OK, so Dave and Joe read Gravity's Rainbow in 2013. There are a lot of ways to look at that decision, but to call that book "a bit much" is diplomatic. You could also call it a clusterf#@k and no one would argue.
We address the unique craziness of this book in a Q&A format below:
Dave: Will you ever forgive me? (Seriously, though, what did you think of your first Pynchon book?)
Joe: Forgive and forget, that's my motto. But, you're a son of a bitch for convincing me to read this thing. My first experience with Pynchon was memorable in the same way I remember the first time I really took a hard shot to the junk. It's a unique pain that you remember in your teeth.
Speaking of teeth, his description of the "old guard" military guy having to eat shit was so well written that I can almost taste the sandy residue in my molars thanks to his wonderfully descriptive writing. No one abuses talent like Pynchon.
He is amazing at times and really, really impressive... and he chooses to use that talent in the worst possible ways. He's sort of like a the smartest kid in school who uses his talent to break some international video game record or to organize for pot legalization. Great ability, questionable focus and choices. Have you ever met someone smart who can't stop trying to right the most ridiculous wrong ever? That's Pynchon. While some people are caught up in trying to make real differences, there's Pynchon using Mozart-like talent to legalize recreational Adderall use. Wasted talent and a shame.
Joe: OK, my turn. How many drugs were required to write that? Feel free to use google if needed. We need stats
Dave: I have spent an hour searching "Thomas Pynchon" and "Drugs" on the internet. Which was a long, twisting search that kept seeming like it was going to lead to a great revelation but ended with raised hands and wasted proclamations to the heavens. Tie into your own experiences with GR as needed.
As much of a recluse as Pynchon is, the only thing I found stories of were his love of Marijuana, which, having read 3 of his books, containing numerous references to dope, I feel that I could have confirmed anyways. But I have put some thought into this, and my answer....well, you are not going to like my answer. Short version: "Not Enough". Long version, I need to start with a discussion about Nascar....
(don't go away, Joe. I promise this will make sense. I think.)
Since the late 80's, Nascar has, on the larger (more than a mile long) tracks, required cars to have "restrictor plates" which limit the effective horsepower of the car, and keeps the car at an attainable speed. Most cars top out now around 185 mph, without restrictor plates, those speeds could go as high as 225. At that speed, you lose the ability to safely keep control of the cars. The unseen benefit of restrictor plates is that the "best" car on any given day is best by a smaller margin, and the races are generally better to watch, you almost never see somebody dominating the race start-to-finish, and there is a lot more passing and competitiveness. In other words, the races are more watchable.
So, when I look at Gravity's Rainbow, a book that was very typical Pynchon for 75% (which is to say, written with bright ability, numerous characters and storylines, and a thematic tourette's syndrome), and over the last section, became (even more) insane and incomprehensible, well, clearly something in his substance intake changed towards the end. And so I ask, what if it's not that he was on to more/better drugs? What if he stopped his intake? What if the last section of Gravity's Rainbow was pure, uncut, undiluted Thomas Pynchon, without the restrictions of Pot or Heroin or Acid or any mind-altering filter that was making sense of the nightmare fuel secreted from his head?
Dave: What was your favorite part/ moment of the book?
Joe: As crazy as this sounds, his description of the allure of thigh-high stockings was fabulous, absolutely correct, freaking beautiful, and though-provoking. And, considering this is a book about the military industrial complex in a way, it's like Pynchon synthesizing a beautiful string of logic to prove that Adderall somehow helps you regulate your metabolism. Still, he can really be amazing with language and has his finger on the pulse of some pretty amazing observations. He craps the bed on the follow-through (and even did so with the quote below by changing gears completely within the same paragraph), but still.
