RATE: characters/plot/style/ideas in novels & plays

vershy versh

Well-known member
From what I've read so far of gravity's rainbow it's ideas, style, characters, plot, isn't it?

Yeah, definitely. The characters become stronger in the later novels. It was something that really bothered him about the early ones and which he worked on. He talks about it in the introduction to Slow Learner, the short story collection published in the 80s.
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
I am warming to slothrop more as it goes on, and there are some really interesting characters, but they are kind of swamped by all the ideas and descriptive style. I'm just assuming no cohesive plot as such is ever gonna emerge, and is sort of the point (entropy and all that)
 

vershy versh

Well-known member
I am warming to slothrop more as it goes on, and there are some really interesting characters, but they are kind of swamped by all the ideas and descriptive style. I'm just assuming no cohesive plot as such is ever gonna emerge, and is sort of the point (entropy and all that)

How far through are you?
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
I might be wrong, but I get the feeling the plot won't ever fully resolve and will only get more entangled and confusing.
 

vershy versh

Well-known member
Supposedly he was so stoned he didn't remember writing some of it, but dunno how true that is as it was relayed by a school friend whose wife ran off with Pynchon. There may have been an axe to grind.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sus

vershy versh

Well-known member
One of my favourite early bits is when the Nazis contact the ghost of Rathenau and he starts lecturing them about control and fossil fuels.
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
One of my favourite early bits is when the Nazis contact the ghost of Rathenau and he starts lecturing them about control and fossil fuels.
Yeah that was good but I had to go back over it cos I didn't have a clue what was going on at first.

Best bits so far for me are the opening section, the bits with Katje (Blicero! Fucking hell) and all the shady goings on in the white visitation and the casino in France, Slothrops paranoia ramping up. Getting really good now he's in Europe.

The sweets episode was absolutely appalling, what was he thinking?!
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
In general he just rambles on far too much though, which is annoying because the good bits are some of the best things I've ever read, but they just get diluted.
 

kid charlemagne

Well-known member
in theory i feel like i would put plot first because there are particular genres i love more than others, but often times when i mention something and im asked "whats it about?", i almost struggle to give a decent pitch or synopsis on what the story is because thats not always the main "why" in why i like or recommend it.... in bible study i was telling a while back i was telling someone about gravitys rainbow and thomas pynchon and i was saying that i am more invigored by how the book is written more than the fine "plot" print itself, and the guy said wow ive never heard someone describe reading like that
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
Everyone will put plot at the bottom of the list, I'm sure of it.

Shakespeare couldn't care less about plots, he just used to nick them off someone else.
 

Murphy

cat malogen
8 mins of lunch break left. Probably wrong for not going at it from the right angle - different works illuminate more brightly from different ratios of each quality, starting with ideas. No ideas, no work

In Parenthesis for a fusion for all redeeming qualities, even if it’s occasionally an awkward, angular, twitchy obstacle course of scraggy, barbed, blocky phrasing. Nothing else like it. Not even Come And See/Idi I Smotri in film which is searing, timeless and equally merciless. Both smash every aspect listed. More of this consideration is my own bias pertinent to Jones who pulls so many references in, the horror becomes both universal to us and for the author‘s psyche changed utterly and nailed forever in this time of conflict

Maybe it’s a British reader’s bias. IP has more trace echoes of familiarity, like an old 78rpm your grandparents might’ve had with its hollowed out crackly patina-rich tinny sound, before an excruciating escalation to the front and the main ridge assault. No other work has filled my inner vision with such sensory detail and dread, populating it with all too human figures who move on, always on as ordered, as casualties before hijacking it further with a mix of drill sergeant, primal hunter/killer, meditative regimental clergy and transcendent goddess of fecundity

Come And See shatters so many differentiated qualities you’d associate with the tagged o.p guides but compare the endings to IP in conveying war. Both capture ghostly attributes of survival and unimaginable mass slaughter at a scale we’ve collectively forgotten. Both go beyond qualitative descriptors and ask - would you rather be spared from either of these journeys, or see death as the inevitable contagion nothing living can avoid in such labyrinthine conditions of chance?

