Probably the experience most common to readers and students of Gravity's Rainbow is the conviction that Pynchon's novel possesses an ethical stability or center in spite of their being unable to find one. This is a book which seems to have no identifiable point of view, but which at the same time seems to coincide wonderfully with the New Left Age of Aquarius. Is it an overgeneralization to say that the resulting criticism has therefore tried to make a moral virtue of the novel's anti-systematic composition, its refusal to close or to champion (narratively or dramatically) a moral perspective?
How to Cite:
Schaub, T., 1986. Mythologies New and Old: Hume and Current Theory. Pynchon Notes, (18-19), pp.110–115. DOI: http://doi.org/10.16995/pn.354