Pynchon's View of the 1960s Counterculture

Word Count: 824

The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon, is strange upon first reading. At first glance, Pynchon seems to have a fairly pessimistic view of human nature. The world seems to be fairly bleak and protagonist Oedipa Maas consistently wonders whether or not the Tristero system has been some elaborate joke played on her by her deceased ex-boyfriend. This strange theory is normalized by Oedipa to the extent that it almost seems as though Pynchon’s novel exists in a world that is a step away from our own, perhaps an extended model of the future as Pynchon saw it in the mid 1960s, the time period in which the novel was published.

Pynchon often seems to be making fun of the culture of the 1960s in the novel, such as with the music group the Paranoids. They are the archetypal drug-using, anti-establishment “hippie” band of the 1960s; this is evidenced in Oedipa’s thoughts at their first appearance. She thinks that it was as if “Miles, the kid with the bangs and the mohair suit, [was] now multiplied by four” (26). This limits the Paranoids to being identified as other iterations of Miles’ character. Not only does this take away the individuality of the Paranoids, but it also establishes them as a single unit. This group method of identification is continued with the female “groupies” of the band, who are also established as a unit, with “a number of girls’ faces, gazing through armpits and around angles of knees” (26) of the boys in the band. This paints the girls as sort of accessories to the boys. This sort of dynamic could be reminiscent of the mania surrounding the iconic 1960s band The Beatles. Thus, it is possible that the Paranoids are meant to represent that particular pop culture phenomenon. Overall, Pynchon seems to regard the subject of the band with a sort of morbid humor, which can inform one that he holds a certain skepticism for those who completely subscribe to that aspect of the 1960s culture.

Another way that the 1960s counterculture is portrayed in The Crying of Lot 49 is through geographic location. This can be evidenced by the way that Pynchon treats his own made-up city San Narciso. It is described as a city that “lay further south, near L.A. Like many named places in California it was less an identifiable city than a grouping of concepts” (13). This description of the city is fascinating because although Pynchon seems to be using his novel to poke fun at cities such as San Francisco (the city that San Narciso is modeled after), he also seems to have a bit of respect for them at the same time. Much later San Narciso is described as “a name, an incident among our climactic records of dreams” (147), which indicates that it is something much larger than a simple symbol meant to represent another city. Perhaps in the context of a larger meaning, it could be meant to portray all of 1960s America. It is also interesting to consider that San Narciso is separated from the rest of the state, almost as if it were another strange dimension brought on by a drug-induced hallucination or Oedipa’s own paranoid mind as evidenced by the comparison of the city to a dream. Moreover, Pynchon states that “San Narciso had no boundaries. No one knew yet how to draw them” (147). On a literal level this indicates that the city is spread out and it is difficult to create concrete borders, but on a more figurative level, this could also mean that the city could technically span the entirety of America. This idea of everyone in America belonging to San Narciso could be emblematic of the “free love” counterculture ideals of the 1960s. Thus, Pynchon’s representation of the city of San Narciso is his way of poking a bit of fun at the counterculture, since the statement of San Narciso’s lack of boundaries is literally meant to describe a sprawling urban landscape, and the ideal of San Narciso being a place that everyone inhabits is meant to be an obvious stretch for meaning that casts doubt on the legitimacy of the 1960s counterculture ideals.

These are not the only references to the culture of the 1960s, but these are the most blatant examples of Pynchon’s attempts to poke fun at many of the elements of the culture that do not make rational sense. Rather than completely dismissing this culture, Pynchon seems to be instead humorously pointing out the flaws in their ideals. This does have the effect of de-legitimizing them a bit, and yet with Pynchon leaving the possibility of a real conspiracy within the novel open-ended, he seems to be also leaving the legitimacy of the paranoia and radical idealism of the 1960s counterculture movement open to interpretation. Rather than completely dismissing them, he opens up the flaws in their principles and leaves it open to interpretation.