[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 820 KB, 2598x3907, pic0504-pynchon002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3636528 No.3636528 [Reply] [Original]

I sincerly believe this man is a pedophile

Why the fuck does he include pedophilia multiple times in all of his books?

Bianca?

What the fuck?

>> No.3636546

In postermodernism pedophillia is just a social construct.

>> No.3636549

>>3636528
He does look like a pedo.

>> No.3636554
File: 56 KB, 402x402, Isaac-Asimov-9190737-1-402[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3636554

>I sincerly believe this man is a robot

>Why the fuck does he include robots multiple times in all of his books?

>> No.3636560
File: 12 KB, 220x280, skring.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3636560

>I sincerly believe this man is a writer

>Why the fuck does he include writers multiple times in all of his books?

>> No.3636566
File: 206 KB, 284x409, salad.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3636566

sincerely hamster

why?

>> No.3636577

>>3636566
Go to bed, Tao.

>> No.3636595

>>3636577
tao who?

>> No.3636603

>>3636595
the tao that can be named is not the true tao

>> No.3637947

>>3636554
>burroughs writes about gays
>burroughs isn't gay

>de sade writes about perversion
>de sade is not perverted

>> No.3637949

>>3637947
might want to check your facts on sade

>> No.3637953

>>3637949
He was a pedo, engaged in sexual violence and homosexuality. That's more than enough to be considered a deviant in his time.

>> No.3637961

>implying you didn't get a boner from Bianca, and also that girl in the African section of V

>> No.3637976

>>3637953
he killed a couple hookers too.

>> No.3637979

>>3637947

Burroughs liked it in the crapper. Prove me wrong.

>> No.3637983
File: 33 KB, 500x425, Tom_Clancy[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3637983

I sincerly believe this man is a president

Why the fuck does he include presidents multiple times in all of his books?

Jack Ryan?

What the fuck?

>> No.3637985

>>3637949
>>3637979

The point of >>3637947 was to provide countexamples to >>3636554 where anon notes that if an author writes about a subject, he is not necessarily a participant in the subject. Burroughs was gay and De sade a pervert naturally. Why can't Pynchon be a pedo or interested in pedophilia if he writes about it so much.

>> No.3637989

List of famous authors who are confirmed pedophiles:

Flaubert
Lewis Carroll
Nabokov
Sade
Pynchon

Any more?

>> No.3637995

Oh, and if you're going to say Muhammad, the Holy Quran was in fact revealed to him by Allah, so technically he is not an author

>> No.3637998

>>3637989
I wonder if there are more gay, or more pedo authors.

How old was the kid Wilde was sleeping with?

>> No.3637999

>>3637998
Well, literally all authors are gay, so unless they're all pedos too, the gays win

>> No.3638000

>>3637989
All of the ancient greek philosophers.

>> No.3638003

All authors were gay, but all of their books were actually written by their wives, who were also gay

>> No.3638007

>>3638003
I'm pretty sure that all of the readers of their books were also gay.

>> No.3638008

>>3636528
>Why the fuck does he include pedophilia multiple times in all of his books?
To be edgy. Modernist[1] writing is celebrated by academia purely on the grounds of how edgy and contrarian it is.

If Pynchon didn't have pedo- and copro-philia in his novels, they'd be languishing in the sci-fi section, with gaudy pictures of starships on the covers.

[1] As well as those who, like Pynchon, market their modernist writing as 'po-mo'.

>> No.3638011

>>3638007
Not necessarily, but it's true that there are a lot more gay readers than straight.

>> No.3638013

>>3638008
A soiled mind languishes inside your skull, friend.

>> No.3638021

>>3638013
Stunning retort, dude. Always makes me glad when people respond on-topic and without using grade-school logical fallacies.

>> No.3638023

>>3638021
I am also glad that that guy did what you just described, which is what he literally did.

