If I had no previous knowledge about the author of the essay Journey Into the Mind of Watts, the last person I would have ever guessed would be Thomas Pynchon. The differences in writing styles between The Crying of Lot 49 and this essay are so substantial that I almost find it hard to believe that not only were they produced by the same man but also around the same time. On the most basic level, the greatest difference is seen in the level of straightforwardness and clarity; The Crying of Lot 49 is confusing and almost scatterbrained while Journey Into the Mind of Watts is a clear and simple. However, with regards to rhetoric, both are written very well. Pynchon is able to incorporate high levels of rhetoric, such as varied sentence structure, detail, and dialogue, into the essay yet still make it clear enough that any average American could read it with ease. The Crying of Lot 49, on the other hand, is purposefully difficult to read and understand. This is because Pynchon has completely separate goals for each piece: the essay is meant to provide information mixed with opinion while the novel is meant to symbolize emotion, ideals, politics, relationships, etc.

Back to The Crying of Lot 49 and the end of chapter one, Oedipa’s main “problem” is rooted in her own self-awareness. Before Pierce’s estate came into her life, the reader is led to assume that she lived reasonably carefree in suburban America. However, now she is thrown into a whole mess of ordeals and is forced to examine her own feelings, which in this case regards her relationship with Pierce. This presents her true feelings of wanting to escape, yet she is not sure what exactly she wants to escape from. Much like the girls with sad, “heart-shaped” faces in the Bordando el Manto Terrestre, she feels that she is locked high in a tower but has no real way to escape, hence the wig analogy.