Gravity’s Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon Audiobook

This post has 9 comments with rating of 5/59

• 
  Don Kingsley
  April 7th, 2015
  

  “Long-Winded Drivel”
  Thanks to the miracle of audiobooks (because I have more time to “read” via this method and retain things better through sound for some reason, I was able to give this book my full attention and conquer the literary milestone that people seem to think it is. All my life I’ve heard the same things about this book. I’ve heard that hardly anyone finishes it, and those who do seldom understand it. But I’ve also heard that for those who do understand it, it’s one of the greatest books ever written.

  That’s high praise. And from where I’m sitting, sorry to say it… it’s also an over-saturated load of bull butter.

  I’ve read some bad books in my time. We all have. In my experience, Gravity’s Rainbow is one of the worst reads I’ve ever encountered. I have found zero redeeming qualities in it. None. Zip. Zilch.

  I realize this book has a lot of defenders, and I trust this review will be taken with the understanding that my disdain for this work has nothing to do with attacking those who enjoyed it. If you enjoyed it, great. Glad you did. Clearly, you were the target audience, and I’m sorry that this review might hurt your sensibilities. Not sure why you’re still reading what I have to say about it, but that’s on you, just as it’s on me that I actually bothered to finish Gravity’s Rainbow. That said, I am inspired to a level of anger requires an exorcism and/or should have me channeling the powers of the Dark Side like a master. And so, like the author himself, I write this rant of a review because I felt obliged to word vomit about it. The difference, of course, is that I freely admit I’m not literary, I don’t try to be, and I can make my point in considerably less time. You’re welcome.

  I own up to my biases. I am not that “literary minded” as I’ve said, although I have read Chaucer, Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, and Homer for fun, mixed in with all of the other stuff I enjoy. I also have very little tolerance for the drug culture of the 1970s, from whence this rodent killer of a tome was spawned. It comes down to a matter of taste. I found this book had none, nor was it to mine. I’d find more ready appreciation in a Leonardo or a Monet than in a Pollack. I have a lot better things to do with my time than looking at a canvas spraypainted via firehose or maps drawn by kids with crayons. Give me Beethoven, not the Bee Gees. At the same, though, I did go into this with the idea that there are exceptions to everything, and if so many praise its literary qualities, there had to be something to it. I honestly looked forward to the discovery of what that might be. Having made it to the end and found nothing, I not only feel cheated, I actually feel violated because I’m this angry about it.

  Most tell me that if I don’t like the book, it’s because I don’t understand it. To be honest, it’s just not that difficult to figure out. I’ve encountered and appreciated many “difficult” books before, and I’ve typically come away the better for the experience. That’s not the issue I found here. Instead, I found it to have all of the depth of MAD Magazine, with about the same maturity level, but without the inability to land on a punchline, meaningful or otherwise. I’ve read Choose Your Own Adventure stories with more plot than this. The overall message of the book is a good one: “make love, not war.” Sadly, even that basic positive got pulled down to the level of randy farm animals to the point where anything resembling humanity was lost. I’m certain that was the point too. I’m supposed to applaud this? I got the impression Pynchon thinks he deserves a standing ovation. I object to any writer on moral grounds that says fighting is bad and yet forces the reader to resist epic levels of “HULK SMASH!” urges for the duration of the read.

  The writing style is my largest gripe. People have described it as “crystalline prose,” whatever that means. It tries way too hard to impress the idea upon you that it’s raw, visceral, and somehow “artsy” without being artsy. Whatever tone he was trying to achieve, I grant that he achieved it, which is quite a feat considering he did it by using the largest amount of semi-coherent babble I’ve ever ever seen at one time. The readability of this had all of the appeal of watching somebody shave an animal, remove the top layer of its skin, and then feed that skin back to the animal. No, I don’t have personal experience with anything like that, but I can imagine quite a bit without the use of drugs that the author clearly needed to achieve the same effect. And it wasn’t so much what Pynchon wrote that made me feel the way I do about it. Instead it was more the way he wrote it that caused that reaction. So if that’s your benchmark of literary, ok, point Pynchon. He got a bona fide reaction out of me. Good job in making the reader want to turn away from the work in disgust.

