/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23303999]

Is this Pynchon's worst novel?

[Anonymous No.23304004]

That's not saying much...

[Anonymous No.23304029]

>>23303999
Vineland sucks hippie dick. I haven’t read this one though

[Anonymous No.23304127]

it's his best

[Anonymous No.23304139]

>>23303999
Only Pynchon I have yet to read, will be getting to it soon though. I suspect it to be about the same as IV, entertaining but no real depth.

[Anonymous No.23304162]

>>23304127
Why?

[Anonymous No.23304449]

>>23303999
>boomer who can’t set the VCR clock or use a smartphone writes about tech
Golly gee wonder why it sucked. Ever heard write what you know you stupid fucktard?

[Anonymous No.23304720]

>>23304449
>t. Never read pynchon

[Anonymous No.23304774]

>>23304029
Crescent City dump though

Most important concept out of Bleeding Edge: spaces with more volume inside than would seem from outside, lower level, Montauk, chains that hang, 9/11, yea, yea, Pollard spy israel, nuclear, nuclear, nuclear, Jersey exit Ikea 13a, it’s actually, yea, Bleeding Edge is pretty based, plebs need not apply.

[Anonymous No.23304830]

>>23303999
it's good but as usual Pynchon's characters are so bad

only Mason & Dixon has good characterization

[Anonymous No.23304939]

>>23304830
>only Mason & Dixon has good characterization
You haven't read AtD then. M&D just has an epilogue tacked on to humanize them after the fact which does nothing for the previous 900 odd pages. His flatest main characters by a long shot, they don't develop in the slightest until the epilogue.

[Anonymous No.23305117]

>>23304939
bisexual steampunk orgies isn't for me, I won't be reading AtD

[Anonymous No.23305143]

>>23304830
lmao filtered

[Anonymous No.23305145]

>>23305117
Faggot

[Anonymous No.23305158]

>>23303999
>checked

His palpable progressive decline from Mason & Dickass is the literary version of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJWksPWDKOc

[Anonymous No.23305176]

>>23305117
There are no orgies but there is a cowboy threesom.

[Anonymous No.23305183]

>>23305176
Actually, maybe there was an orgie? TWIT?

[Anonymous No.23305234]

pynchon can't write characters yet writes so sentimentality about them

hack?

[Anonymous No.23305274]

>>23305234
What's wrong with them?

[Anonymous No.23305547]

>>23305234
oedipa maas refutes this

[Anonymous No.23305709]

>>23305547
Oedpia was pretty flat character-wise

[Anonymous No.23305801]

>>23304449
>190+ IQ who worked in aerospace engineering presumed to not know how to set a VCR clock
*ruffles your mullatto perm*
Bless your heart, faggot.

[Anonymous No.23306166]

>>23305709
How so?

[Anonymous No.23306743]

>>23305274
>>23305547
paper thin characters with extremely cringe names

you just know pynchon thinks he's a genius for doing this but he should put down the bong

[Anonymous No.23306757]

Why does every thread have to resort to baiting? Like damn, take a position.

[Anonymous No.23306760]

>>23303999
It's the best of his "lighter" works aside from maybe Crying of Lot 49 and is a scathing critique of how the tech sector still see themselves as some cool counter-cultural force while being part of the establishment and helping usher in a new age of information warfare and espionage on the masses.

[Anonymous No.23306768]

>>23306760
Damn anon you made a pretty convincing case for this one. How’s it compare to Vineland?

[Anonymous No.23306806]

>>23306768
I very much prefer it over Vineland but I think the reason a lot of people bounce of Bleeding Edge is that it requires you to kinda "get" the whole tech culture of the late 90s/early 2000s in order to fully understand what Pynchon is trying to have a go at. Think of it as Pynchon's "cyberpunk" work for a lack of a better word, the man clearly did a lot of reasearch about both the tech, the culture surrounding it and the pop-culture that tech nerds of the time really loved (it name drops Ghost in the Shell and Hideo Kojima for example).

[Anonymous No.23306823]

>>23306760
>>23306806
but still the characters are complete dog shit

[Anonymous No.23306991]

>>23306743
Paper thin how though? He's more interested in characterizing attitudes anyway.

[Anonymous No.23307008]

>>23306806
>you live long enough to become a pastiche of yourself

Grim.

[Anonymous No.23307029]

>>23306991
what don't you understand? they don't feel real at all, pynchon is an ideas guy, his characters all read like goofy cartoon cutouts

[Anonymous No.23307118]

>>23307029
Characters can be allegorical too you know.

[Anonymous No.23307820]

>>23307029
Archetypal characters can still be very compelling.
I feel like the people who make these claims fall into the comic book reddit trap of every character needing to "develop," as if the only point of a character is to use a narrative to learn some kind of Mother Goose lesson. At some point internet debate faggots decided "developing" a character is synonymous with them being "good."
Look at Seaman Bodine. He doesn't change, he's very goofy, but he's incredibly interesting to see move through Pynchon's world, he's memorable and enjoyable. I'd say he feels like a cartoon in a good way, in the sense that you see him in every sentence starkly outlined in your head like Bluto or Patrick Star, it makes his actions and dialogue viscerally come to life.
>Seaman Bodine looks up suddenly, canny, unshaven face stung by all the smoke and unawareness in the room. He's looking straight at Slothrop (being one of the few who can still see Slothrop as any sort of integral creature any more. Most of the others gave up long ago trying to hold him together, even as a concept-"It's just got too remote" 's what they usually say). Does Bodine now feel his own strength may someday soon not be enough either: that soon, like all the others, he'll have to let go? But somebody's got to hold on, it can't happen to all of us-no, that'd be too much...
>Rocketman, Rocketman. You poor fucker.

[Anonymous No.23309024]

>>23304029
You're right, Vineland is even worse.