Gravity's Rainbow and Wizard of Oz

I have read Gravity’s Rainbow once, and I am now reading it a second time. To me the book is highly underrated. What interests me, is how Pynchon refers to the Wizard of Oz in the third part: ""Toto, I fear, we're not in Kansas anymore ... " Does anyone else see a similar pattern of Slothrop and Dorothy? Both protagonists seem to be walking in a world in which they don't have a place (anymore). Dorothy is looking for a way back home, and Slothrop is looking for... a way out? How would you see this resemblance? And does anybody else see other resemblances? Like characters which look like characters in the Wizard of Oz? Or certain events on his path which feel like the Wizard of Oz?

One thing. Since when is Gravity's Rainbow underrated?

I was reading this post first:

http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=43223

And I am from Belgium, and around here Pynchon is not well known.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis

One thing. Since when is Gravity's Rainbow underrated?

---

My thoughts entirely on seeing the OP...

Maybe I shouldn't talk, because I started Rainbow but never got very far, but I think what fa means is that GR doesn't get the kind of respect and reverence that a work like Ulysses, say, gets. I don't know if GR is so obvious a work of genius as Ulysses. In other words, how many graduate theses are written on GR vs. Ulysses? ;-)

As for the similarity between GR and the Wiz, being lost and searching for home is one of the great basic archetypal themes in story-telling, from the original Ulysses up through Alice In Wonderland, Heinlein, and Kerouac. It's perfect for an author who wants to write observational fiction.

Thanks dr, that's exactly what I meant. Around here, everybody agrees that Ulysses is a classic and a masterpiece, but when mentioning GR, only the English lit students seem to have heard about the novel.

But on topic: The topic is about GR and the Wizard of Oz, not whether GR is underrated, that was only an introductory sentence. Pynchon himself seems to have incorporated 4 direct references to the Wizard of Oz, but are there also hidden references, as I don't remember the story of the Wizard of Oz in detail anymore.

I would say that, while GR isn't critically underrated, it is a pretty frequent punching bag for literary types (e.g. "I love Ulysses but Gravity's Rainbow is pulpy, drug-induced, bloated nonsense"). I don't particularly get the backlash, or why some aren't willing to put the effort into reading it that they would other classics, but to each their own.

I haven't seen The Wizard of Oz since I was a kid, but that's a really interesting comparison. It's certainly playful-- "We're not in Kansas anymore" has become a sort of American pop-culture touchstone, and to use it right before the characters head into the heart of the German war zone is definitely apt. In the latter half of the book, the tone becomes ever more colorful with the cartoonish/superhero plot lines all jumbling together. And I could be getting this wrong about Oz because it's been so long, but the image of a vast, powerful, and omniscient ruler revealed as an illusion made by a small old man manipulating machinery rings true with the world of GR-- a panoptic society where the shadowy "they" are always watching your every move, but the true villains are revealed to be comically inept or deluded people caught in sinister web. Boy, that sounds heady. It really is a fun read.

I've always been intrigued by the King Kong epigraph, spoken to Fay Wray, at the beginning of the second part: "You will have the tallest, darkest leading man in Hollywood." Definitely funny, but not sure what it has to do with anything. Still, it's not as though Pynchon ever shied away from throwing in a joke for the hell of it.

@Rootinghog: Not but after reading papers about GR, I have the feeling that America considers GR as the greatest book since Ulysses, whereas in Belgium there is only a non-compulsory course in Antwerp about it. I found it a bit hard to follow in the beginning, but I suggest that everybody should read the novel twice. First read it and only look at Slothrop's story, and then read it a second time and read it very detailed. You will see so much more when you first get the bigger picture, and then read the details, which are often references or jokes you don't get if you don't get the big picture.

As far as your Oz comparison reaches, it is a very interesting one. I was comparing characters from Oz to the one in GR, but your point of view is also very interesting. Especially the ruler manipulating the machinery! As far as I remember there is a powerful wizard from the North who tells Dorothy he will get her back home as soon as he frees the East(?) from the evil witch, but eventually turns out to be a person from the real world flying a balloon (also in GR).

What do you think of the characters? I was looking for a lion (someone who lacks courage), a tin man (someone who lacks emotions) and a scarecrow (missing a brain). To me at some point or another Slothrop himself represents them, but are there also other characters who can fill in the part? And what about the evil characters? There are two witches: East and West. Dorothy kills the first one when she lands her house right on top of the witch. Who represents the good wizard and who represents the evil witches with the flying monkees who at the end gets killed by water which causes her to melt?

The King Kong is also interesting in the story, there are actually more references to King Kong and American movies in general made in the novel.

@Rootinghog

In the latter half of the book, the tone becomes ever more colorful with the cartoonish/superhero plot lines all jumbling together.

I was reading the story but I wasn't able to find specific examples of differences between the first part and the last parts. Could you give some examples?

And I was wondering, since there are so many novels on this topic, whether there is a general name for these kind of novels? Novels like Ulysses, Alice in Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, can't simply be put in the great genre of fiction, can it? And the description "looking for a way back home after being lost" doesn't really sound nice does it ;-)

I read maybe the first three hundred or so pages of Gravity's Rainbow and I stopped. I didn't enjoy it. I like Pynchon and I loved Inherent Vice. I thought that was a very clever book.

I have already found numerous similarities after rereading both novels. I feel that love, courage and intelligence are very important in Gravity's Rainbow. In the Wizard of Oz, the characters Scarecrow, Lion and Tinman all seem to miss these. In GR I can see a similar pattern, with Katje as an intelligence agent, Slothrop as the courageous one as Rocketman and heart in Slothrop leaving the novel, as saying goodbye to the game.

Another similarity I am looking at, is how the three exterminations in GR can be found in The Wizard of Oz. First and throughout the novel, the Euro- American slaughter of the misnamed American Indians; second, the Dutch extermination of the dodos on Mauritius in the seventeenth century; third, the genocidal war fought by the Germans in response to the Herero uprising of 1904.

To me Slothrop seems to meet two groups of people. He meets the Good witch in Europe, and the Wicked Witch of the West and the Wizard of Oz in Africa. So in a way, the Wicked Witch of the West reappears as a representation of a Euro-American slaughter. The Wicked Witch of the East, as she is dead before Dorothy can meet her, could be represented by the exterminations of the dodos in the seventeenth century, as both took place before both Dorothy or Slothrop could witness them.

But I am not certain about the dodos and about the Herero uprising. Anyone else have a thought on this one?

And what do you think of the role Toto is playing? I was thinking that Toto in GR is represented by the "brain in his pants", but is this too strange? I found it funny as everybody says that Slothrop is travelling alone, but actually is guided by his erections just like Dorothy is running after Toto all of the time. Could anyone think of concrete situations which make my suggestion less ridiculous?

Gravity's Rainbow is in the same neighborhood as Infinite Jest. It has high ratings from most critics, but far from the mainstream.

As a cruel irony, the arguably best writers are too complex for serious commerical success.