>> No.3638025

>>3638013
To be fair, most entries in the western canon were outrageous in their time. The fact they touched on sensitive issues of the era made them important. Pynchons pedoness may be an attempt to imitate this.

>> No.3638026

>>3638011
citation needed

>> No.3638028

>>3638026
The fact that homos tend to have higher IQs is proof enough, I think

>> No.3638033

>>3638021
You're assuming that Pynchon's writing is insincere and forced, not to mention of low quality ("they'd be languishing in the sci-fi section, with gaudy pictures of starships on the covers.")
If you think that's what Pynchon is, maybe you had better read some Pynchon before subjecting the rest of us to your ignorant opinion on him.
You imply that he's using postmodernism as a gimmick to sell more copies or receive more accolades, instead of a distinctive style unique to his writing, the evolution of which can be traced in order of his published books. Just because something is unusual doesn't mean someone's trying hard to make it unusual. Sometimes people - get this! - actually are unusual! Pynchon is a rare breed because he was not only a fucking hippie, but he is also incredibly smart. If he's going to write about a guy retreating into a toilet's pipes to save his harmonica, I'm going to accept that as the product of an already unusually creative mind warped further by extensive drug use, not some tryhard crap.

Fuck you, Holden.

>> No.3638037
File: 474 KB, 127x139, 1364902107231.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3638037

>>3638028

Homos do not have higher IQs. It is just that not having the pressure of hetero life allows them more time to flex their intellectual muscles.

>> No.3638041

>>3638033
This post was OK until the shitty insult at the end. Disregarded.

>> No.3638045

>>3638037
Interesting point of view. I guess men and women just plain don't belong together. Oh well.

>> No.3638049

>>3638028
5/10. Believably stupid.

>> No.3638051

>>3638033
>if he's creative he can't also be a tryhard

>> No.3638052

I never understood the 'tryhard' insult. What, exactly, is wrong with Trying Hard? Surely it's better than trying not at all.

>> No.3638054

>>3638051
>he's creative and I don't get it therefore he is a tryhard
I'm going to bed.

>> No.3638060

>>3638052
think of it in the context of trying to fit in or impress people.

>> No.3638062

>>3638060
so it has no relevance to literature, because even the most socially reatarded aspie knows the book nerd writer type people are all introverted weirdos and that writing books to fit in or impress makes no sense whatsoever

>> No.3638067

On the topic of pedophilia, can someone recommend me some good pedo books? Lolita wasn't nearly erotic enough.

>> No.3638068

>>3638062
>writing books to impress makes no sense whatsoever

Some writers achieve eternal fame. Some writers try too hard for this greatness, and it comes out in their writing. That's tryhard.

>> No.3638071

>>3638068
But the point isn't that they're trying hard, but rather that they're bad at writing. Plenty of the greatest writers tried very hard, perhaps harder than most so-called tryhards, and then succeeded

>> No.3638074

>>3638071
Yeah, it has the connotation of bad writing.

>> No.3638075

>>3638045

Kiss me you fool

>> No.3638077

>>3638074
In fact, I'd say that most of those you'd probably call tryhards, weren't actually trying that hard, but were really just shitting out a bunch of crapola that they though was neat or deep-sounding, and then trying to call it literature

>> No.3638082

>>3638077
Nah, shit writers can work very hard on their shit.

>> No.3638088

>>3638082
I guess you're right, if Tolkien is any indication

>> No.3638160

>>3638033
>You're assuming that Pynchon's writing is insincere and forced,
Nope, I'm assuming that academic literature types are insincere and forced. Pynchon is providing fanservice to the insincere and forced people. Can't say I blame him, everybody gotta hustle.
>not to mention of low quality ("they'd be languishing in the sci-fi section, with gaudy pictures of starships on the covers.")
No, I'm suggesting that people who design covers and stock bookstore shelves are stupid and low-quality, not Pynchon's writing.

Also, I should report your post for underage. This board is off-limits to precocious high-school students.

