A Satirical Reality: The Crying of Lot 49, Chapter Three

Since the beginning of the chapter, one could notice the importance of Tristero in The Courier’s Tragedy because of the foreshadowing of events Pynchon used. The first paragraph of chapter Three started talking about the play, an event that would unfold much later. “Things then did not delay in turning curious. If one object behind her discovery of what she was to label the Tristero System or often only The Tristero…” (p. 31). This peculiar character was also mentioned right before the play began, even though he would come to appear at the very last line of the tragedy. “So began, for Oedipa, the languid, sinister blooming of The Tristero. Or rather, her attendance at some unique performance, prolonged as if it were the last of the night…” (pgs. 39-40). Naturally, the reader became curious about the play and conscious that it concealed some sort of significance. Its plot resembled the reality of the characters in The Crying of Lot 49 not only in the bone digging system, but also in the Thurn and Taxis’ monopoly of the mail conspiracy. Both of these events were notable in the play as well as in chapter Three, in Mike Fallopian’s Peter Pinguid Society and in Manny di Presso’s sue against Pierce Inveraity. Pynchon may be suggesting that we are all actors in a play, omitting the Stoic belief in the presence of a superior force and suggesting that life is a cycle. Events repeat themselves, giving time a circular, non-linear pattern.

“Dear Mike, it said, how are you? Just thought I’d drop you a note. How’s your book coming? Guess that’s all for now. See you at the Scope.” (p. 39). The Peter Pinguid Society’s mail delivering system is so ineffective that its members are forced to send weekly letters to prevent the organization from collapsing. The majority of these letters are irrelevant and useless. In fact, I believe that Peter Pinguid Society members waste more money sustaining their mail delivery system and sending worthless weekly letters than if they were to use the U.S. Postal Service periodically. This reminds me of the character of Julia in the book 1984. Many times individuals disagree with an idea but are unable to eliminate or replace it. So, their only remedy is to satisfy themselves by breaking the rules even though they know that losses will be their only accomplishment, like Julia’s capture in 1984. Human nature is not based on achieving supremacy over others, but in relieving one’s self from what you think is incorrect.

The Crying of Lot 49 seems fictional at first because of its satirical tone and comic plot; however, it manages to portray, as mentioned in the previous paragraph, the reality and behavior of the human race. Maybe the ridiculous, sarcastic mood of the novel is used by Pynchon to highlight the queer, often absurd character of individuals today. The bone affair Inverarity was involved in seemed humorous at the beginning. I mean, who would ever think of digging and selling a massive quantity of human bones? As the case advanced, the reader noticed that human vices, such as corruption and robbery, began taking hold of the situation. “‘No bribes, no freeways,’…” (p. 46). Many people today are involved in fraudulent businesses where bribes and money take the lead role to dominate the affair. By merging this reality with the satirical, humorous tone of the novel, Pynchon manages to portray the ridiculousness of human vices and the way that they undermine the seriousness of our civilization. Does this have anything to do with the WASTE acronym Oedipa found on the bathroom door? Is the author of the novel trying to suggest that humanity is a waste, an annoyance, a plague?

In all the utopia/dystopia novels we have read thus far, literature was suppressed in an attempt to restrain individuality and freedom of thought; hence, nobody knew who Shakespeare was. On the contrary, literature and freedom of expression are permanently present in The Crying of Lot 49. This is the reason why Oedipa’s ignorance of Shakespeare seemed so weird. “‘Who was he?’ she said. ‘Who was Shakespeare. It was a long time ago.’” (p. 60). Why does Pynchon undermine the importance of the greatest playwright in history? What effect is he trying to create on the reader?


Vocabulary:

Proselytize: convert or attempt to convert someone from religion, belief, or opinion to another.

Reconnoiter: make a military observation of a region.

Poignant: evoking a keen sense of sadness or regret.

Indite: write, compose.

Ancillary: providing necessary support to the primary activities or operation of an organization, institution, or system, such as ancillary services.

Strafe: attack repeatedly with bombs or machine-gun fire from low-flying aircraft.

Interim: the intervening time; meanwhile. Example: In the interim I’ll keep my fingers crossed.