<div dir="ltr">Clearly Pynchon is portraying a world in which rationality is not always in control. Blicero's rituals with Katje and Gottfried are metaphors of power structures, rituals to invoke encounters, powers higher than themselves (and maybe to court their own demise in the process). Victims are can sometimes turn the tables, push the Witch into the oven, and escape. Or they can have Impolex-shrouded orgasms, willingly sacrificed, embracing annihilation as the kiss of transcendence.. He doesn't portray the V-2 program as a rational War-strategy (although terrorism is a rational technique of War). It is also a religion. I can't tie it all together. I think it is meant to remain an oscillating enigma.<div><br></div><div>I don't think any of these observations are the reason he doesn't depict the Shoah directly. I think it is meant to remain in the shadows in GR, like the never-seen monster in horror movies.</div><div><br></div><div>David Morris<br><div><br></div><div>David Morris</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Monte Davis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:montedavis49@gmail.com" target="_blank">montedavis49@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Hyper-technically, the Auschwitz complex --  almost 50 camps in all and hybrid,as you say -- was originally  a concentration camp (Auschwitz I) for Polish political prisoners, added the Auschwitz II-Birkenau cluster as prison then extermination camp for Jews and Gypsies, then added Auschwitz III-Monowitz as slave labor camp for IG Farben's synthtic-rubber factory.. which is why Primo Levi, an Italian Jew and a skilled chemist, survived at Monowitz rather than dying at Birkenau. Mixed priorities...  </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Why not follow up on your sense that P's "systems...markets" message "can't really <span style="font-size:12.8px">digest the insanity of Nazi racial policy and ideology"? Why not question yout implicit premise that systems and markets are by their nature sane and rational? Recall my earlier point on Blackett's "you can't run a war on gusts of emotion": that  the German V-weapon campaign and the US-UK city-bombing campaign *were not rational uses of economic and military resources,* no matter how much technology and organization went into them. They were supposed to be answers to "how do we win the war?", but in fact were answers to "how do we HURT THE ENEMY?" They were highly organized, rationally implemented gusts of emotion. Likewise, </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">all those trains taking Jews to the death camps could have more profitably been supplying </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front -- except that the felt threat from the Jews was beyond or beneath rationality, deeper and darker than that from the Red Army.</span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Remember how Prof.-Dr, Jamf prizes the bold, lion-like ionic bond *seizing* electrons over the wimpy sharing of the covalent bond (Viking 577)? Remember "a conspiracy of human beings and techniques" crying like a vampire "I need my night's blood, my funding, my funding, ahh"(521)? </span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Rather than saying Pynchon *couldn't* deal with the Holocaust directly because he'd chosen an approach based on the primacy of rational systems, markets, cost/benefit calculations, etc... consider the possibility that he's questioning how rational they really are. The peculiar horror of the Holocaust, after all, was not mass murder -- Rwanda or Cambodia or the partition of India will do for that -- but the *juxtaposition* of mass murder with an "advanced" European nation's highly organized, systematic implementation. You propose that people using technology and rationality to do insane things poses a problem for Pynchon in GR; I think it's at the heart of the book.</span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:42 AM, rich <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:richard.romeo@gmail.com" target="_blank">richard.romeo@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>one of the major misconceptions about the Holocaust and mass murder is that most people think only of Auschwitz which technically was not a death camp say like Treblinka was. Dora was not a death camp either--they were work camps in essence, horrible in any case. still broadly speaking we can include such camps as part of the Holocaust if our definitions expand on a broader definition of extermination in its myriad forms (gas, labor, rape, etc). So, yes Pynchon does address that in Dora.<br><br></div>The missing bit from GR which I think Pynchon cant adequately utilize directly w/r/t to the Holocaust is that there was no logical reason for such mass murder from an economic point of view beyond appropriating space. If you build up your message as Pynchon does about Them and systems and repressions and markets and link them all up, it cant really digest the insanity of Nazi racial policy and ideology which underpinned much of its actions in the East. <br><br></div>i guess what I'm saying is hybrid camps like Auschwitz or outright labor camps like Dora where there was an economic benefit for Germany or perceived to be (many projects were failures) are easier to explain than outright death mills like Treblinka, Sobibor, etc. maybe that's one reason for Pynchon's 'aloofness' on the subject<br><br></div><div>just my two cents<span><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div>rich</font></span><span><br><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:32 AM, David Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fqmorris@gmail.com" target="_blank">fqmorris@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">But WHERE does <span style="font-size:12.8px">GR "depict the Holocaust?"</span><span><font color="#888888"><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">David Morris</span></div></font></span></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br><br><span><font color="#888888"></font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>