/lit/ - Literature

[Malavox !!soFIkVfN9z9 No.1934574]

Read and loved Infinite Jest, should I read Gravity's Rainbow? I've heard DFW and Pynchon were similar and the book sounds interesting

[Anonymous No.1934594]

They're not similar at all, except in sentence length.

[Anonymous No.1934597]

I found the similarities between them to be rather superficial. Gravity's Rainbow is still a damn good book, though; you should read it.

[Anonymous No.1934602]

GR is perhaps more of a challenge, but it's really great, and a rewarding read.

[Anonymous No.1934606]

I'd say they're similar as far as they're both "postmodernism," whatever the hell that word means anymore. They're also both very interesting and both immensely talented writers.

The similarities end there. Pynchon draws from a much different body of knowledge, and while I don't know your age I'll say that though I read every page of Gravity's Rainbow many of the references simply went soaring over my head (like a rocket, right? huehuehue) simply because I have no frame of reference of 1940's European Wartime culture.

If you liked the way Wallace writes about issues central to post-millennial America, I would recommend Don DeLillo, another American author in the postmodern canon. Specifically, look for "White Noise" and "Cosmopolis". Definitely give Pynchon a shot, but look into a companion guide and also consider tackling a shorter work of his like Crying of Lot 49 or Slow Learner, a collection of his short fiction.

[Anonymous No.1934620]

If you loved IJ, you should definitely read Pynchon, because you obviously don't know what well-crafted text is, yet.

[Sunhawk !nZQ2xl.g.6 No.1934629]

GR and IJ are pretty different. I'd say IJ is better.

[Anonymous No.1934872]

Don DeLillo and William Gaddis are both also comparable to DFW in that same way. Not that I read such drivel.

[sandwiches No.1935204]

Go for it, OP. But Pynchon is a lot more like Joyce. Like others are saying, you would probably like DeLillo more. Check out Underworld and Mao II. White Noise is kind of...I couldn't finish it, I don't know anyone who has finished it.

tl;dr read Pynchon's V. and GR and/or DeLillo's Underworld and Mao II.

[Anonymous No.1935210]

>>1935204
What do you mean by Pynchon being similar to Joyce?

[Anonymous No.1935215]

>>1935210
troll'd softly

[sandwiches No.1935280]

>>1935210
>>1935210
I mean just that. He models himself after Joyce. He's the kind of writer who gets a lot of pleasure developing a strong cult following and keeping critics busy with his work, every novel Pynchon writes he spends a shit load of time working on it like he wants every novel of his the best thing (at least most ambitious) novel of the century. He's got a density like Joyce that will only start to be appreciated 50+ after his death. Joyce is notorious for referencing all sorts of different works and Pynchon is the same. Reading Pynchon and Joyce is like reading everything they have read.

I guess you could say the same for most post-modernist authors but it seems to me like Joyce and Melville are Pynchon's biggest heroes. Also, I was told that Gravity's Rainbow models itself, structurally, after Finnegans Wake. Something about circularity, but I can't say for sure because I have yet to tackle that beast.

[Anonymous No.1935282]

>>1935280

How does Inherent Vice fit into your theory?

[Anonymous No.1935289]

>>1935280

>Also, I was told that Gravity's Rainbow models itself, structurally, after Finnegans Wake. Something about circularity, but I can't say for sure because I have yet to tackle that beast.

The Wake is overtly circular, beginning with a sentence fragment that connects to a sentence fragment at the end. GR is less overt, but it's been argued that it's circular since it begins with a rocket explosion and ends with a rocket launch.

[sandwiches No.1935298]

>>1935282
>>1935282
It doesn't really. But it's really unlike anything he's written because it's so relatively tame. I read this one alleged encounter with Pynchon and the guy claimed that he met Pynchon while he was working on one of his massive novels (GR or after GR, working on M&D) and Pynchon told him that one day he'd start writing "normal books."

I think Pynchon had his fun writing gigantic ambitious novels and now he's doing something different. I've only read Inherent Vice once and I now I need to read it again but I'm not ready to write it off as Pynchon being simple, like some people write off Crying of Lot 49 as being Pynchon-lite. Quite frankly, I think Pynchon is far too intelligent (regardless of what you think of his writing abilities, the guy is fucking smart) to write something simplistic, I think he's just trying to write something different, reach a different audience maybe, or maybe he's just old and doesn't give a fuck and he'll smoke all the weed he wants and write about it too.

[sandwiches No.1935301]

>>1935298
con't...sort of

Part of what I like about Pynchon, even if I can admit to not liking or enjoying all his books, is that there is a pretty wide range of opinions on each of his books. You can find anyone who likes Pynchon but hates his novel ____ and you can find another person who thinks that novel is his very best. It's not as one-sided as just Gravity's Rainbow is his best, at least among his fans.

[Anonymous No.1935306]

>>1934574
>I've heard DFW and Pynchon were similar

>>1934629
>GR and IJ are pretty different. I'd say IJ is better.

>>1934872
>William Gaddis are both also comparable to DFW