Prejudices and Caricatures

[LBernier at tribune.com]

Granted my grasp of pomo discourse and theory is puny, if not non-existent, but 
Dave, are you saying that language is ACTUALLY synonomous with the expression of
ideas?  That the idea is language and vice-versa?  And someone who speaks Hopi 
would be trapped in an IDEA set that cannot be escaped from because the words 
exist or do not exist within this language?  I can understand that concepts may 
be expressed with differing degrees of subtlety from one culture to the next - 
for example, there's a japanese word which means (roughly) the disjointed and 
mixed feelings of sadness and fondness and happiness that one feels when 
confronted with a smell or sound or look from one's past.  The fact that there's
no particular English word for this feeling (it's NOT nostalgia) does not mean 
the feeling does not exist.

Jean.

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Prejudices and Caricatures
Author:  davemarc <davemarc at panix.com> at Internet_tco
Date:    11/25/96 3:59 PM


At 07:12 PM 11/25/96 +0000, you wrote: 
>davemarc writes:
>> 
>> At 05:14 PM 11/25/96 +0000, Andrew wrote: 
>> >
>> >[snip] Who says `Pynchon
>> >*would have* written within the prejudices of his time'? Well if 
>> >anyone or anything says so it can only be argued with reference to 
>> >what was actually written. So where's the evidence?
>
>> For starters, P. wrote most of GR using 20th Century English.  That's the 
>> evidence.  Where's the evidence that he somehow managed to liberate his
>> prose from the prejudices or world view embodied in that language?  It's a 
>> truism that writers write within the prejudices of their times as reflected 
>> by their language.  
>
>That's the evidence??? 
     
Yup.  Where's your evidence that he liberated his prose from his language 
and its built-in (and I do mean built-in) prejudices?
     
>If C20th English is so riddled with unavoidable
>prejudices then how are you able recognise the existence of such 
>prejudice? 
     
Hey, anyone can spot prejudices in a culture.  I'm not claiming that because 
someone lives in a time and place that that person is unaware of the many, 
many prejudices or *world views* of that time and place.  Galileo was pretty 
good at spotting some widely prevalent ones that happened to be false.
     
>And if you can then why could not Pynchon. 
     
I can; Pynchon can.  I'm not saying any of these prejudices or world views 
are necessarily invisible.  Though it is possible (though not necessary) to 
be unaware of them.
     
>And why cannot
>both of you, having recognised such prejudice, avoid it? 
     
I doubt that anyone with a functional linguistic ability can avoid *all* the 
prejudices within a language--which include but are not limited to attitudes 
like "faggots are evil."  They also include prejudices like "cause and 
effect exist," "there is such a thing as snow," "there is no such thing as 
snow," "faggots are good," "the earth is the center of the Universe," "time 
progresses in months according to the phases of the moon," "time progresses 
according to the progress of the sun," "time is relative," etc.  Depends on 
the language.   But one can avoid many of them.
     
>Sorry, but
>your truism is another wheel which does not turn, like original sin 
>(who cares whether one is guilty a priori when it's the a posteriori 
>sin which causes all the shit). I think you need to come up with a 
>better formula to beat yourself with. This one is self-defeating.
     
Perhaps Andrew will reconsider. If Andrew or myself were discussing built-in 
prejudices in P.'s English in contrast with markedly different languages 
(say Old English, a Hopi dialect c. 1850, etc.) I suppose the truism would 
be even more apparent.
>
>[snip]
>
>> Given that P. cannot help but write "within his times" it's also possible to 
>> recognize that, as a (creative) individual, he could still take just about 
>> about any attitude about particular subjects (i.e. sexuality), characters, 
>> u.s.w.  
>
>Well, it's not given, that's your assumption. Where is the evidence? 
>Are you saying that Pynchon never writes "outside of his times"
     
Yes.  Did Pynchon write at any point prior to his birth?  Or after his 
death?  Where is the evidence?  
     
>i.e. that his writing embodies a set of presumptions which olour all 
>of his judgements, which are common to all writers of his generation 
>and some of which are not common to people who are 20-30 years 
>younger.
     
I am saying that his writing--his very existence--takes place primarily in a 
widely recognizable form of 20th Century English that, like all languages, 
shapes the thoughts of everyone raised within that system.  There's a lot of 
room for variety, dissent, contradictions, whatever...among the language's 
prejudices.  Because languages generally shift slowly over subgroups defined 
by time, place, and the tension between standardization and individuality, 
there are, in fact, likely to be differences as well as similarities (some 
very pronounced).  That's one reason why we can appreciate translations even 
though "something gets lost" in the process.  
     
     <deletia>