Here is a segment that was just amazing:
"How the penises of Western men have leapt, for a century, to the sight of the singular point at the top of a lady's stocking, this transition from silk to bare skin and suspender! It's easy for non-fetishists to sneer about Pavlovian conditioning and let it go at that, but any underwear enthusiast worth his unwholesome giggle can tell you there is much more here - there is a cosmology: of nodes and cusps and points of osculation, mathematical kisses... singularities! Consider cathedral spires, holy minarets, the crunch of trainwheels over the points as you watch peeling away the track you didn't take... mountain peaks rising sharply to heaven, such as those to be noted at scenic Berchtesgaden... the edges of steel razors, always holding potent mystery... rose thorns that prick us by surprise... even, according to the Russian mathematician Friedmann, the infinitely dense point from which the present Universe expanded... In each case, the change from point to no-point carries a luminosity and enigma at which something in us must leap and sing, or withdraw in fright."
He applied this to a grown woman and it was fantastic. Not much later, he then describes a weird fantasy where a 12-year-old girl wears stockings, similarly described, and just ruins it. He went a little Lolita on the reader and it was creepy. It's like Pynchon made a fantastic case for his Adderall point, but then he said too much and you have to say, "I just don't see why Adderall needs to be in the water supply. You had me for a bit, though."
Still, lost on the follow-through or not, that was a real moment in the book. And then it was back to pigs leading people in the woods and light bulbs trying to take over the world. Actually, I loved the light bulb part (a light bulb contemplates taking over by rallying all the bulbs to blow at once as a sort of coup). It was probably the only coherent story in the final part and was just fun. Everything else about part four was a clown car wreck of a mess.
Joe: Are you angry about losing out on the book this could have been or convinced no one could ever tie such a thing up (trainwreck as destiny)?
Dave: Well, having read 2 of Pynchon's books before, I knew that things were not going to be tied up at the end. He is about the Journey, not the Destination, in fact probably never has a Destination in mind when he writes. You have to read Pynchon for the moments (much like above) and not be so concerned with the ending. But this book....there's a difference between leaving loose ends and blowing up the string with dynamite. Most of what happened was like a dream right before you wake up. I would read it, put the book down, and 30 seconds later try to remember what I just read, and never got it right. Only a couple of things stick out from the end, and one of them is the ridiculous sprawling story about the Sentient German Lightbulb. (yeah, you read that right) Angry is not the word I'd use, nor disappointment. Really, confusion, like I was not smart enough to understand what the hell he was saying. I do not like feeling like that. It's one of the reasons I read authors like Pynchon, to "prove" that I'm not just some simpering dumbass, and if I am not able to pave my way through the jungles of flowering Genius, I can at least find my way through the directions of others. But with GR, I was lost, and never made any progress through the rain forest in Pynchon's head. And I am humbled, and upset, and shaking my map, railing against the explorer that was supposed to get me somewhere that wasn't here.
Seriously. German Lightbulbs. Fuck.
Dave: What was the most surprising aspect of Gravity's Rainbow? (Good or bad)
Joe: How much it sucked. I mean it. I was very disappointed. I wanted it to be a worthwhile read. I read Infinite Jest and loved it. Difficult books can be very rewarding and I was expecting that. I can handle hard books. This wasn't "hard to read with a purpose" as much as "hard to read to seem complex." It wasn't really complex. Just confusing. IJ was complex, but it was not hard to see where it all fit. GR was just scattered and messy. I was surprised that it wasn't a better book. I was also surprised at how good a writer he can be. I just refuse to allow Adderall in the water supply and Pynchon won't shut up about it.
Joe: Will you ever read Pynchon again?
Dave: Yes. Lost as I was in this book, I saw some amazing things on the way. I may not read another for a while, but, to reference the first question, do addicts stop doing a drug because of one bad experience? Does that first DUI really make you put up the bottle? Yeah, I will read another.
Also, I currently have an unread Pynchon book on my shelf. I mean, I can't just waste money like that, right?
We address the unique craziness of this book in a Q&A format below:
Dave: Will you ever forgive me? (Seriously, though, what did you think of your first Pynchon book?)
