Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jessicathehun t1_j6b8mfd wrote

Yes, absolutely. I went through this reading Pynchon as well as James Joyce. The first time it happened was while reading Ulysses. I was struggling through it, trying hard to parse out the meanings and references… and then I just let go, stopped trying, and allowed the text to become like a sea of words I was floating on. I guess I believe that style of writing is meant to be instinctive and evocative, to make you feel, to activate your deeper instincts less so than your processing and analysis functions.

Could I tell you the plot of these books? No. Am I one of the few people I know who actually read them and didn’t give up in agony? Yes.

No idea what the authors would think of this approach, but it is truly a lovely experience! Glad you found your own way to connect and enjoy a very experimental text. Congratulations.

23

The_Red_Curtain t1_j6db03c wrote

Honestly, I think Ulysses is meant to be understood lol, you just have to work a bit for it. If anything, it's the ultimate analysis and process novel, kind of a culmination of what was canonical Western literature at that point while also pointing towards something new.

Finnegans Wake is a totally different beast, tho.

4

jessicathehun t1_j6e7loz wrote

I definitely see that point of view, but I was shocked at how much more fun it was when I shifted to the immersive experience. It was something about the vocabulary and structure, where it seemed every word and phrase was intended to make you feel something rather than think it. It helped that I had the lexicon to be able to capture the nuances without getting lost in analysis, too.

1

mmillington t1_j6ibuhp wrote

The immersion approach is great for Ulysses and Gravity’s Rainbow, especially for a first read. During rereads is the time to really dive in, because a first read gets you somewhat oriented so the novel doesn’t feel quite as alien.

A few of Pynchon’s books are like that. I also use that approach with r/JosephMcElroy and r/Arno_Schmidt.

2

jessicathehun t1_j6b96rj wrote

Oh, and I’ll echo someone else’s comment that this style of writing is also just kind of bad. I consider it sort of abusive to the reader. After Pynchon, I decided I never again needed to read some white guy banging on and showing off all the words he knows (sorry David Foster Wallace)

Edit: lol I forgot a basic rule: never tell book people you don’t like DFW

−14

KieselguhrKid13 t1_j6d0x6u wrote

I think it's a common misconception that Pynchon talks down to the reader or is just trying to make himself look smart. On the contrary, I feel like he writes in a very challenging way, but he expects the reader to be able to get there, too, with a bit of effort. He trusts the reader's intelligence.

And he's clearly not writing for everybody - there's a specific type of reader who will pick up books like that and love them, and others who won't, any that's okay.

8

McGilla_Gorilla t1_j6d26tx wrote

I mean, Pynchon is totally readable for a lot of people. And I’d argue several of his novels are easily approachable for anyone reading above a high school level.

6

mmillington t1_j6icj0l wrote

Yeah, I think he’s very, very accessible, especially Vineland, which is like Pynchon smoked some weed and riffed on 1980s movies and daytime TV for 400 pages. It’s a pretty good hint at what Tommy was up to during his 17 gap between Gravity’s Rainbow and Vineland.

2

mmillington t1_j6icuhq wrote

It was probably the “some white guy” comment, not namedropping Wallace.

2

jessicathehun t1_j6iikgt wrote

Yeah, maybe I should have been more specific: “upper middle class 20th century white guy who had the privilege to gain a huge vocabulary and the opportunity to be paid to bang on and show off all the words he knows whether anyone wants to read them or not”

−1

mmillington t1_j6iisis wrote

You okay?

2

jessicathehun t1_j6il7yo wrote

I can’t be the first person to point out the preponderance of overeducated & overconfident white guys who got published in the 20th century, can I? Downvoting my opinion and implying I’m somehow unwell to hold it is a bit disrespectful. If you don’t agree, move on then.

−1

mmillington t1_j6in5l6 wrote

All I did was point out that I think you misdiagnosed the downvotes, so you responded with 10x more. That’s what we internetters call a smidge unhinged. But don’t worry, upvotes and downvotes have no real-world value.

1

jessicathehun t1_j6inhed wrote

Man, you’re taking this really personal.

0

mmillington t1_j6inr9v wrote

How so? Aren’t you and I just trading unpopular opinions?

1

jessicathehun t1_j6iqxrr wrote

You might need to beef up your rhetorical skills, friend. Come back when you’re interested in having a good faith debate! Until then, seriously, you can just move on with your day; this thread is a conversational dead end.

0

BringMeInfo t1_j6d9cvd wrote

I prefer not to read work by people of any race or gender who are just banging on and showing off all the words they know.

0

RVG990104 OP t1_j6dvs52 wrote

Thank you! Also, I wouldn't call it bad but to each his own, I don't really understand the downvotes, it's reasonable to have a negative opinion about any writer.

0

jessicathehun t1_j6e6p5g wrote

I’ve known for a long time that this is an unpopular opinion! People hold these authors in very high esteem, probably explicitly due to how challenging it is to read their work.

I read a lot of classics and various styles of literature, and for me there’s a stark difference between an author who’s able to move me with a powerful story vs. one who seems to be writing mostly for themselves. I’m glad literature seems to have mostly gotten over that style. It was an interesting trend but thankfully an ephemeral one.

−1

mooimafish33 t1_j6cqnch wrote

Yea I wouldn't want to read something that doesn't allow me to follow it. I can understand if something is beyond my reading level or vocabulary, but if its purposely incomprehensible I think it's dumb and pretentious.

−2