I'm currently reading Vineland by Thomas Pynchon. It's my first Pynchon novel and I was excited to read what's the big deal with him. My first impressions, from the 150 or so pages I've read on it: The novel is witty. I personally don't find it funny, but it tries to be funny and does so well enough for me to find the humour witty. I can't help but feel that Pynchon is mocking his readers. The characters make references to pop culture of the times (A Character whistles a tune from the Flintstones, for example), but does so in what I think is a purely superficial way, as if to say: "If you understand this reference, there's a problem here". I'm not sure if that was his intention, but I get that impression. The characters act in a manner often reminiscint of Kafka's characters (At least I get a kind of feel of similarity between the character) at times, and at times it seems he's trying to mock us for our narcissism, trying to knock us down a peg through having our characters act serious about absurd things, like how the main character tries to jump off (fake) windows every so often in order to keep his government checks coming in, and all of his friends know this and don't discourage him or comment on it in any deeper manner (From what I've read so far in the book). It reminds me a lot of Catch-22, except there's no Yossarian, or if there is, he's as crazy as the rest. But hell, Wikipedia pretty much has it down better than I could ever describe it: That's what to expect in Vineland. I might want to note that the television addict thing is meant to be literally addicted to television like someone is addicted to meth. Alternatively, I just finished going through EVERYTHING by William Gibson and I could say if you like cyberpunk or even awesome fiction that deals with technology, political intrigue, espionage, conspiracies and so on in an intelligent manner, you should give him a try. Wikipedia has it righter than I could ever say again: And somewhere, I made a post detailing my top five favorite books, which were Don Quixote, Ulysses, Faust, The Castle and Plato's Symposium. I would recommend those to anyone looking for something that is worth a reading that will engage them in some way.In addition, the novel is replete with female ninjas, astrologers, marijuana smokers, television addicts, musical interludes (including the theme song of The Smurfs) and, naturally, metaphors drawn from Star Trek.
Leonard's review called Idoru a "return to form" for Gibson, while critic Steven Poole asserted that All Tomorrow's Parties marked his development from "science-fiction hotshot to wry sociologist of the near future."
Definitely sounds interesting. I can definitely see it being something awesome of way over my head - Catch-22 felt that way, but it could have been my age when I read it, back when I was in high school. I don't think I've read anything that would be qualified as cyberpunk, but enjoy the elements mentioned and intelligent manners, so I'll have to look into it. I've never tried Don Quixote, but I'm familiar with the story from The Man of La Mancha, so it's been on my radar before. A little random, but "quixotic" has to be one of my favorite words, for its uniqueness, its pronunciation, and its derivation.
If you do read Gibson, let me give you a fair warning: the most popular work of his, Neuromancer, reads like a steep cliff. I read it, went through about 10 pages of it, put it down and didn't pick it up for four years. I then read Idoru and enjoyed that so much that I read Neuromancer and then everything else he ever wrote. This video also helped: http://youtu.be/kWeWBnRwjnw Although I hate the guy presenting it.
Most Pynchon is hard going (a nice exception is the short, accessible, and terrific "Crying of Lot 49". I liked "Vineland" okay, and I like "V" more, but it was mostly over my head. "Gravity's Rainbow" has some great moments, but few and far between. It's overrated, in my opinion - probably because, again, I didn't 'get' most of it.