Fwd: Re: Safe Sex is No Fun

[Susan M Danewitz]

John Burgess:
> 2. As others have noted in their replies to my original on this, for 
> Pudding, even shit is alive -- for Pudding.  That it propels him back to 
> a time when he was truly vital, every sense and nerve-ending alive, is, 
> for him, life affirming.  That it ultimately causes his death (that, at 
> least, is the supposition of other characters, though not actually stated 
> as fact) is a side-effect.  But then, I think I can safely say that we 
> all do/did things that made sense at the time, but didn't, in the long 
> run.
> 
> Regards.

In _V._ the alignment between "bad" or inanimate characters and "perverse"
sex is fairly straightforward.  When a character brought in a fetish 
object, or went for a little S&M, almost inevitably the result was corrupt
and destructive.  Foppl's house is left in disgust, and a judgement is
somewhat called on all the S&M there.

When i was looking closely at _V._ I was also trying to understand the 
change in modern mentality toward "perverse" sex.  Pynchon certainly 
uses scatology and pain as shock techniques, and what i was noticing was
that his attitude was kinda archaic.  S&M is linked to the eventual killing
of the Bondel in _V._.  S&M at this point in his writing is not at all 
complex, just someone wanting to give pain and another acquiescing.  this 
rather flies in the face of the growing group of S&M advocates, who easily 
point to long, loving relationships between couples who participate in S&M.
im certainly not an expert, but the focus, in books and etc, seems to be
on the heady interaction that comes from the intimacy of dealing with power
and pain in the sex relationship.  

Pudding shows a more complex take on the flagellation complex, which i
certainly feel extends to the coprophagy.  

"bound by nothing but his need for pain, for something real, something pure.
They have taken him so far from his simple nerves.  They have stuffed paper
illusions and military euphemisms between him and this truth, this rare
decency, this moment at her scrupulous feet 
. . .
she was here all the time, sure in her ownership of his failing body, his
true body: undisguised by uniform, uncluttered by drugs to keep from him
her communiques of vertigo, nausea and pain.  . . . Above all, pain.  The
clearest poetry, the endearment of greatest worth . . ."   (234-235)

Pudding links Them and normal sex--only through this massive brutalizing
encounter does he feel "something real, something pure."  in GR, if you
are closer to stable, you have rowdy, but not as shocking, sex.  If youve
been ravaged by the world like Pudding or Greta you echo that in sex, in 
scenes which i guess really disturb some readers.  In the Blicero/
Katje stuff i did find the sex to be disturbing, but that was because
it wasnt voluntary.

i found the piece of the turd in the nostril from the trip down the toilet 
a LOT more disturbing.  man, did i have trouble shaking that image... EW!

oh yeh--sometime we ought to admit that pynchon's got annoying alignment
between homosexuality and decadence/perversity.  this read-through of GR
i really noticed it.  only in the scene when Katje and Pirate talk about
loving all of Humanity did i find a place where homosexual conduct wasnt
immediately associated with lisping sub-humans.  yeesh.

heh...im not used to CRITIQUE-ing pynchon.  reely, tho, i still adore him...

susan