The Silence of the Lambs

[Nicholas Lester]

Perhaps we all have the feeling that the discussions, although well
intentioned, have moved away from the mark. Lately I had the feeling that I
was reading the Joyce list: is it a period or a dot or a square or an ink
blot, or what? As they say in my old neighborhood, "Who gives a rat's ass?"

And like Bonnie I am amazed at how "territorial" some of these men and women
can be. The world's falling apart, TP told us that before we saw it for
ourselves, and yet the literati worry about grammar while the scientists try
to counterpunch, telling us that we don't really know enough to speculate
about quantum mechanics, etc. Heh--let's go easy on each other! This is a
friendly discussion amongst people who have a common interest.

I'll throw out a few questions for y'all:

1. Why do we spend so much time speculating about TP's private life when he
has tried hard to get us to IGNORE him and concentrate on his books? So
where's the logic here? He asks us to judge his work as it stands, yet we
insist on doing the opposite. I like TP's work because I don't know anything
about him. Let's keep it that way. Otherwise TP will become another
Mailer--full of himself, full of appearances on Jay Leno, and void of talent.

2. Why the TP worship? I can't recall who said it (perhaps Gardiner, perhaps
Kundera) but to paraphrase, "books, good books, are always greater than
their author." We've all seen this in our writing--we say something in our
work that is smarter than we are. I don't want to go into the whys of it,
but since we know this to be true, why worship the author? Let's "worship"
the books and their ideas. (And please, no idiotic comments about
worship--you guys get my point.)

3. As an American Studies kind of guy, I'd like to discuss GR and how it
reflects today's America. Look, any work of art worth its salt is applicable
to the reader TODAY. If not, the work is good for what I call "cocktail
party English." You know--you can talk about Eliot's objective correlative
over a drink and everyone thinks you're so "deep." But in the end, it's this
kind of crap that has driven students away from the humanities, lit in
particular. (It has driven me from the Joyce list, and perhaps many of you
from this list.)  HOW DOES GR RELATE TO US--NOW? And what does it tell us
about American politics, values, etc.?

4. We've spoken about TP's use of music, but few have addressed the
significance of his use of popular music. Why is it in his works? 

5. I had the opportunity to talk with John Barth (occasionally we
freelancers get a good assignment--that's one in 12 years for me). He said
that what matters in a novel is what remains with the reader one year or two
years after reading the thing. After the plot has vanished from memory, what
remains? Good question for all of TP's works. 

6. The devolution of Slothrop in GR represents the death of the American
romantic novel: born circa 1800 died circa 1968. The individual as center of
the universe stands at the core of the romantic novel (and American
society). Can the individual stand up to today's paranoid world? If not, how
can any novel centering on a charcater represent this world? Good question
TP asks. Let's address it.

OK--these are my ideas. What are yours?

Nick