49 & Watts

In the late ’60’s, Pynchon had two works published, The Crying of Lot 49 and Journey Into the Mind of Watts. The two works very different from each other. But both arguing. And I think they are arguing much of the same argument: Communication failure.

Pynchon goes about this argument in two different ways.

In Lot 49, he makes this argument of communication error by emotion; using false clues, frustrating situations, blending the meaningless with the meaningful, to play with the readers emotion.

He also uses argument by logic, or maybe I should say illogic. Pynchon shows countless communication failures that lead to chaos and infinite nothing. All of it proving irrational, illogical.

In Mind of Watts, the argument leans towards, as Aristotle might say, ethos. The stories and issues Pynchon writes of make the reader asses his or her character. How do I feel about this morally? What are my values in regard to this? Do I even care about this?

One strategy makes the reader feel a certain way, changes their mood. The other causes the reader to step back and evaluate their own character. I think both strategies are smart rhetorical moves. They make the reader react.