I started browsing /lit/ in 2013 and the board may as well have

>>8708905
1. Pynchon memes are getting stale
2. Barely anyone here has actually read GR thoroughly, so discussion is difficult
3. We're still recovering from his tragic death 3 months ago.

>>8708905
Yes, 4chan is currently too stupid for pynchon.

>>8708919
>Barely anyone here has actually read GR thoroughly, so discussion is difficult
sad if this is true.

>>8708905
I actually just started Gravity's Rainbow.

So far really excellent.

>>8708905
Pynchon is still very popular; I saw a thread on Gravity's Rainbow on the front page like fifteen minutes ago. Once he one of the top ranking writers on the favorite books of /lit/ survey?

It doesn't have anything to do with Pynchon specifically. There were a bunch of fairly decent discussion threads over the last few months.
The real problem is that overall there isn't much direct literature discussion on /lit/ these days. Most of the threads are vaguely related to this board's theme (where do you read, post your chair, various blogging threads and such) or just asking for recommendations and advice.
I also believe that most of the people who are interested in actually discussing literature here have already read at least some Pynchman (he's one of the top memes of this board) and had their go at discussing his works.

More people grow up and start using the internet so websites and image boards grow larger and larger over time, only they're increasingly more populated by impressionable young people. Before, teens looking into serious literature used to be a somewhat more niche thing since you'd have to look for thesm yourself, rather than be faced with on the front page of a popular site. Remember how even 6 years ago 4chan was regarded as "that weird obscure site that only some weird people go to"?
Basically the gist of it is more kids joined and ruined everything. It also doesn't help that /lit/ is probably the most ironic board on the site, so you have a lot of people who don't get the humor and actually believe the memes about how many literary masterpieces are bad.

>>8708977
Sad but true.

Is he going to come out of hiding to write an article/novella on Trump? How could he not? Trump is the archetypal Pynchon villain

>>8709175
Happy but false

Pynchon is great but really he has a lot less to offer than writers like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky and so on

>>8709208
Lol

What are /lit/'s thoughts on Mason&Dixon? Currently reading it, my first Pynchon

>>8709212
It's goofy pynchon

>>8709212
Strange pick for first choice, how come?

Pynchon is still probsbly one of if not the most discussed author on lit, there's definetly a thread on him every day, but as others have said lit's moved towards more general discussion in a lot of places. Often now the threads on Pynchon are memes about the fact Pynchon is a meme, and this probably drives away new people from reading him meaning there's less people asking those questions that opened up threads (there's still a lot though). Also 2013 was pretty close to the 'Pynchon posted here' hype.

Still, there's a fair amount of discussion, earlier today there was something about GR's beyond the zero, and the other day someone popped up dropping some pages from an essay on Maxwell's Demon on TCoL49; he's discussed far more deeply on a regular basis than anyone else, I'd say

we /bolaño/ now, familia

>>8708905
lit used to be populated by readers

its now populated by ideologues espousing their personal philosophies

>>8709273
Like you?

>>8709351
we're all just ideas mannnnnnnnn