News:

OK A-holes.  It's fixed.  Enjoy the orange links, because I have no fucking idea how to change them.  I basically learned scripting in four days to fix this damned thing. - Andy

Main Menu

Author Topic: Gravity's Rainbow  ( 15,189 )

R-V

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,220
Gravity's Rainbow
« on: March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM »
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Jon

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM »
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.
Take that, Adolf Eyechart.

"I'm just saying, penis aside, that broad had a tight fuckable body in that movie. Sans penis of course.." - A peek into *IAN's psyche

R-V

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,220
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM »
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

Jon

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2010, 09:29:25 AM »
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

Are you saying you didn't? Stick in the mud.
Take that, Adolf Eyechart.

"I'm just saying, penis aside, that broad had a tight fuckable body in that movie. Sans penis of course.." - A peek into *IAN's psyche

Slaky

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 7,883
  • Location: Bucktown
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM »
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

R-V

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,220
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM »
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

Jon

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2010, 10:02:33 AM »
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM


The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off.

That's one of my favorite aspects of his work. In Mason & Dixon, he convincingly writes in an 18th century style for the majority of the book, but still manages to make it interesting and readable. I'm currently reading Against the Day, and the first 30 pages or so is written in a 19th Century Young Adult Novel style (complete with overwritten passages and a sort of joyfyul bonhomie), which matches the innocence of the characters portrayed, before following another character to a much more wordly place, where the style makes a seamless switch to a darker, Realistic tone. The switch is suprisingly smooth - I was reading about the next character for almost four pages before it occured to me that the book was no longer oddly overwritten and precious.

I really enjoyed watching Slothrop disintegrate into like 5 different characters towards the end of the book, though it's been a while since I read it. Trying to decide just how much of the events in the book were "real" and how much were just his imagination was also pretty cool.
Take that, Adolf Eyechart.

"I'm just saying, penis aside, that broad had a tight fuckable body in that movie. Sans penis of course.." - A peek into *IAN's psyche

CT III

  • Administrator
  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,828
  • Location: NonDescript
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2010, 10:04:07 AM »
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 10:02:33 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM


The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off.

That's one of my favorite aspects of his work. In Mason & Dixon, he convincingly writes in an 18th century style for the majority of the book, but still manages to make it interesting and readable. I'm currently reading Against the Day, and the first 30 pages or so is written in a 19th Century Young Adult Novel style (complete with overwritten passages and a sort of joyfyul bonhomie), which matches the innocence of the characters portrayed, before following another character to a much more wordly place, where the style makes a seamless switch to a darker, Realistic tone. The switch is suprisingly smooth - I was reading about the next character for almost four pages before it occured to me that the book was no longer oddly overwritten and precious.

I really enjoyed watching Slothrop disintegrate into like 5 different characters towards the end of the book, though it's been a while since I read it. Trying to decide just how much of the events in the book were "real" and how much were just his imagination was also pretty cool.

Go read "The Guns of August" you homos.

Dr. Nguyen Van Falk

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,887
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2010, 10:08:32 AM »
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:29:25 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

Are you saying you didn't? Stick in the mud.

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
I liked the poop sex.

Pedo poop sex?

Did Pynchon write this thing on an NEA grant?
WHAT THESE FANCY DANS IN CHICAGO THINK THEY DO?

Slaky

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 7,883
  • Location: Bucktown
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2010, 10:24:40 AM »
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

I don't think you're wrong at all. This book was the most challenging I've read and way more of a challenge than IJ. I hope you don't write off Tom though - have you read any of his other stuff?

PenFoe

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,739
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2010, 10:26:21 AM »
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 10:24:40 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

I don't think you're wrong at all. This book was the most challenging I've read and way more of a challenge than IJ. I hope you don't write off Tom though - have you read any of his other stuff?

I've read the first 15 pages of this book probably 5 times.
I think page 40 is my record.

Nothing written here so far is really making me regret this.
I can't believe I even know these people. I'm ashamed of my internet life.

Jon

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2010, 10:27:10 AM »
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 10:24:40 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

I don't think you're wrong at all. This book was the most challenging I've read and way more of a challenge than IJ. I hope you don't write off Tom though - have you read any of his other stuff?

I have to admit, GR was the first Pynchon I ever read. It makes everything else he's written a lot easier to digest. And I'm pretty sure it also made it easier to finish Ulysses as well.
Take that, Adolf Eyechart.

"I'm just saying, penis aside, that broad had a tight fuckable body in that movie. Sans penis of course.." - A peek into *IAN's psyche

Jon

  • Fukakke Fan Club
  • Posts: 1,880
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2010, 10:27:47 AM »
Quote from: PenFoe on March 09, 2010, 10:26:21 AM

I've read the first 15 pages of this book probably 5 times.
I think page 40 is my record.

Nothing written here so far is really making me regret this.

As always, RV: listen to Pen. Then do the opposite.
Take that, Adolf Eyechart.

"I'm just saying, penis aside, that broad had a tight fuckable body in that movie. Sans penis of course.." - A peek into *IAN's psyche

PenFoe

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 4,739
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2010, 10:29:21 AM »
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 10:27:47 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on March 09, 2010, 10:26:21 AM

I've read the first 15 pages of this book probably 5 times.
I think page 40 is my record.

Nothing written here so far is really making me regret this.

As always, RV: listen to Pen. Then do the opposite.

Profit?
I can't believe I even know these people. I'm ashamed of my internet life.

R-V

  • Johnny Evers Fan Club
  • Posts: 3,220
Re: Gravity's Rainbow
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2010, 10:36:07 AM »
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 10:24:40 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM
Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM
Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM
Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

I don't think you're wrong at all. This book was the most challenging I've read and way more of a challenge than IJ. I hope you don't write off Tom though - have you read any of his other stuff?

I have to admit, GR was the first Pynchon I ever read. It makes everything else he's written a lot easier to digest. And I'm pretty sure it also made it easier to finish Ulysses as well.

This was my first Pynchoning. Are his other books less confounding?

As frustrating as it was, this book was worth reading solely for the fact that it introduced me to the term coprophagia. General Pudding really knew how to party!