  The rest of my issues stem simply from a lack of characters that I cared about or wanted to, and a lack of anything resembling an actual plot beyond the general need of the characters to want to screw everything. It takes absolutely zero talent for anyone to take drugs and get this kind of effect. It boggles the mind that when somebody acts on their visions and writes something down, the “literati” out there prop up both author and book like a pagan idol or a new prophecy or whatever. All it proved to me is that the author was driven to write. There’s a fine line between genius and madness, and he crossed it long before the end of his first paragraph. Still, I can’t tell anyone not to read it. Everyone makes their own call in that regard. I simply offer my own counterpoint to the choir of would-be angels circling Pynchon’s throne in endless hallelujah. I’ll be kneeling in reverence over at the altar of Tolkien, if it’s all the same. As long-winded as he could be, he at least got to the point and presented it with some manner of coherence. And what do you know… it’s the SAME POINT, that war is bad. Tolkien created multiple languages and dialects for his masterpiece. Pynchon spent 1000 pages mangling only one.

  Bottom line: I found this book to be pretentious in the extreme and insulting to the very core of my being. I managed to finish it only because I had an audiobook that could force some kind of forward momentum that the author certainly didn’t provide, and I willed myself to do so only because apparently the ending was supposed to make me change my mind and help me to see how brilliant this work is. Calling this literature is like calling FOX News “fair and balanced.” At least I can get back my Audible credit and trade it in on something that won’t potentially cause an aneurysm. I prefer my reading to be enlightening, educational, entertaining, relaxing, or some combination of any of these factors. This was none of the above. Almost anything would be an improvement over this lamentable mess. Almost.

  More worthy tomes await. I feel better now. I’m done with one.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  MGFMSKM
  April 7th, 2015
  

  I just thought I’d dash off a quick note of response to ‘Don Kingsley’ -

  Gravity’s Rainbow is my favourite novel, but I can’t imagine it coming off in audiobook format. I would *strongly* recommend that a) Pynchon first-timers start somewhere else, and b) they go with him on paper.

  One of the joys of Pynchon’s novels is the recurring, complex and interwoven patterns. He writes books rich in symbolism, satire and cultural parody. His uses of vulgar jokes and toilet humour are intentional - trying to undermine quasi-arbitrary and traditional concepts of ‘high’ and ‘low’ culture is a crucial part of Pynchon’s writing. Moreover, if you are looking for a novel about characters that you want to form an attachment with and understand their inner lives, this is not the book for you. Pynchon deals much with ideas, ideologies and the uncertainties of reality, but few of his books are driven by the thoughts of his characters. Similarly, if the narrative feels meandering, confused, inexact, aimless and inconclusive - yet again - this is part of the novel’s point. More than just playing with the narrative expectations of fiction, it is worth pointing out that life is often meandering, confused, inexact, aimless and inconclusive.

  While I will not patronise Don Kingsley so far as to say that they did not ‘understand’ the book, I will say that they clearly wanted and/or expected it to be something that it very obviously is not and was never intended to be. A few minutes (half an hour, max) reading about *why* the book is considered difficult, why it is so polarising and what the main features of Pynchon’s fictions are would have made all of this very clear. Nothing I have read above is a secret, and almost all of it is virtually taken for granted in any writing about Gravity’s Rainbow.

  So, I’ll still be giving this audiobook a shot as I quite fancy re-reading it and don’t have the time to go through it on paper for the foreseeable future, but I strongly - *strongly* - recommend that people unfamiliar with Gravity’s Rainbow - and especially people unfamiliar with Pynchon in general - have think about whether this is the sort of book they want to read and think they’ll enjoy. Moreover, I *strongly* recommend they start with Pynchon in print.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  ssitimefill
  April 8th, 2015
  

  I agree that there are some books, fiction and non-fiction that just seem to work better in print compared to audio format. From my minimal experience with Pynchon I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Gravity’s Rainbow would be a good example of a book of this type.

  A few years ago I tried listening to/reading Inherent Vice. I put in the effort but I had a-lot of trouble getting into and enjoying the novel. For some of the reasons you indicate, I probably would have had an easier time if I had read a physical copy instead of listening to audiobook version.

  Yet I also think that there are some people that will almost always get a better reading experience of almost -any- book when read in audiobook compared to print format. This includes but is not limited to people with ADHD, Dyslexia, vision problems, people who like to do most of their reading while exercising, and also people who are just very accustomed to doing most of their reading via audiobook. So maybe Gravity’s Rainbow will be preferentially read in print for 90% of people, or something like that, but I think it is likely that there is 10% who will have a richer experience with an audiobook.

  As for the general literary quality of Gravity’s Rainbow and other works by Thomas Pynchon, I don’t have a personal opinion on that. Whatever might be wrong with it, Gravity’s Rainbow is serious literature, so I wanted to upload it.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  Michael D. Mullins
  April 8th, 2015
  

  To Don Kingsley: I must disagree. The novel’s reputation of greatness is fully deserved. As to people not finishing, that is a result of not knowing how to approach the book. The (very western) need to understand ever thought is misplaced here. “Gravity’s Rainbow” proceeds as a dream, and the flow of imagery and the very gripping, exciting story are where readers should hang their hats.

