>Many reviewers of Bleeding Edge have been disappointed with its apparent superficiality, reading it as a sort of, to use Michiko Kakutani’s notorious, if in some ways apt, phrase, “Pynchon Lite.”
>However, this is a plain misreading of this strand of Pynchon’s work. The lack of redemptive language, this apparent hollowness, this total saturation in the cheapest and most superficial elements of our culture is very much the point; these are novels that make no attempt to transcend the culture out of which they emerge, instead attempting to articulate forms of resistance to it that emerge from within, and it is in this light that Bleeding Edge should be read. If it is Pynchon Lite, it is so because it is part of the world in which ‘Lite’ products exist and thrive. And to attempt to avoid that unpalatable truth through recourse to high culture forms or discourses, Pynchon implies, would be at the very least dishonest. As March Kelleher, in many ways the conscience of the novel claims, “‘Culture, I’m sorry, Herman Göring was right, every time you hear the word check your sidearm. Culture attracts the worse impulses of the moneyed, it has no honor, it begs to be suburbanized and corrupted’”
>[...]
>It is this possibility of resisting the forces of oppression – be they technological, conceptual, or governmental – that lies at the heart of Pynchon’s writing, and in Bleeding Edge, perhaps more than in any of his previous novels, he explores what resistance from the compromised position of a participant in the total system of modern cultural, political and social life might look like. This is to say that there is no, or at least very little, possibility of stepping outside the system, no external vantage point from which to observe, critique and potentially attack the agents of social, cultural, and political debasement; we are so thoroughly interpolated into the world as it is that escape from it would be escape from ourselves.
>[...]
>Given the failure of the adult world in Bleeding Edge to challenge or resist oppression (or even to grow up in ways that would allow them to do so) this gesture towards the potential of children to resist the system from within, to manipulate an all-encompassing and seemingly irresistible version of reality in ways that undermine its hegemonic pretensions is precisely what Pynchon’s novel itself offers in its turning back of the debased language of consumer culture on itself. There is no position, Pynchon’s most recent work tells us, outside of society from which we can resist its pressures and allures. Instead, it is only from within the system that resistance is possible. Like Maxine’s therapist Shawn, the apparently inauthentic, plastic, and shallow can – must, in fact – be the very point from which truth emerges.
What do you think?
Fuck you and your zany meme author
>>7382832
Kill yourself. Holy fuck this board is irritating at times.
>>7382841
Not as irritating as the millionth meme thread on this bucktoothed faggot. Fuck off and read someone else already Jesus christ
Can't be bothered to spin up a customized expression of how this particular bit of litcrit is bullshit but Bleeding Edge is Pynchon being genuine
No source?
>>7382866
I've read him, he's wacky ironic pomo trash
>>7382871
Nice opinion. What does this have to do with the thread topic though? If you think Bleeding Edge is shit, please explain why.
>Thomas Memechon
>on /lit/
I heard you guys were snobby or somethin
>>7382871
Go make a thread pertaining to your interests and stop behaving like a faggot in the threads that don't.
>>7382890
Even in excerpt form, this is the most repetitive thing I've read all year.
Can someone explain to me what the fuck DeepArcher was supposed to be
>>7382948
No idea, sometimes looked like a Second Life- type sim, other times I understood it was just a fancy portal to deep web shit.
>>7382948
Po-mo version of the internet
>>7382948
get a load of this surface web pleb
>>7382825
WTF was the WTF?
Bichiko Kakutani definitely does not know.
>>7383091
Are there a lot of cool literature sites on the deep web?
>>7382866
Fuck this annoys me. Almost everyone here has read or attempted to read Pynchon. His fucking epubs are scattered everywhere. I read Bleeding Edge and it was the most mediocre novel I read that year, it was shitty shitty shit. This would be fine if every 10th fucking thread wasnt dedicated to >>7382853 "that bucktoothed faggot" and DFW, when no one can discuss underworld or roths works besides portnoys complaint or faulkner or any given years man booker prize winners because it isnt part of some shitty self fulfilling meme. Joyce and Pynchon and Stirner and to a lesser extent McCarthy, everyone just spews it because they are so enmeshed in group think that no one can think outside the box. And when contemporary lit comes around they go ooohhh its shitty new books are shit but all you motherfuckers can do is drone about v2s and footnotes. And this guy, he fucking thinks its "annoying when people who havent read him lambaste him". Well guess what, every fucking thread about 20th century fiction has him inserted into it somehow, and its fucking garbage. Bleeding Edge was a shit book about a shitty bitch and shitty 9/11 and shitty private schools in nyc, and just because pynchon shat it out for a paycheck does not mean its good or high literature.
