Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Gravity's Rainbow (rewrite)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Guildensternenstein 04:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Looks like it should go in the unbook section. Were you forced to study this work for an exam ? --Romartus 13:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually it shouldn't go in the UnBooks section because it's an article about the book, not like a condensed version of the book or a "book" spoofing the actual book or anything like that. And no, quite the opposite. Gravity's Rainbow is actually my all-time favorite book. I wrote this article because there wasn't an existing one on the subject. I don't have a problem poking fun at things that I actually *like* haha. The Pynchon fan who reviewed the first version of this article thought the same way.
--Guildensternenstein 17:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Please note that I have never read this book, but I am familiar with Thomas Pynchon.
|Humour:||6||One-trick pony. Constant references to coitus do not a humourous article make. By the time I reached the character section I was well and truly tired of reading about which characters were fucking each other. Unfortunately the emphasis on sex means that the other characteristics of Pynchon's writing are mostly ignored: dense, meandering, dead-end storylines; ludicrous characters; random poetic licence with historical events... Let's face it: Pynchon is ridiculous, and the problem is that this article only exploits one facet of his madness.|
|Concept:||5||The problem with making fun of one of Thomas Pynchon's existing works is that it is impossible to make the article more ridiculous than the novel itself. Also, this article does not endear itself to the casual reader at all. Lots of people have picked up a Pynchon, but most haven't been able to get all the way through. I have read Against The Day, so I have some conception of what you are talking about.
In my opinion, you and TPLN should collaborate on an UnBook about Thomas Pynchon's lost works, full of silly one-shot paragraphs that reflect the collected insanity of a Pynchon novel. This would allow you to replicate the style, lambast the books, and not be cramped by an existing work.
|Prose and formatting:||9||It's not a 10 because you misspelt the word "Dutch". 10s are pretty rare from me, though, and I've already given you two today.|
|Images:||7||Adequate, the V-2 is the best image. It needs, dare I say it, more cowbell.|
|Miscellaneous:||6||Dense, confusing, fucking. At least it's authentic.|
|Final Score:||33||You've got a Pynchon inside you, but it's not this one.|
|Reviewer:||IronLung 03:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)|