http://www.wired.com/news/culture/story/3431.html

[argus.]

Hey folks, we're famous!

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/story/3431.html

An article about the Lineland thing is in the Wired News from
friday.  Yuck.

I was shaking mad when I heard what Jules did and couldnt quite
parse why.  Like many of the people posting things of recent, I
considered Jules' book something of an immoral act.  I ranted to 
a friend who is doing his diss. on internet culture about violation
of copyright laws and got set back by his response.

He acknowledged the legal grounds for complaint, but immediately
disagreed with my wanting to pursue that, saying it would 
naturalize copyright laws, which are only some 100 years old,
and which are largely reliant on corporate motivation for their
continued extension of property rights on intellectual products.
(He mentioned Hollywood as a prime mover in making copyright
last longer, as they attempt to retain control over old movies.)

Reseating myself in the gut reaction, I think it is still important
to talk about Jules and his book and his actions, not behind the
scenes, but up front, because what we really have is an issue
of internet culture and the culture of this list in specific, and
what we expect out of our interactions in this luscious list.  

I am angry at Jules because he has done bad anthropology.  Coming
on the list with the clumsiest nettiquette possible and a severe 
lack of textual interpretation skills, I watched the misreadings
and over-reactions he showed us and quickly noted his distance from
the Pynchon-L crew.  He did not lurk, as far as I can tell, to get
a sense of how the list functioned.  He did not try to listen.  He
came in like a steamroller, called attention to himself, changed the
flavor of the conversation by accelerating conflicts into flamewars, &
generally showed lack of consideration for the culture that has been
built in the years this list has existed.  Almost everyone on the list 
commented on the change in tone (to nasty) in the aftermath of Jules.

These are the reasons I doubt sincerely that his book will be any
more than an outsiders glossy troping of Pynchon-L and net culture
in general.  Jules shows little ability to listen.  While I dont mind
that so much in fiction, when my little cafe has been the subject of
such an intellectual weakness, I get angry.

Jules violated the culture of Pynchon-L by writing this book.  Like
a typical Imperialist, he came in with his slice of knowledge to a small
culture that was functioning in a healthy way, played God to the extent 
he could, abused the natives, and ran back away to report to the Empire 
how the natives function.  He now throws beads at those who he most 
appropriated with a shabby, condescending narrative that tries to deny
our right to anger while alternatively defending his acts through legal
structures.  

Any good ethnographer (tho even such a profession must be suspect) knows
to respect those they study.  Entering a community and observing it 
creates precarious situations that only careful diplomacy and strong
insight can negotiate.  Sneaky backhanded Kitty-Kelly analysis does
damage to both to the subject and the resultant readers.  I dont give
a shit how *cute* Jules' take on the aura of Pynchon vs. the Real Average
Joe will be--he abused the Pynchon-L community when he was posting,
and abuses us now.  If you dont think so, think about the consequences
of the Wired article.  M&D mania will be bad enough.  How many more
rude and gluttonous thrillseekers do you expect to come rubbernecking
now that we are a species on display?  And what integrity can we 
maintain as a community if we accept insolent violation of our culture?

I do not know at this point what specific precedents might be wielded 
against Jules.  I have been pointed to some already, and there are 
extensive internet archives we can all consult once we see the actual text 
of the book.  But I consider what Jules did to be a breach of community on
the same order of Cantor and (yep, aint that interesting...) Siegel.  
Retaliation seems to me to be a way to prevent this sort of rudeness 
from happening more often, in other communities.  So I really do 
advocate anyone who is willing to use the law to fight his book.  

SO: I have fifty bucks I will (as a grad student and damn poor!) contribute
to any law attack.   Not because Jules is Wrong, cuz I dont believe in
right and wrong.  But because a little world I love has been pained
by an outsider's actions and the government happens to have a nice
tidy way to fight back.  Laws are an instrument that a community uses
to articulate their will.  From the ratio of glad/mad posts on Jules,
it certainly seems that we are on the "mad" side.

Andrew, I address you in specific because I respect your stance on
the free nature of internet discourse.  Do you also acknowledge the
integrity and reality of community and the distinct nature of the
respect that has been amazing to encounter in this .net?  If you do,
I cant see how you approve of Jules' violation of it. 

take care all
susan

ps.  Grounds to get upset at me: myth of booj indiv consensus, misinterp 
of Jules' project, over-reaction that could damage a fellow human, lack
of real participation myself in P-L, romaticization of "community" etcetc.