Joe: Forgive and forget, that's my motto. But, you're a son of a bitch for convincing me to read this thing. My first experience with Pynchon was memorable in the same way I remember the first time I really took a hard shot to the junk. It's a unique pain that you remember in your teeth.
Speaking of teeth, his description of the "old guard" military guy having to eat shit was so well written that I can almost taste the sandy residue in my molars thanks to his wonderfully descriptive writing. No one abuses talent like Pynchon.
He is amazing at times and really, really impressive... and he chooses to use that talent in the worst possible ways. He's sort of like a the smartest kid in school who uses his talent to break some international video game record or to organize for pot legalization. Great ability, questionable focus and choices. Have you ever met someone smart who can't stop trying to right the most ridiculous wrong ever? That's Pynchon. While some people are caught up in trying to make real differences, there's Pynchon using Mozart-like talent to legalize recreational Adderall use. Wasted talent and a shame.
Joe: OK, my turn. How many drugs were required to write that? Feel free to use google if needed. We need stats
Dave: I have spent an hour searching "Thomas Pynchon" and "Drugs" on the internet. Which was a long, twisting search that kept seeming like it was going to lead to a great revelation but ended with raised hands and wasted proclamations to the heavens. Tie into your own experiences with GR as needed.
As much of a recluse as Pynchon is, the only thing I found stories of were his love of Marijuana, which, having read 3 of his books, containing numerous references to dope, I feel that I could have confirmed anyways. But I have put some thought into this, and my answer....well, you are not going to like my answer. Short version: "Not Enough". Long version, I need to start with a discussion about Nascar....
(don't go away, Joe. I promise this will make sense. I think.)
Since the late 80's, Nascar has, on the larger (more than a mile long) tracks, required cars to have "restrictor plates" which limit the effective horsepower of the car, and keeps the car at an attainable speed. Most cars top out now around 185 mph, without restrictor plates, those speeds could go as high as 225. At that speed, you lose the ability to safely keep control of the cars. The unseen benefit of restrictor plates is that the "best" car on any given day is best by a smaller margin, and the races are generally better to watch, you almost never see somebody dominating the race start-to-finish, and there is a lot more passing and competitiveness. In other words, the races are more watchable.
So, when I look at Gravity's Rainbow, a book that was very typical Pynchon for 75% (which is to say, written with bright ability, numerous characters and storylines, and a thematic tourette's syndrome), and over the last section, became (even more) insane and incomprehensible, well, clearly something in his substance intake changed towards the end. And so I ask, what if it's not that he was on to more/better drugs? What if he stopped his intake? What if the last section of Gravity's Rainbow was pure, uncut, undiluted Thomas Pynchon, without the restrictions of Pot or Heroin or Acid or any mind-altering filter that was making sense of the nightmare fuel secreted from his head?
Dave: What was your favorite part/ moment of the book?
Joe: As crazy as this sounds, his description of the allure of thigh-high stockings was fabulous, absolutely correct, freaking beautiful, and though-provoking. And, considering this is a book about the military industrial complex in a way, it's like Pynchon synthesizing a beautiful string of logic to prove that Adderall somehow helps you regulate your metabolism. Still, he can really be amazing with language and has his finger on the pulse of some pretty amazing observations. He craps the bed on the follow-through (and even did so with the quote below by changing gears completely within the same paragraph), but still.
Here is a segment that was just amazing:
"How the penises of Western men have leapt, for a century, to the sight of the singular point at the top of a lady's stocking, this transition from silk to bare skin and suspender! It's easy for non-fetishists to sneer about Pavlovian conditioning and let it go at that, but any underwear enthusiast worth his unwholesome giggle can tell you there is much more here - there is a cosmology: of nodes and cusps and points of osculation, mathematical kisses... singularities! Consider cathedral spires, holy minarets, the crunch of trainwheels over the points as you watch peeling away the track you didn't take... mountain peaks rising sharply to heaven, such as those to be noted at scenic Berchtesgaden... the edges of steel razors, always holding potent mystery... rose thorns that prick us by surprise... even, according to the Russian mathematician Friedmann, the infinitely dense point from which the present Universe expanded... In each case, the change from point to no-point carries a luminosity and enigma at which something in us must leap and sing, or withdraw in fright."