>>7383096
There's evidence Thomas Pynchon and J.D. Salinger are the same person and are a rogue CIA agent on the deep web.
But you didn't hear that from me.
>>7383134
WTF!
>>7383139
Its just a high fiber poo anon. Dont you eat oats?I wiped my ass with the page in Mason Dixon where the dog first appears, it seemed appropriate since Pynchon also seemed to take a huge dump on that page as well.
>>7383134
I think you should read Pynchon man, haha who cares about the africa booker prize are you a faggot, read Pynchon!
>>7383134
Make some threads of your own, you whiny little cunt.
>>7383163
I'll start with V. like everyone says! Except I'm going to wrap its pages around my gfs vibrator and consume it anally as it deserves.
>>7383167
Confirmed for not being in with the Pynch movement, everyone knows that Lot 49 first is the canon way of entering the Tommy reality.
>>7383161
No, I mean, the Wahhabi-Trans-religious Friendship.
Did you even read Bleeding Edge?
>>7383166
He probably does you're just mad someone called you out on being a faggot poser who thinks he's living the literary life because you read gravity's rainbow in public. Fuck off, I've seen maybe 2 posts total that actually have something insightful to say about le wacky rocket man novel and the rest was retarded meme'ing. Stupid cunt doesn't even know what he's fucking reading
>>7383180
Yeah my favorite part was when she immediately knew bernie madoff was a ponzi scheme, and the awkward unsexy sex scenes, and the adventures in underground bases in long island. I especially liked when I was done because I didnt have to read it anymore.
>>7383192
Make some threads of your own, you whiny little cunt.
>>7383134
Fucking leave, retard. You're mentally disabled if you think Pynchon is bad, especially if you've only read Bleeding Edge.
>>7383234
Fuck your shitty meme hugbox, we're here to discuss literature. Go back to reading 1984 and pretending you're well-read faggot
>>7383205
>What can you guys tell me about Gaddis?
>0 replies
>What can you guys tell me about postmodernism?
>0 replies
>What can you guys tell me about philosophy of music?
>0 replies
Kill yourself
>>7383250
Gaddis is Pynchon.
You'd know that if you read any of their work.
>>7383250
>we're here to discuss literature
Apparently not, sperglord. Try reading before you post here.
>>7383262
You mean Pynchon is Gaddis. The sailor is the one who wrote all of those novels.
>>7383273
willing to bet fucking money you're reading brave new world right now or some equally pleb shit
>>7383288
Willing to bet money that you've never read anything by your own accord. Project more, you adult loser.
P.S I'm reading The Recognitions.
So much jealousy going ITT, someone is really mad nobody cares about his meme authors and their meme books.
Interesting take. So the hacker twins are the potential source for redemption, even if Maxine isn't? Makes sense with how their plot ended.
I like this interpretation even if I think it's overreading a "fun" novel in a way that attempts to explain why it's so fun (why do we need that explained?). It's an underrated novel for sure.
>>7382948
This guy >>7382982 is about right, it's basically Pynchon riffing on Gibson and Stephenson by making his "Deep Web" internet something totally goofy and already existing - i.e. Second Life.
>>7383234
>if he doesn't like Pynchon he must never have read Pynchon.
>>7383709
I mean...yeah.
>>7383262
>Everyone recommending you to start with V
>Not realizing that recognitions was his first novel.
>>7383292
>Gaddis is slowly becoming our next meme author.
>>7383763
who's this succulous succubus?
>>7383763
I am completely okay with this. There will, of course, be contrarians who rip on him because of it, though.
>>7383709
p much desu senpai
>>7383991
>more difficult to read than either Joyce or Pynchon
>>7382859
Yeah, me too. This is really the cultural argument du jour. David Fincher says as much in the extras of the social network DVD.
I just don't buy it.
>I was only pretending to be retarded!
