do not despair

[ckaratnytsky at nypl.org]

     Greg gets me:
     
     >But is that silence saying the same thing to you that it is to me???
     
     Oh, al-right, leaping into the fray:
     
     I had been of the opinion that "No comment" meant "No comment."  But, 
     OK, point taken, Greg -- yes, I suppose that the silence (re the 
     various sensitive topics that have arisen of late) can be read as 
     either tacit *approval* or tacit *disapproval* of the remarks made, 
     depending on how one feels about such things.    
     
     I heartily endorsed (in a private post) davemarc's well-phrased 
     objection to Jules' comments re "the Herero women..."  I regret that 
     both John Mascaro and Diana York Blaine have read the list's silence as 
     passive agreement (to paraphrase davemarc) with Jules.  It hasn't been 
     in my case.  Furthermore, the positive responses of discussion 
     participants aren't representative of anything but those folks' own 
     opinions.  Not mine.  A-and, by the way, I've been thumpin' rock 'em, 
     sock 'em Johnny M., and others, on the back, but in private posts.  
     That's how *I* tend to work such things, anyway -- off-list.  
     
     So, what's a nice list to do?  Gentleman Murthy tried to address this 
     issue in subtle fashion by posting additional GRGR comments for those 
     of us "who don't want to talk about Pynchon's personal life" and got 
     tweaked by Jules with what I thought was a bit too much glee.  Maybe 
     when Andrew posts the next GRGR the discussion will re-focus itself on 
     the work, fachrissake, of TRP.  (I can dream, can't I?)  Fuck the rest 
     of that shit.  
     
     Hoppin' into that ol' flameproof nightie,
     
     Chris