  And as to audio not being the best way to take in the book: This also is misguided. Truly, any way you get through the book the first time is ideal. But maybe this book as much as any other deserves repeat performances.

  And Guidall is the dream narrator. Perhaps Phil Gigante would be even better. Either way, it doesn’t get much better than this.

  Please give the book a try, in whatever form you can. Allow the dream state to take hold. Resist the urge excessive intellectualization. There is, of course, plenty for the intellectual here, but left- and right-brain are equally balanced. Ingesting this with your whole being and your mind wide open is your best chance get it.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  KenoshaKid
  April 11th, 2015
  

  Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon is probably my favourite novel of all time. Against The Day is also pretty amazing. These two books were written 40 years after Gravity’s Rainbow, and I think he is a far better author at that point. I admit to having started & quit on Gravity’s Rainbow a few times.
  Do give Mason & Dixon or Against The Day a try, all the hyperbole about how great Pynchon is does have some basis.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  Roger Mexico
  April 11th, 2015
  

  Gravity’s Rainbow ranks amongst the greatest English language novels of the last century, in its conceptual complexity and stylistic innovation in genuinely expanded the scope of what a novel could do. However, its true that it doesn’t lend itself to this format: Pynchon’s syntax is labyrinthine and must be read careful to extract its full meaning. Nevertheless, given that all but the most dedicated of readers will likely find themselves flagging at points, an audiobook comes in handy. Treat it as an aid, rather than alternative, to reading the text.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  2 cents
  April 17th, 2015
  

  I just want to add my two cents to anyone approaching this novel. I haven’t read it yet, I honestly didn’t even intend to read it I just wandered across it searching the new torrents. So I’m not here to defend the book, as I have not read it, and though it’s on my list, it’s very low on my list. Still, criticizing the book for being something it isn’t meant to be, as MGFMSKM said, is something that is a bit of a pet peeve of mine when it comes to books and other media. I never read anything about a book specifically before I read it. However, I do take time to read up on the author, on the literary category or movement, and generally familiarize myself with the context that surrounds a book and its reputation. I mean, I’ve already heard everything there is to hear about how Ulysses is a difficult novel. I know very little to nothing about that book’s contents, as I haven’t read it either. But I do know that it is supposed to be a “difficult” book, that it was written with that intention. And I’m a firm believer that not every book, or every movie, or every video game, should be made to appeal to a general audience. Niches are perfectly fine. After all, we don’t criticize a comedy because there weren’t enough jump scares. So why should we criticize a work of literary fiction because it didn’t have likable characters? It isn’t meant to do that!

  Some books, though this is very rare, aren’t even meant to entertain at all, but instead, the pleasure is derived from the intellectual exercise of working through the book and grappling with the ideas and experiments the author does with the work. It’s interesting because, people play games like Dark Souls or Bloodborne right. Idk if any of you guys are gamers but, Dark Souls has the reputation for being an extremely difficult game. Like, a game that will make you want to tear your hair out. I have played that game. That game is not fun. At all. The enjoyment comes, not from playing the game, but from feeling as if you have mastered it. It comes from challenging yourself. Why can’t literature attempt to do the same thing? No one plays Dark Souls and complains that it isn’t easy enough for the non-hardcore gamer. That isn’t the point. You play a game like that to challenge yourself, and maybe you read a novel like Ulysses or Gravity’s Rainbow, for much the same reason.

  That’s not to say there isn’t a pleasure in reading the experimental work of fiction. The pleasure is derived from the ideas, concepts, use of language, and the appreciation of the complexity and the sheer artistic achievement, among other things. You appreciate and admire the work of fiction, as much as, if at times even more than you enjoy it. It’s like looking at one of the wonders of the world. You are amazed that a human being created that thing. You just appreciate that it exists and that some human out there took the time and effort to try something that had truly never been done before. To push fiction as far as it could go.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  100ironwolves
  January 22nd, 2022
  

  

  Pretty good audio book, not half as boring as the first gasbag reviewer’s novel above, don kimpsley. Spoiler alert: My eyes glazed over after his third paragraph, skipped to the end, and learned after don finishes listening to the audiobook, the cheapskate actually exchanges it for audible credit. Go figure.

  Can’t vouch for the quality of this download, but I borrowed the discs from the library. A decent narration. Not always dramatized to it’s fullest, but always clear and allows space to imagine better ways it might be read. Give it a shot.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
• 
  Dinhead
  March 19th, 2023
  

  Could someone seed? + didn’t read neckbeard “reviews” above, thanks.

  Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon

Add a comment