The aim of this essay is to investigate the traces of metafiction in Thomas Pynchon's novel The Crying of Love 49. Metafiction is a term given to "fictional writing which self-consciously and systematically draws attention to its status as an artifact in order to pose questions about the relationship between fiction and reality" (Waugh 2). Such writing examines the fundamental structures of narrative fiction and also explores the possible fictionality of the world outside the literary fictional text. Linda Hutcheon (1991) refers to metafiction as "fiction about fiction — that is, fiction that includes within itself a commentary on its own narrative and/or linguistic identity" (1). Waugh also defines three framing devices in metafiction: a) "stories within stories"; b) "characters reading about their own fictional lives"; c) "self-consuming worlds or mutually contradictory situations" (30). McHale considers the first group as a subcategory of "Chinese-box worlds" and is based on the formula of a "recursive structures" (McHale 112). Trompe-l' oeil, meaning 'eye-deceiving' is another metafictional strategy which is related to the idea of ontology. McHale defines it as "deliberately misleading the reader into regarding an embedded, secondary world as the primary" (McHale 115).

     Regarding the above theories, this novel itself is a means of communication between reality and fiction that will prove ultimately baffling to the main character and reader. Pynchon designed The Crying of Lot 49 so that there would be two levels of observation: that of the characters such as our own Oedipa Maas, whose world is limited to the text, and that of the reader, who looks at the world from outside it but who is also affected by his relationship to that world. Both the reader and the characters have the same problems observing the chaos around them. The protagonist in the novel, Oedipa, like Pynchon's audience, is forced to either involve herself in the interpreting of clues or not participate at all. Oedipa's purpose, besides executing a will, is finding meaning in a life dominated by assaults on people's perceptions through drugs, sex and television. The reader's role is also one of interpreting countless symbols and metaphors to arrive at a meaning.

     In terms of both the differences inherent in San Narcisco and Pynchon's writing, there is a layering of superficiality through which one must penetrate in order to get to real meaning. The "nothing was happening" declaration is particularly troubling because it leads us to believe that the chaotic events that follow it are merely dreamed up in Oedipa's mind. Thus, we see an external world of peace that is mentally blocked out by a woman whose overactive mind leads her to all sorts of wild speculations and imaginings. There are always more layers to the complex plot, and Oedipa will find that each time she strips away a mysterious layer; it only opens up more possibilities and more sub-mysteries to be solved, there are always deeper layers to be uncovered. These problems with hallucination highlight the much more pressing problem of the ability to understand what is real and imagined. The novel suggests that the human mind has an extraordinary ability to create situations that seem so real as to be indistinguishable from truly external events.

     One of the most effective literary techniques Pynchon uses to involve the reader in his fictional world is his use of details. The purpose of these details is to overlap the reader's world with the fictional one. Pynchon flirts with the reader. He allows the reader to see more of his world than any of his other characters can. Pynchon wants to tempt the reader into the character's search for meaning. Furthermore, the alternations of fact with fiction, such as the description of the historical basis of the Peter Pinguid Society, confuse the reader to such an extent that he is forced to rely upon Oedipa to decipher reality from illusion. Pynchon even denies the reader and Oedipa time to sort out the information by moving rapidly to the next event. The blending of authenticity with fiction introduces an epistemological aspect to Pynchon's work. Pynchon wants the reader to recognize and plunge into the shaded area between fiction and reality. Pierce and Pynchon tell Oedipa and the reader, respectively, that we do not know much for certain. In Pynchon's comical world, our senses deceive us, ruling out an Empirical solution to the epistemological question. What seems rational really is not, making a rationalist solution unacceptable. By ruling out a basis for an epistemological interpretation outside the text, Pynchon commands the audience to accept Oedipa as its interpreter.

     In fact, a mystery novel like The Crying of Love 49 is a very basic meta-novel (metafiction). The reader construes a suspect before the author reveals it to him. In our case, we think that events, places and names connect, but we are never sure until Pynchon confirms it for us. There are many metaphors that describe the relationship between the author and reader in Lot 49. The name Oedipa Maas evokes the famous Greek riddle-solver Oedipus, whose quest to interpret the Delphic prophecies leads to his downfall. Pynchon gives us two options when presenting metaphors like the Oedipus: either they are patterns for interpreting the meaning of Lot 49, or they are unclear, deceptive invitations for interpretations, purposely made up by the author.

     The most ingenious method of involving the reader in the novel in Lot 49 is the mock-Jacobean drama The Courier's Tragedy. Pynchon compares Oedipa witnessing the play to the reader apprehending the novel. For example, Pynchon switches from Jacobean vocabulary to modern phrases: "While a battle rages in the streets outside the palace, Pasquale is locked up in his patrician hothouse, holding an orgy". This distances the reader from the play, similar to Oedipa's role as a confused onlooker, thereby giving Oedipa and us a false sense of security. We soon find elements of The Courier's Tragedy almost in all subsequent events of the novel. Pynchon, via Driblette, speaks to the reader: "You guys, you're like the Puritans about the Bible. So hung up with words, words". This is not a warning to the reader and Oedipa against interpretation. Instead, it is a warning to the reader and Oedipa of the addictive nature of their respective searches (self-conscious fiction). Oedipa's search for the original version of The Courier's Tragedy, which is obstructed by her inability to separate her play from its author, editor or producer, is an exaggerated metaphor of the reader's troubles in making sense of the novel.

     The Crying of Lot 49 is a detective story, but the puzzle it tries to solve, like culture, which constantly emerges out of itself, is infinite. And there is no answer to infinity, there is only voyage (play). In trying to create order, Oedipa alienates herself from the very world she is trying to organize. As the novel demonstrates in the Tristero conspiracy Oedipa vainly tries to solve, in the ending that is no standard ending at all, and within the larger structures of its own self-abnegating language and style, there can be no final answer, no true ending, ever.

 

 

 

Works Cited:

 

Hutcheon, Linda. Narcissistic Narrative: The Metafictional Paradox. London: Routledge, 1991.

 

---. A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction. London: Routledge, 1996.

 

McHale, Brian. Postmodernist Fiction. London: Routledge, 1999.

 

Waugh, Patricia. Metafiction: The Theory and Practice of Self-Conscious Fiction. New York: Methuen & Co. Ltd, 1984.