Paranoia, at its most basic state, is classified as a mental disorder characterized by delusions backed by apparent logic. However, in another context, it is also described as a tendency to look for hidden meaning, even when no meaning is intended. As John Johnston illustrates it, paranoia can be considered “less as a mental aberration than as a specific ‘regime of signs’…in which the semiotic or signifying potential is dominant” (O’Donnell 47). This classification suits Thomas Pynchon’s heroine, Oedipa Maas, from The Crying of Lot 49. Enveloped by delusional over-thinking, a conspiratorial postal system, and a penchant for following clues, Oedipa quickly finds herself flung headfirst into a situation filled with a complex blend of fact and fiction. She continually searches for more information, a revelation, or a “cry that might abolish the night” (Pynchon 95). Oedipa’s sole purpose is, like the fictional Maxwell’s Demon, to sort useful facts from useless ones. However, neither she nor the reader will ever arrive at a conclusive end. Therefore, Pynchon uses the protagonist Oedipa Maas to communicate the concept of paranoia and the search for meaning in everyday life by demonstrating the importance of individual interpretation over the real answer.
The very act of interpretation should denote a certain understanding of an epistemological aspect. “To understand is to interpret…interpretation is a liberating act” (Sontag 7). Oedipa, blindly following the myriad of signs that are thrust in her path, has a couple options. She can either give up, call herself a delusional housewife and go home, or she can see how far down the rabbit hole goes. She chooses the latter route, and begins to find hidden meaning in everything that she encounters on her journey. She has no other option but to interpret the signs, and attempt to make the pieces fit together. Here, Sontag suggests that the act of interpretation results in understanding and clarity of the subject. However,...