So in other words, he is a backpedaling 4chan shitposter?
>>7383991
He's not as difficult as Joyce, but, yeah, he is harder than Pynchon. And I feel that your definition of "rewarding" is not the same as everyone else's.
>>7383134
>discuss underworld
>UNDERWORLD
holy shit kill yourself, bleeding edge has far more worth than that piece of shit.
>>7382871
This is how I can always tell when someone's a mindless DFWdrone crusading against this perceived ironist.
Pynchon makes verrrrry little use of irony, and nothing he writes carries an ironic message.
>>7384724
you're a fucking moron
Underworld is a ambitious and mostly successful modern classic and a great author's magnum opus
bleeding edge is a potboiler cooked up in a few months for fun
not even pynchon would agree with you, mong
>>7385066
delillo is awful and has no subtlety
>>7385077
let me guess, you're an expert because you read white noise and mao ii
>>7385019
I love his writing, but whenever I see that photo I feel like I should slap Borges' shit s hard
>>7385077
delillo is much better than pynchon
not that it's saying much
>>7385077
Subtlety is good, especially when you beat them over the head with it.
>>7385019
>if you're not for my meme author you must be a mindless fanboy of another meme author
Kill yourself m8
It's just a book, for fuck's sake. Admitted, Pynchon is the best goddamn American author alive, but Bleeding Edge is just pure fun, m8.
I created this thread https://warosu.org/lit/thread/7375892 that got no attention and it's relevant here.
>>7386009
>just pure fun
What does that mean?
>>7386019
Myth moving to the cyberspace? That's interesting and you might be on to something but I doubt the basement horror bit has anything to do with this...
>>7386091
The basement creature is very clearly an inner surface person. That's the only part of my post that gets past speculation. Understand that as well being literary, a lot of Pynchon is just puzzle games. If you want to tie the inner surface person into the proposed theme in the OP, focus on Maxine's reaction; this is the first element of what lies 'outside' that she's met, so is she right to be afraid, or is the horror all in the threat of being released from her cage?
>still reading white males
This board is disgusting, do you guys even know what year it is?
>>7386019
there's also the inner earth gnomes in against the day
pretty blatantly actually. that whole book feels like a blur to me, but they might even stop at an inner earth port for a while
>>7386446
The calendar year
>>7383134
Ironically, this proves OP's point. We only created a counterculture to the mainstream literature scene in the same way as /pol/'s stuck in a legacy(or anti-legacy) of 50s middle America.
>he explores what resistance from the compromised position of a participant in the total system of modern cultural, political and social life might look like
So Bleeding Edge is Pynchon's take on how the whole subsumes the parts. 4chan's suburbanization is in the same vein desu senpai
>>7383134
I agree with this post. 90% of Pynchon discussion is braindead as hell anyway.
>>7386019
I don't think this is a very good reading of either Bleeding Edge or Mason & Dixon. In the context of Bleeding Edge the kid in the basement is clearly one of the CIA's charges. I don't have the book on me so I can't dig up the exact passage that discusses them, but this review agrees: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/fictionreviews/10304078/Bleeding-Edge-by-Thomas-Pynchon-review.html ("exploring underground bunkers that may or may not shelter gangs of time-travelling brainwashed assassin children.")
The gnomes in Mason & Dixon serve a very different purpose. The book is about the partitioning of science from myth, and the mythological narrative worlds that "died" to an Enlightenment scientific drive. (If we prove the world isn't hollow, then the gnomes can't live there, so they're gone.) Very different from BE thematically.
But hey, making dubious connections is pretty Pynchonian, so good on ya for that.
>>7385077
you shill this in every thread but you've never made a critique of substance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4hAh_gXEW4 2edgy
>>7382841
>>7382866
>>7383163
>>7383180
>>7383262
>>7383273
>>7383288
>You didnt like Bleeding Edge, Dont like the thread, think Pynchon is overrated, dont like Pynchon, and think my analysis is shit
>Hence, you have never read pynchon.
as >>7383134 says, almost everyone here has read some or part of a pynchon book. Its nothing impressive and its nothing to be proud of, and making 10 threads a day about it does not make you more esoteric or erudite.
