Help with Gravity's Rainbow

[u/ZAH215]

Hello All. To start off, I want to make clear that A. I am enjoying the novel and have no issue with generally working with it, B. I have an alright grasp of plot but I want a better one.

I'm currently at page 150 of this novel and my most reoccurring feeling is this in and outness of understanding what's happening and being lost in this dense mist of language and words. Is there any way in which this is supposed to be read or is it one of those "you just have to feeeeeeel it man" kinda books. I'm used to an overwhelming prose like with Faulkner, but with him the structure is (typically) more systematic, whereas this is very much... different. Anyone felt similar, any assistance to be given?

[u/MoMaike]

To get what you want from the novel, you’ll need to read it multiple times

[u/GazelleLongjumping67]

Read the whole thing and then read it again and again and again and you’ll get it. It’s a different book each time because there’s so much. Don’t take the shortcut

[u/bakingisscience]

This book makes you power through 5-10 pages of insanity just to have you go back and reread passages backwards and frontwards over and over again. Then you think maybe you figured something out and that moves you forward another few pages before you have to stop and analyze again. It’s taken me months to get to page 400 and I’m nowhere near done. It doesn’t get easier at all.

You can open up to any page, zero in on a phrase and spend the afternoon researching just that one idea. Endlessly fascinating and dense and complex, I’m having a frustratingly good time.

[u/No-Jello9276]

Read the exegesis of Thomas Pynchon on substack. It speaks deeper on the themes of the book. If you want more plot based then the links people shared in here are great

[u/Super_Direction498 → u/No-Jello9276]

Agree, great work that is definitely worth spending some time with.

[u/No-Jello9276 → u/Super_Direction498]

I need to go back and re read thru some of it bc even then there are so many themes that are layered and deep. The author who is active on here did an excellent job

[u/Romulan21]

The less you worry about plot and “what is happening” the easier it is. We are so trained to expect dramatic rules and narrative and story structure, but in this case, try experience it more as characters as representations of things - ideals, feelings, forces etc - within systems. It’s helpful to stop asking what is happening and instead ask who is narrating and what system are they in, or representing, or responding to. All of the above is an oversimplification but hopefully things that’ll help get you through a first read. Don’t worry about not “getting” everything, you most likely won’t on a single read. The title of the Talking Heads film comes mind a lot as a mantra - Stop Making Sense!

[u/MoochoMaas]

No Pynchon is meant to be completely understood by "mortal men". There are plenty of guides, with

A Gravity's Rainbow Companion: Sources and Contexts for Pynchon's Novel

by Steven Weisenburger 

Widely considered one of the best.

https://pynchonwiki.com/ - has info on each novel

[u/milk_maannn]

There’s a dude on YouTube that did chapter breakdown and historical analysis of V. Think he has one for Gravity’s Rainbow. Not only did that help with the things you have absolutely zero context for, it also just recaps and keeps things fresh in your mind. I’m sure that might help a little.

[u/ChOgles44 → u/milk_maannn]

Sauce?

[u/milk_maannn → u/ChOgles44]

John David Eibert channel. Pretty sure he might be a controversial figure in this sub but pretty cool and made my experience with V. a lot more enjoyable

[u/Temporary_Meet8754 → u/milk_maannn]

He's pretty great. The one thing I recall taking issue with was him saying that the bombing of Lubeck was just as bad as the Holocaust. Like I don't get why anyone would feel the need to make that comparison. Just a weird thing to say. There were around 300 casualties. I guess you could say that principally it's wrong to target civilians in war, but I'm sure there are better ways to say that.

[u/pfildozer12]

Currently reading GR for the fifth or sixth time since the late 1970s. I agree a lot of the complexity is front-loaded, and will / may figure later on in the story. Also, in Part 1 characters constantly being introduced and it's hard to keep track of them all.

Part 2 (I'm currently around page 490, having just disembarked from the Anubis) is not quite as packed with detail but is, let's call it discursive. We get detours and subplots to the extent that I'll forget we're still in a tunnel in Nordhausen, for example. And so I flip back to remind myself. It’s always a challenging read but always rewarding.

[u/crow1101_]

I first read the novel in 2021, and I remember the process being both amazing and hellish. Don't be afraid to look things up, for example there were a couple things in part 3 that I had to look up and went on full on deep dives down rabbit holes before returning to the novel.

[u/gravitysrainbow1979]

It’s feely sometimes but if you treat it as thinky it rewards that a little more.

[u/hmfynn]

There's two rules to fully enjoying Gravity's Rainbow.

a) Make peace with the fact that no matter how smart you are, you will probably miss over half the esoteric references. It's a book from 50 years ago referencing a period 30 years before the book came out. If you don't get something, changes are it's a line from a commercial that hasn't aired in almost a century.

b) Treat it like an 800-page prose poem and focus more on how the imagery and interactions and weird scenarios make you feel about the topic in broad strokes vs. what's literally "going on" because a lot of it's dream logic and (not to spoil anything) the book increasingly breaks down what a plot even is, on purpose.

