[uhn-ree-duh-buh l]
1.
2.
not interesting to read; dull; tedious; an unreadable treatise.
3.
extraordinarily difficult to read or comprehend; obscure;incomprehensible:
an unreadable dream; an unreadable expression.
Readable books (which is the point of books) are not described as "not unreadable." Because that doesn't make any sense. For example, the following sentences are never said:
"No, the food at Arby's is not unedible, but the ingredients are unsummarizable."
"No, it was not unwatchable; I sat through all 110 minutes of 'United Passions'."
"No, the flight was not unsmooth; but our crash landing is unsummarizable as I have a head injury."
"No, he is not unattractive. The deformities and lesions on his face are, however, unsummarizable."
I don't really have much else to add about Gravity's Rainbow. After 112 days, it is finished.
Oh, by the way, the plot really is unsummarizable, hence I have not included a summary of it. I honestly have no idea what it was about.
This becomes the third book to take up last place in my rankings. The first being The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (as it was the first one I read), and Naked Lunch, which has held the title since December of 2010.
Next up is Vladimir Nabokov's second list book, Pale Fire.
That's a fairly accurate review.
ReplyDeleteIt's not that the plot is unsummarizable exactly, but rather not worth the effort of figuring out to summarize. There were some good ideas in there; it's a World War II fantasy involving advanced oddball research, propaganda meeting reality and the general craziness of the post war era. Some bits of the setup were clever, but then the story meanders and collapses. I gather that is one of Pynchon's strengths. He could take even the most straightforward story and turn it into a diffuse mess. Maybe they should have imposed a word limit and hired an editor, but then it wouldn't have been a Pynchon novel.