>>7387271
Yes it does
I feel it all the time
>>7386508
Dude, follow the linked thread in the linked thread: I quote the passage there directly. The creature is not human, and it meets the description of the gnomes, and apparently >>7386450 these gnomes are recurring. All of what you're saying is obvious, but you're categorically misunderstanding postmodernism: none of that stops it being real, and as Pynchon's novels definitely do have some canonic interrelation, you're going to need to ignore the random critic's thought and accept that there is magic in Pynchon and that it is partly fantasy writing. What's going on is probably not that the time travellers are children, but that being strange little gnome people, wherever in the book someone mentions children, they were relaying a mistaken impression. Also - please stop talking as though there's an absolute authority on these things, and especially as though you're it; we all have undergrad degrees; we all know how to analyse. I'm just trying to do the puzzles over here, while you're trying to do something completely else, but also are trying to tell me the puzzles don't exist. You're caught in some kind of frame. Try and reflect on that and come back.
>>7389123
you're also categorically misunderstanding postmodernism if you're thinking about it in terms of "being real"
>>7389123
Your theory is shit
>>7389167
Your argument is shit
>you're also categorically misunderstanding postmodernism if you're thinking about it in terms of "being real"
Pynchon's novels have very identifiable levels of reality or 'realness.' Just because your pigeonhole category has definitional reservations with a sense of 'realness' doesn't mean Pynchon does to the same extent because he's sometimes given that label.
>>7389260
>Pynchon's novels have very identifiable levels of reality or 'realness.'
Look! Someone who's not afraid to show they've no idea what they're talking about!
>>7389266
Do you have a proper response?
>>7389303
obviously the postmodernist and demistructuralist appropriation of metanarratives in gravity's rainbow and mason and dixon reflect a postcolonial subjugation of epistemological issues of "reality" that spring from the question of "how can we be sure of anytihng in a post-colonial capitalism where our own consumption and surplus value IS the genius malignus? where white privilege DOES alter the fabric of reality?" allegorized in gravity's rainbow by the anti-war movement's absorption into the cybernetic system of closed loop meta-violence.
>>7389167
I thought about putting that in scare quotes, then thought, No, that would be condescending; only an idiot would (however wilfully) fail to understand my meaning or appreciate the extra two or so sentences I'd need to cover every appropriate qualification. Listen: We've all got undergrad degrees. We've all written essays on Molloy. Calm down and try to engage at eye-level.
>>7389318
This is honestly quite sad.
What does this screed here actually counterargue? Nothing. I take the impression you've come in with something (fairly trite) in mind to post and are ready to sneer at anyone who wasn't saying exactly the one thing you wanted to say - because this is completely irrelevant to what anybody's been arguing, even to how Pynchon engages with the real and with simulacra and with so on.
>>7389260
>Pynchon's novels have very identifiable levels of reality or 'realness.'
That's a horrible way to put whatever you might've been trying to say when there are whole chapters in (probably all of) his books dedicated to blurring the lines, for reader and analyst both.
>>7389123
>>7389322
Who the hell is this that keeps humble-swinging their undergrad degree? Think it's such a good line you can use it twice? Care to think again?
Also: if you're going to get this offended whenever people disagree with your dumb theories, you're not cut out for the dumb theory game.
>>7389421
>Pynchon's novels have very identifiable levels of reality or 'realness.'
We all have undergrads in shitposting buddy. Just because the lines of reality are blurred for us doesn't mean they don't in some way exist, if only to the characters. Sure large chunks of Gravity's Rainbow are hallucination, others seem entirely nondiagetic and there are those leaps outside of the narrative world. But to claim the stories have no anchoring in any sort of reality is stupid. If you were to ask Slothrop, he's know what's real and what's not. (Bad example actually, ask Tantivy) The gnomes in Mason and Dixon as the other poster was I think saying, may be used for the purpose of some kind of metanarrative or criticism but that doesn't mean they are any less real to the characters. Sure the characters don't exist so you can argue the differentiation is pointless, but the gnomes are still engaged by the characters and that's an identifiable level of 'realness'. There is a consistent link through what the reader accepts as the book's 'reality' and the gnomes, ergo, to whatever degree they can be, they are 'real'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nlE71wvWm8
Pynchon is going to be suburbanized like everything else.
>>7390265
>choosing the chili peppers instead of the beach boys to make a song about Pynchon