>> No.3638161

>>3638160
Actually Pynchon is doing fanservice for math, science, history and Star Trek nerds more than anything

>> No.3638169

>>3638160
>Nope, I'm assuming that academic literature types are insincere and forced. Pynchon is providing fanservice to the insincere and forced people. Can't say I blame him, everybody gotta hustle.
>providing fanservice

I like this. Finnegan's Wake was fanservice for academics. Panty shots for old jaded men.

>> No.3638173

>>3638169
It's also fanservice for fans of beautiful language

>> No.3638176

>>3638161
>Actually Pynchon is doing fanservice for math, science, history and Star Trek nerds more than anything
That too. But the forced and disgusting sex acts are the secret sauce that made Pynchon into a celebrated high-brow author.

The guys who do fanservice for math, science and Star Trek, and don't include a pinch of pedorape and shit-eating, end up on the shelf where Dan Abnett is exiled, not in a college syllabus.

>> No.3638185

>>3638176
I don't think that's true. You're gonna have to give me a bunch more examples than just Pynchon for me to believe there's such a trend

>> No.3638193

Well Nabokov was his teacher.

>> No.3638414

Well, Pynchon was fucking and living with a 17 yr old while he was writing Gravity's Rainbow.

I'm pretty sure she said she was the inspiration for Bianca.

Also, the house they lived in while he was writing is basically Doc's house in Inherent Vice.

>> No.3638423
File: 6 KB, 185x273, rand.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3638423

I sincerly believe this woman is a bitch
Why the fuck does she act like a bitch multiple times in all of her books?
Objectivism?
What the fuck?

>> No.3638428

>>3638176
So by your logic I'm willing to bet that half the content on literotica is "tryhard" and insincere by your standards.
Of course, you're the only one whose writing is genuine and doesn't try too hard to be unique or eternal =).

>> No.3638447

Guys, my stubble has become overgrown and it's taken on a kind of soft down-like texture, and it's making me nauseous to know that it's there, and my impulse is to touch it, as though that would make me less nauseous, but I then do touch it and it makes me feel even more nauseous; it's really quite disgusting. I think about going and shaving, though, but it's midnight and I think, even, that if I shaved it I would feel even more nauseous though in a more soul-centric kind of way, and less in a way that I could point to and say, There, that.

>> No.3638449

>>3636528
Yes, probably. Chill out about it.

>> No.3638566

>>3638176
Wait, Pynchon is in college syllabus in America?

>> No.3638581

>>3638566
He is in Australia.

>> No.3638635

So, all I am getting between shitflinging in this thread is that this guy writes sci-fi with pedophelia mixed in.

These are a few of my favorite things. Sign me up.

>> No.3638675

>>3638447
Oh man. Is that what stubble is like? I'm fucking 19 and haven't had to shave yet. If it sucks so bad, man, I just don't know...
I always loved the thought of stubble, cause it would make me look more mature and gritty, but man,.. if it's that dirty.
I don't think I want stubble any more.

>> No.3638680
File: 201 KB, 904x474, Bueno.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3638680

>>3638045
Its not that. Consider the following:

You are a bright young scientist/playwright/author. You work hard at your craft but never quite make it. Eventually you get gf and move in together. For most of time, she wouldnt have a job, you would be providing for her, and even in modern times you are likely to spend a lot of money on her. Eventually you have kids, extra mouths to feed.

What all this amounts to is, more money needed. Are you going to screw around with your poorly paying job as a writer or a researcher when you have kids to feed? You are going to have less and less time for your passion as you have to dedicate more and more time to supporting them.

Compare this to a homosexual couple. Until very, very recently, they were completely unable to have kids. You have two adult men, both have high paying jobs, neither is dependent on the other. All that excess income allows you to work less, or perhaps work more at a low paying job as an actor or artist or scientist ect.

Gay people just have more time to devote to things normalfags would consider a waste of time.

