Crying of Lot 49 Ending

After reading “Crying of Lot 49” my opinion of what a mystery entails has changed.  Coming into this freshman writing seminar, I had assumed that a mystery novel would be where a problem is presented, and then resolved by the end.  However, the lack of closure in “Crying of Lot 49” demonstrated how a mystery does not always have a definitive solution.  The duration of the novel is spent on Oedipa trying to track the Tristero mystery presented by Pierce.  She is confused by his stamp collection, and tries to fit together how the historical guerrilla postal service conspiracy is relevant.  Oedipa obsesses over the Tristero, believing that random symbols (such as the muted horn, and the Courier’s Tragedy) are related.  However, Oedipa struggles to determine what the connection is between the different clues to unveiling the purpose of the Tristero System.  I initially thought that the ending of the novel would clarify the meaning of the stamp mystery, but it does not.  Instead, the reader is led to believe that the stamp mystery has no significance nor true value. “For there either was some Tristero beyond the appearance of the legacy America, or there was just America and if there was just America then it seemed the only was she could continue, and manage to be at all relevant to it, was an alien, unfurrowed, assumed full circle into some paranoia”  (Pynchon 150-151).  Rather, the postal stamp mystery was created by Pierce as a type of ploy or distraction, making Oedipa question her purpose and role in executing Pierce’s will.  Therefore, a mystery can be a novel which presents a problem or confusing matter. 

In addition, the main character in the mystery is not necessarily a detective in the traditional sense.  I had stereotypically categorized all mysteries as having a Sherlock Holmes character, a leading figure in offering a solution to the issue.  However, “Crying of Lot 49” counters my original belief of the responsibility of a character in the novel.  According to my initial definition, Oedipa should have fulfilled the role of being a detective.  Due to her inability to resolve the Tristero mystery, she failed as a detective.  However, not all mysteries have detectives.  Instead, the reader has a greater responsibility in determining the meaning behind the mystery.  It is not solely the fictional character’s purpose to propose a problem and answer.  The reader needs to discover for his or herself whether the Tristero System was intrinsically important, or if the obsession with a stamp collection was indicative of Oedipa’s need to find a purpose to her otherwise mundane life.  Therefore, a mystery novel does not need to have a conclusive ending.  Rather, a mystery can propose a problem, which guides the reader’s analysis of plot and character development.  Oedipa's reaction and intention to piece together the Tristero Mystery influenced her actions, which was telling of her characterization of a lost and lonely woman searching for a sense of purpose.