He applied this to a grown woman and it was fantastic. Not much later, he then describes a weird fantasy where a 12-year-old girl wears stockings, similarly described, and just ruins it. He went a little Lolita on the reader and it was creepy. It's like Pynchon made a fantastic case for his Adderall point, but then he said too much and you have to say, "I just don't see why Adderall needs to be in the water supply. You had me for a bit, though."
Still, lost on the follow-through or not, that was a real moment in the book. And then it was back to pigs leading people in the woods and light bulbs trying to take over the world. Actually, I loved the light bulb part (a light bulb contemplates taking over by rallying all the bulbs to blow at once as a sort of coup). It was probably the only coherent story in the final part and was just fun. Everything else about part four was a clown car wreck of a mess.
Joe: Are you angry about losing out on the book this could have been or convinced no one could ever tie such a thing up (trainwreck as destiny)?
Dave: Well, having read 2 of Pynchon's books before, I knew that things were not going to be tied up at the end. He is about the Journey, not the Destination, in fact probably never has a Destination in mind when he writes. You have to read Pynchon for the moments (much like above) and not be so concerned with the ending. But this book....there's a difference between leaving loose ends and blowing up the string with dynamite. Most of what happened was like a dream right before you wake up. I would read it, put the book down, and 30 seconds later try to remember what I just read, and never got it right. Only a couple of things stick out from the end, and one of them is the ridiculous sprawling story about the Sentient German Lightbulb. (yeah, you read that right) Angry is not the word I'd use, nor disappointment. Really, confusion, like I was not smart enough to understand what the hell he was saying. I do not like feeling like that. It's one of the reasons I read authors like Pynchon, to "prove" that I'm not just some simpering dumbass, and if I am not able to pave my way through the jungles of flowering Genius, I can at least find my way through the directions of others. But with GR, I was lost, and never made any progress through the rain forest in Pynchon's head. And I am humbled, and upset, and shaking my map, railing against the explorer that was supposed to get me somewhere that wasn't here.
Seriously. German Lightbulbs. Fuck.
Dave: What was the most surprising aspect of Gravity's Rainbow? (Good or bad)
Joe: How much it sucked. I mean it. I was very disappointed. I wanted it to be a worthwhile read. I read Infinite Jest and loved it. Difficult books can be very rewarding and I was expecting that. I can handle hard books. This wasn't "hard to read with a purpose" as much as "hard to read to seem complex." It wasn't really complex. Just confusing. IJ was complex, but it was not hard to see where it all fit. GR was just scattered and messy. I was surprised that it wasn't a better book. I was also surprised at how good a writer he can be. I just refuse to allow Adderall in the water supply and Pynchon won't shut up about it.
Joe: Will you ever read Pynchon again?
Dave: Yes. Lost as I was in this book, I saw some amazing things on the way. I may not read another for a while, but, to reference the first question, do addicts stop doing a drug because of one bad experience? Does that first DUI really make you put up the bottle? Yeah, I will read another.
Also, I currently have an unread Pynchon book on my shelf. I mean, I can't just waste money like that, right?
Thank you for this....now I will never think of lightbulbs without calling them German lightbulbs :)
ReplyDeleteSeriously, this was a great discussion and gives me insight into what to expect if and when I ever do read this book. Although, when Dave experiences lack of recall with material I know I will be in trouble as he ALWAYS has great recall. Also, Joe said it flat out sucked.....maybe, but maybe not when not being measured next to DFW. It's interesting as many of the English lit students I was in college with claimed this to be their all time favorite book. Showing off maybe....?