[u/Slickrock_1 → u/hmfynn]

100%. All the arcane songs and chemistry and whatnot are the texture of the book, you don't need to digest every morsel of it any more than you need to look at every dot on a Seurat painting.

[u/Naked_Open_Mic]

"you just have to  feeeeeeel it  man"

bingo, bright eyes. 

I’ve read it quite a few times now and I’d pay good money to zap my brain and be where you are right now. Been chasing that dragon ever  since.

[u/ZAH215 → u/Naked_Open_Mic]

I feel like I'm missing so much with this approach though; or am I just trying too hard. Should I surrender myself?

[u/guy_incognito42069 → u/ZAH215]

I’ve read most of it blazed and it really helps the “feeling it thing”, also you’re welcome to find your own meaning in it, that’s what I’ve done.

[u/hmfynn → u/ZAH215]

Sometimes Pynchon doesn’t really signpost what’s actually happening and you have to just assume what the page says is what’s more or less going on. I remember a chapter where a guy takes drugs that slow down his brain so much it (apparently) literally slows down time around him and makes a missile headed for his sub overshoot its mark. I got hung up trying to figure out what he meant by that, but ultimately you just have to write it off as dream logic or something that would happen in a cartoon (LOTS of 40’s Looney Tunes / early comics references in this book).

[u/mentaldekay]

After starting several times over the last two decades (and getting only 100-odd pages in every time), I'm listening to the audio book. Cheating, perhaps, but it fills the doldrums of a 40 minute commute and one can only air drum so much instead of fully paying attention to the road in rush hour.

Funny thing having completed Moby Dick as my most recent driving diversion is that I feel like the authors' use of language seeps into my own linguistic phrasing.

I made it through Crying and V in the old manner. I think if I ever had the time to sit with the text of GR, I might be able to get through it without ADHD or life getting in the way.

Sadly, listening made the Kenosha Kid passage less memorable, less impactful.

[u/Emperor_Chaddeus]

I definitely sometimes get lost in the poetry of the language and just wander a long until the plot comes back...
I think the first 150 pages barely deal with the "plot" at all.

[u/MrsWof_]

If you're still in part 1 I would say just push through, part 2 is significantly easier to follow and stuff from part 1 gets cleared up over time somewhat. The difficulty is definitely front loaded for the most part (until the end).

[u/JudgeLionelNutmeg]

I’ve just finished rereading GR and what really helped me with understanding was the Slow Learners podcast. It’s two very entertaining guys discussing it in smallish sections plus interesting guests to expand on things.

[u/ed-biblioklept]

A suggestion: The first time you read it, use Michael Davitt Bell's summary overview for each section after you've read the section:

https://people.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/links/culture/rainbow.bell.html

This will help to keep a lot of the seemingly loose ends more contained.

I usually am not a proponent of reading with guides, but Weisenburger's is excellent. I read it the second time I read GR and I got so much more out of the book.

[u/PooperShooter612 → u/ed-biblioklept]

Ok

[u/Ok-Economist6914]

Being confused in the beginning is kind of the point. I believe this book is really meant to be read twice (at least.) I didn’t really get it until I was well into to part three, “the zone” and then I realized I needed to read it again. I’m on my second reading now and I’m almost at page 500 and it’s been way more enjoyable the second time around since I kinda know what I’m looking for and how Pynchon presents the story. So just keep pushing through or if you want consult one of the guides or many podcasts that are available if that’s your thing.

[u/RufflesTGP]

Part 1 is very much like that, you just have to push through! If you're enjoying it, even if you're a bit confused, you're right where you're meant to be

[u/guy_incognito42069]

I’ll read a chapter or section and if I’m lost I’ll look for clarification. Often those long wordy sections are straight up vibes. I know it’s annoying but so often the case. That said, once you hit part 2 the plot really starts to happen.

[u/SgtKabukiManNYPD]

I’ve read it twice Both times were different experiences
Both times I got the zap that one of the above commenters described
Next time I’ll read with one of the guides mentioned

[u/Dependent-Camel6165]

During my read (just finished this novel a few days ago), I reviewed "A Gravity's Rainbow Companion" and Michael Davitt Bell's summary as I finished each episode (careful not to read too much about Part 4 as to avoid spoilers of the ending). One of the most amazing books I've ever encountered. The prose was very engaging and did remind me of Faulkner at times, but the style of presentation was indeed very different. If I didn't understand a passage, I would review the guides mentioned above, and reread if needed. Each Part is different in tone, the first part can be dense indeed. The prose presents all kinds of texture that etches into the mind.

[u/CaptFun67 → u/Dependent-Camel6165]

Is it possible to spoil the ending? I've read it twice and still don't know what happened

[u/Dependent-Camel6165 → u/CaptFun67]

Very good question. I wasn't sure if there was an ending in a conventional sense, but just to make sure I was cautious when using a guide :) In the end, the ending was more than I imagined. More mind blowing that I thought.

[u/hmfynn]

The Pynchon in Public podcast was a great read along, but it shut down in the middle of V. The Gravity’s Rainbow ones might be available online somewhere, I hope they’ve been preserved.