>> No.3638711

>>3638566
I've seen a Yale lecture of The Crying of Lot 49

>> No.3638715

>>3638635
it's actually not sci-fi at all, he just (in gravity's rainbow's case) talks about rocket engineering and includes literal calculus equations in the book, as well as a bunch of sex scenes including fucking a twelve year old on an orgy yacht

>> No.3638746

>>3638715
Well you almost had me disuaded but those last 9 words sucked me right back in.

>> No.3638749

>>3638447
I know that feel. Shave anyway, it will be great. Take your time. Have a drink in the meanwhile. Listen to classical music. Provided you shave wet with a blade and not with some strange contraption.

>> No.3638772

>>3637989
Flaubert? Nabokov? I've never heard of anything relating to pedophilia about Flaubert. And Nabokov got angry that people were reading Lolita as a kind of pedo-erotica. It isn't; not even close.

>> No.3638784

>>3638772
>And Nabokov got angry that people were reading Lolita as a kind of pedo-erotica. It isn't; not even close
Yeah? Then maybe, just maybe, he shouldn't have written a book explicitly marketed at the sorts of people who will inevitably read it as edgy pedo-erotica! Nabokov is a two faced fucktard.

>> No.3638804

>>3638772
It kind of is

>> No.3638812

>>3638784
He had nothing to do with the marketing. That was taken out of his hands. It was, in fact, something that he complained loudly about.

Again, I'm not sure how anybody could possibly read that book as being "erotic" or "pornographic" as some early critics dismissed it as. It's nothing like it. It just seems that people—then and now—can't be bothered to actually read the book beyond what they think it's about. If anything, the book is a pretty scathing critique of what Nabokov regarded as the state of American culture at the time: the allure of the "young" nation marred by its tendency to cheapness and junk.

But, whatever, man.

>> No.3638849

>>3638784
Lolita is hardly erotica. the only actual sex scene was written so obliquely that I almost missed it during my first reading

>> No.3638857

>>3638772
>And Nabokov got angry that people were reading Lolita as a kind of pedo-erotica. It isn't; not even close
>for tobacco use only

>> No.3638861

>>3638772
>And Nabokov got angry that people were reading Lolita as a kind of pedo-erotica. It isn't; not even close.

You do realise that Nabby wrote more than just Lolita, right? At least six of his novels revolve around an old man (usually of foreign origin, and with a similar resemblance to himself) who has a strong sexual desire for 12yo girls.

>> No.3639038

Stop ignoring my post!

Pynchon WAS FUCKING A 17 YR OLD WHILE WRITING GR!

Watch the shitty documentary Journey Into the Mind of P. They interview his ex-gf who admits she was 17 and she goes to their house which is exactly like the setting for Inherent Vice.

Pynchy-kun confirmed for statutory rapist. Jackson, if you're lurking, your pops is sick and twisted.

>> No.3639182

>>3639038
But, GR was released when Pynchon was 36. V. was released when he was 26.

>> No.3639269

Bianca was actually sixteen.

>> No.3639668

>>3639269
no where in the book does it say she was 16
she was 12 you dingus

>> No.3639887
File: 1.04 MB, 290x189, 1364314455564.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3639887

>mfw it's literally high school english class in here talking about nabokov as pedo cuz lolita

you guys realize the narrator in lolita says he hates and thus fucks with psychoanalysts in the very beginning of the book, right?

nabokov hated psychoanalysis too. he was paranoid they would psychoanalyze his butterfly hunting interests as his sublimation of his pedophilia. so to beat them to it, he wrote a book about pedophilia that, when psychoanalyzed is actually about sublimated butterfly hunting.


pynchon however, though he did take classes from nabokov, probably didn't realize this. pynchon writing was more influenced by burroughs probably. his pedophilia has to do with vying against his puritan background: making everything holy profane.

>> No.3640811

>>3639887
See:
>>3638861

Write about what you know and all that.