Roger, Jessica and all things Queer.

[Tom Stanton]

[lots of stuff in previous posts]
> > Having
> > lived through the period when Pynchon wrote GR, I think the times
> > are very significant to the text (IMHO).
> 
> Doubtless so. I can think of all sorts of examples in the book which
> justify this statement. But when it comes to justifying the claim that
> he is homophobic I don't see things as being altogether clear cut.

I never said Pynchon was homophobic. I said he portrayed homosexuality
(& most other sexuality) in an unflattering light, and that this 
would be consistent with the period in which he wrote. Despite our
collective admiration, the guy was a product of his times, and as
such he celebrates drug use, decries the military/industrial complex,
and skewers the Establishment at every turn. 

> If Pynchon can write his way out of one type of 60s shallowness
> he can write his way out of another. Why do you presume that he is not
> able to see beyond the sexism of his times when he can see beyond
> other naive preconceptions?

Why are you so adamant that he can? Where, in the text, is 
the proof that he is not writing within the prejudices of his
time? And who says I am limited only to the text when I make
an observation about the author or the book? Writers are always
being critiqued based on the times in which the works were created
(like the controversy over Mark Twain & "Huck Finn"). 

> I don't take a stand one way or another on his homophobia or his
> sexism - how can you in a book where the flashes of real humanity are
> sprinkled sparsely in amongst the actions of otherwise cardboard
> characters. These flashes reveal great warmth, humanity and generosity
> towards all individuals and matters of sexuality are surely
> transcended by such qualities.

Your presemption is that the work is so good the author must, by
necessity, have transcended any prejudices. How is this possible?