psychoanalytic

[MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu]

OK, Mr. Siegal (sorry about the misspelling).  You read your things, I'll read mine.  I 
won't engage in a point by point commentary on your point-by-point commentary 
because that will get us nowhere. I will also continue to post without carefully 
revising and editing because that's what I think this list is for, though I admit it gets 
me in trouble sometimes.  I really do think that you sometimes go way too far in 
presuming knowledge of P. and his work, and I will say forthrightly that I feel a 
hostility from you towards him that further complicates your motives in acting as 
this odd sort of midwife or go between, this Gatekeeper of Authenticity   But my 
brothers and sisters of the list seem to dig what you are doing, with some 
reservations, so that's cool. 

john m

p.s. the revelation about my grandmom should have been self-evident, though I 
guess your need to psychoanalyze just got in the way again.  And it just occurs to 
me that maybe that's what bugs me about your enterprise: it reduces to a kind of 
psychoanalytic criticism, and that's just never been my cup of meat.  It has always 
been a school of criticism noted for hostility towards its subjects, BTW.


>[1] I didn't deny being the source of the dope quote. I affirmed it.
>It's in the article. 
>
>[2] Please be specific about my "hostility."
>
>[3] I'm not analyzing Gravity's Rainbow. I'm offering opinions about the
>psychological sources of Tom's writing style and personal style and I am
>very careful to point out the gaps in my knowledge.
>
>[4] Comparing stress hormones to drugs is not saying they are the same
>thing. Please read this over again and try to understand what I am
>saying. I am not moralizing about drug use nor am I saying that his
>style is a symptom of drug use. I defy anyone to accurately identify
>drug-induced writing. A writer friend, Craig Vetter, once complained
>that he didn't like what I wrote on amphetamine. I asked him what piece
>he liked least.
>"Alpha machines in Penthouse," he replied. Written on a cup of coffee.
>Most? "Family Secrets." New American Review #10. The result of the
>single largest dose of amphetamine I took in my entire life. At the same
>time, I think it very fair and useful to discuss modern culture in terms
>of drug use, for better or worse.
>
>[5] My name is spelled Siegel.
>
>[6] I am not sure what your statement about your grandmother means. Did
>this really happen? Are you talking about drug-induced hallucinations?
>If you are, I think that it would be useful for you to examine the
>source of the pain it expresses with someone you trust deeply.
>
>[7] I read all his short stories. I read V. carefully more than once and
>I summarized it for North American Newspaper Alliance in 1963. The
>Crying of Lot 49 left me cold, but I did read it. From what I see here,
>many of the people on the list have not been able to get through
>Gravity's Rainbow and, in fact, are here in order to understand it
>better.
>
>I'm sure you're sincere in your views, but it would be helpful if you
>would slow down a little and organize your thoughts more carefully, as
>they are difficult for me to answer in their present form. Everything
>that I write here is carefully considered and edited before I send it
>out. I enjoy this, but it's quite a bit of work and I think it merits
>your respect.
>-- 
>Jules Siegel Website: http://www.caribe.net.mx/siegel/jsiegel.htm
>Mail: Apdo. 1764 Cancun QR 77501 Mexico
>Street: Green 16 Paseo Pok-Ta-Pok Zona Hotelera Cancun QR 77500 Mexico
>Tel: 011-52-98 87-49-18 Fax 87-49-13 E-mail: jsiegel at mail.caribe.net.mx
>
>
>