As for the Queen of the Woods, She remains a lone literary figure whose rites brought a tear to my eye re-reading through with a more mature mind in summertime’s heat. Re-read that passage multiple times. Searing, IP’s trauma is ingrained on every page. Every blistered foot. The Queen is as redolent as a second moon. Elemental. Super Nature personified. Maybe even an archaic place/function deity reawakened by the violent onslaught (the morrigan?) who eventually embraces so many of the characters. Add an earlier epic speech from Dai Longcoat whose fate might be the most individualistically monstrous of all and a myriad of trench life details. Was he saved?

Relentless. You can see why Jones subsequently took to tactile works in calm isolated settings, carving materials and epigraphic details by shifting the intuitive guide from eye/hand/killing tool to eye/ hand/tool

Parajanov = style. He has it all. I try not to watch too often. A rare convergence of mesmerism. Kusturica clearly influenced but not even close (imho) and he can be hoot if you don’t take him too seriously eg Time of the Gypsies, Underground. Tarkovsky is maybe finest for quite hard to define ideas which are allowed to gestate in grace and evolve in undefinable ways. How do you describe his films without shitting on them with hindering prose? You don’t, you watch and thank the gods the gulags never came calling

Melville, pap genius with genius casting. Delon, Montand, Volonte! Fuck alarm again. A few examples how all the listed traits click from one pov ..
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
8 mins of lunch break left. Probably wrong for not going at it from the right angle - different works illuminate more brightly from different ratios of each quality, starting with ideas. No ideas, no work

In Parenthesis for a fusion for all redeeming qualities, even if it’s occasionally an awkward, angular, twitchy obstacle course of scraggy, barbed, blocky phrasing. Nothing else like it. Not even Come And See/Idi I Smotri in film which is searing, timeless and equally merciless. Both smash every aspect listed. More of this consideration is my own bias pertinent to Jones who pulls so many references in, the horror becomes both universal to us and for the author‘s psyche changed utterly and nailed forever in this time of conflict

Maybe it’s a British reader’s bias. IP has more trace echoes of familiarity, like an old 78rpm your grandparents might’ve had with its hollowed out crackly patina-rich tinny sound, before an excruciating escalation to the front and the main ridge assault. No other work has filled my inner vision with such sensory detail and dread, populating it with all too human figures who move on, always on as ordered, as casualties before hijacking it further with a mix of drill sergeant, primal hunter/killer, meditative regimental clergy and transcendent goddess of fecundity

Come And See shatters so many differentiated qualities you’d associate with the tagged o.p guides but compare the endings to IP in conveying war. Both capture ghostly attributes of survival and unimaginable mass slaughter at a scale we’ve collectively forgotten. Both go beyond qualitative descriptors and ask - would you rather be spared from either of these journeys, or see death as the inevitable contagion nothing living can avoid in such labyrinthine conditions of chance?

As for the Queen of the Woods, She remains a lone literary figure whose rites brought a tear to my eye re-reading through with a more mature mind in summertime’s heat. Re-read that passage multiple times. Searing, IP’s trauma is ingrained on every page. Every blistered foot. The Queen is as redolent as a second moon. Elemental. Super Nature personified. Maybe even an archaic place/function deity reawakened by the violent onslaught (the morrigan?) who eventually embraces so many of the characters. Add an earlier epic speech from Dai Longcoat whose fate might be the most individualistically monstrous of all and a myriad of trench life details. Was he saved?

Relentless. You can see why Jones subsequently took to tactile works in calm isolated settings, carving materials and epigraphic details by shifting the intuitive guide from eye/hand/killing tool to eye/ hand/tool

Parajanov = style. He has it all. I try not to watch too often. A rare convergence of mesmerism. Kusturica clearly influenced but not even close (imho) and he can be hoot if you don’t take him too seriously eg Time of the Gypsies, Underground. Tarkovsky is maybe finest for quite hard to define ideas which are allowed to gestate in grace and evolve in undefinable ways. How do you describe his films without shitting on them with hindering prose? You don’t, you watch and thank the gods the gulags never came calling

Melville, pap genius with genius casting. Delon, Montand, Volonte! Fuck alarm again. A few examples how all the listed traits click from one pov ..
You wrote all that in 8 minutes on your lunch break? o_O
 
Top