical wackiness that was, in its day, cuttingly subversive. I find it boring.
On average, the cast members are caricatures, if that. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. Plenty of great art deals in caricature, but Pynchon's trying to say something about what oppressive power structures do to people, and there are no people here. Some might say that's the point. In a world run by colluding technocratic governments and capitalist incentive structures, there can be no people, no character, no depth. Your choices are controlled, your consent is manufactured. Great. But what's the use of illustrating dehumanization when we can't see what's been lost? Slothrop's background illustrates this perfectly. He was literally sold to Jamf and doctored. He's doomed from the beginning, "deconditioning" notwithstanding. Wouldn't Pynchon's idea of the obliterated self be more convincing if Slothrop had gotten a chance to develop an intact one? When we meet him, he's already a bundle of conveniently placed compulsions and ticks. What's actually been lost when he fades away towards the end? Nothing. Nothing has been lost because Pynchon didn't give him that much personality to lose.
By extension, the depiction of paranoia in this book strikes me as somewhat disingenuous, especially considering how self-consciously artificial a book it is. Pynchon references and gestures at real world conspiracies all throughout but seems to view the invented conspiracies within his own story as inevitabilities beyond anyone's control, his own included. Of course, everything's a plot, as Bodine says. Pynchon made it so. These are his plots at the end of the day. He alone gets to decide how valid the paranoia in his book is, and yet he looks on his creation with Zola-esque arrogance, like he just conducted a social experiment and not predetermined a series of fictional outcomes. That's my impression, anyway. It's like Stephen Crane trying to demonstrate the idea of determinism through fiction. Of course, these characters have no free will, they were literally authored. Nothing was really shown.
Finally, though I could say more, I found the book a bit repetitious, especially after the five-hundred page mark. How many ways can you find to voice the somewhat basic observation that war, technology, and capitalism are oppressively intertwined? Was it that unclear? Stylistically, too, Pynchon repeats himself. While the prose is undoubtedly beautiful throughout, Pynchon has a habit of reusing devices. Once you've read one crowded room, busy street, or bleak battlefield, you've read them all. They're just lists. There are so many set pieces in this novel that amount to little more than a florid paragraph-length list, the items and people in which no one touches or notices. Nothing has any real texture. Pynchon will also occasionally "theme" a setting, such as during banana breakfast or when talking about the child city run by a child mayor, with child police officers, who will take you to child jail if you're walking outside without your child guide. This is not inventive. It's lazy. Just stick the same noun in front of ten other nouns, and you've generated a quirky, flavorful paragraph. Anyone can do this. Then, of course, there are the musical numbers, which I started skipping after a point.
You get the idea.
@@MichaelSlovin thanks for sharing an absolutely thorough and honest counterpoint, we honestly appreciate it.
@@booksosubstance And thanks for inviting me to share. You're doing great work.
Thanks@@MichaelSlovin! Appreciate your thoughts and listening.
Amazing work, do you all have any links to Pynchon's early articles for Boeing? I'd love to read Hydrazine Tank Cartridge Replacement in particular.
That was a really insightful and satisfying conversation. Thanks, guys, I got a lot out of what you discussed!
Glad to hear it! Thanks for listening.
Amazing analysis guys, gotta read it now!
Enjoy!
Thank you! Coincidentally I just picked up GR again, having stopped about 400 pages in the first time around. Just reading 1 to 3 pages a day this time around, the survival shuffle to the finish line. Trained in 18th century lit, lotsa weirdness there, but not a fan of the big post moderns (to date) except The Tunnel.
The Tunnel is amazing! Thanks for listening!
Seth's mannerisms are really reminiscent of David Foster Wallace
Oh yeah? How so?
Nixon to DJT: how did we end up here? Quartermaster Bodine in several Pynchon novels might have been the same q’master on Wm M Wood 1966-68 during my navy years.
Paraphrasing a Biden razor: capitalism is the worst system, except for all the other systems.