Alien Invasion!--The Final Chapter?

[Greg Montalbano]

On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, I wrote:
>
>All well and good, kids;  but isn't the real problem the intrinsically
destructive nature of said modern technology itself?  ...The fact that "we"
have created a machine with an exponential growth rate (that, indeed,
DEFINES itself by exponential growth; the main difference between "our"
lifestyle and that of the "native peoples" cultures) that seems intent on
fouling and devouring everything and everybody?  
>Or am I just sounding like a "dewey-eyed tree-hugger?"

And now, on page 412 of GR, I find:

   Kekule' dreams the Great Serpent holding its own tail in its mouth, the
dreaming Serpent which surrounds the World.  But the meanness, the cynicism
with which this dream is to be used.  The Serpent that announces, "The World
is a closed thing, cyclical, resonant, eternally-returning," is to be
delivered into a system whose only aim is to VIOLATE the Cycle.  Taking and
not giving back, demanding that "productivity" and "earnings" keep on
increasing with time, the System removing from the rest of the World these
vast quantities of energy to keep its own tiny desperate fraction showing a
profit;  and not only most of humanity-- most of the World, animal,
vegetable and mineral, is laid waste in the process.  The System may or may
not understand that it's only buying time.  And that time is an artificial
resource to begin with, of no value to anyone or anything but the System,
which sooner or later must crash to its death, when its addiction to energy
has become more than the rest of the World can supply, dragging with it
innocent souls all along the chain of life.

~~Greg




>
>>Date: 	Wed, 11 Dec 1996 12:34:36 -0400 (EDT)
>>From: "Steven Maas (CUTR)" <maas at cutr.eng.usf.edu>
>>X-Sender: maas at cutr
>>To: Pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>Subject: Re: Alien Invasion!
>>Sender: owner-pynchon-l at waste.org
>>
>>On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Murthy Yenamandra wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Maas writes:
>>> > While it is very tempting to decry the "pollution" of native peoples by
>>> > modern technology (whether in the polar regions or tropical rain forests
>>> > or wherever), and while I often fall prey to that temptation, the fact is
>>> > that generally these peoples _want_ TVs and t-shirts and computers when
>>> > they see them.  Who are we to tell them no, you shouldn't have them,
>>> > because we like you just the way you are?
>>> 
>>> In the same vein, it's also tempting to think that generally everyone
>>> else wants the same things (TVs, computers and cosmetics) that we not
>>> only want, but also want everyone else to want and are prepared to shove
>>> down their throats.  Which doesn't necessarily make it a fact.  The real
>>> fact is that we don't like them just the way they are and want them to
>>> be more like us.  Whether they want it or not we keep pushing the coke
>>> until they accept and then, of course, it's too late to change anything
>>> because it's the way things are and who are we indeed to deny people
>>> (who are now the all-powerful consumers and whose wishes suddenly are
>>> God's own will) what they want.
>>> 
>>> Let's compare mythologies...
>>> 
>>> Murthy
>>
>>I'd like to separate the various "we"s.  The we I referred to is those who
>>in fact would like to see tribal cultures survive because they seem to
>>have a better relationship with the cosmos than "modern" cultures do.  It
>>seems that the we Murthy refers to are the pynchonesque they; if so I
>>agree with him completely that they will do their best to "keep pushing
>>the coke"--in more ways than one. 
>>
>>I think that those in _my_ "we" need to keep in mind that native peoples
>>often do in fact want modern technology once they see it, and that we
>>should think hard before we advocate keeping them "pure"--"for their own
>>good." (Sort of sounds like "little brown brothers," doesn't it?) Were the
>>Inuit, for example "pushed" to ditch dogsleds for snowmobiles? Were
>>American Indians "pushed" to give up stone projectile points for metal
>>ones, and those for firearms?  Sure, if these peoples had been left alone
>>and not had to deal with intruders with modern equipment they would have,
>>presumably, remained happily using their native technology--until one of
>>their own came up with a new and improved model.  However, unless we set
>>aside human preserves (a _very_ problematic idea), it's impossible these
>>days to keep modern life out of sight.
>>
>>	Steve
>>
>>
>>
>