Negative Positive
Title: Learned and well-intentioned, but lacking greatness
Review: As a fan of Pynchon's previous^M books such as GRAVITY'sRAINBOW, I was disappointed in this book. I saw no need for thearchaistic language, with the capitalization of every noun--why strive for this sort of "accuracy" when on the other hand you have such obviously parodic, postmodern devices such as the narrator being called Wicks Cherrycoke and George Washington speaking in Yiddish? There is an inconsistency here which suggests that Pynchon, once so footlose in the Sixties and Seventies, has become dutiful and academic, wanting to do the "rifght thing." Pynchon's speculations about surveying and the relationship between " the Line" and Enlgihtenment scientific mastery are interesting, but more in a "learned" way than in a way that would appeal to your typical reader of fiction. Pynchon is as good a writer as any alive today, but this book, though obviously well-researched and admirably serious, lacks greatness.
Is the review positive or negative? 