Working Titles

[Susan M Danewitz]

Bartleby:
> 
> The working title was _Mindful Pleasures_ not Mindless Pleasures.
> 

thought it was the other way around, the book of criticism was 
called "Mindful" but the book itself was "Mindless" orig.

criticism of course saying that the pleasures of the GR creation
were meaningful, yez?  or just constructed carefully.

of course we can start a discussion, which is always needed, about
exactly how mindless the pleasures are in GR.       Course there are
two stances on the word "mindless"--i can see mindless, in the sense
of brainless, thoughtless.  but also mindless implys to me a listless
[heh] lack of direction, thus of meaning.           i think it would be nice
to talk, and someone has started recently, about how much meaning/morality
there is in Pynchon.  i want to be careful to separate out the effect,
which varies of course by person, from the general intent of the works. 
is the Pynchonian moral stance just really complex?  

                                        i'd say _V._ was extremely 
mindful, in the sense that the stances taken toward animate/inanimate 
were consistant and nearly didactic, when you look closely.  i dont 
feel such solid alignment in later works, tho, not the same way.  the 
edges feel much more blurry.  has Pynchon just gotten more subtle?  or is 
he throwing off the youthful cloak of moralizing and no longer making 
easy divisions between the good & bad?  more realistic?

susan