Daffy etc.

[davemarc]

At 12:57 AM 7/1/96 +0200, hag wrote, in part:
>
>What 
>bothers me is that you still refuse to engage with my point beyond a 
>cursory rejection. Rude, that - and that means giving you the benefit 
>of the doubt. I said pop culture was increasingly formulaic, not 
>produced by some shmuck on dope but according to the latest market 
>research, blablabla. I take it you don't concur? Why not?
>
If you re-examine my post, you'll see that I was simply adding points (as
you yourself did).  I was not subtracting them.  I was not rejecting your
points or anyone else's.

But if you'd really like to know my reaction to your comment that pop
culture is increasingly formulaic, my observation is that that statement is
so generalized (particular in the international context of this list) that
it doesn't make much sense.  There is so much pop culture produced all over
the world that it's hard to know how to *begin* considering your statement.
Only a century ago, for example, American popular songs were extremely
formulaic, more so than they are today.  American television's a complicated
issue in itself, but recent trends (especially the growth of cable) have led
to a burst of formula-breaking, particularly in the comedy genre.  

But again, the statement's simply too general for my tastes.  I honestly
didn't see any point in spending much time with it, so I just tried to add
to the discussion by noting that Pynchon revels in pop culture and pop
culture references.  He gets a kick out of much of it, remaining aware of
(and exploiting) its comic as well as its potentially sinister ramifications.

davemarc