Mason's Fantasy

[Brian D. McCary]

Eric summerizes:
"Upon telling Mason of the encouter [w/ Dieter] Charlie asks Nevil if
Clive of In-di-a will pay, but it seems the answers Nevil offers
regarding Clive always end in No. Thus Charles has an elaborate
day-dream about being back in London society, and receiving the thanks
of Clive for the well-keeping of his brother-in-law.  this comes in the
form of a beautiful envelope full of "Thanks for Watching Nevil.""

I quote in part (163:13):
	[Clive says] "... Nevil's sanity is important to me, as I'm sure it
must be to Lady Clive as well.  I wish I knew some better way to
express..." But being Clive of India, alas, does not.  The stiff cream
Object approaching Mason's Hand... "For preserving the Futurity of
Astronomy in Britain..."  Thus at the instant of first Exterior
Contact, before Immersion of the Gift into a Coat-Pocket, all Honor
Mason might take in the Moment is drain'd away, as even his Daydreams
turn upon him, allowing among them Clive Anointing Maskelyne..."

This is a particularly interesting passage for two reasons.  When I
first read it, I was reminded of Pointsman's Nobel dream in GR: the
dreaming of glory to come (as contrasted with, for instance, Brigideer
Pudding's pining for the glory long past).  The wonderful, and subtle,
differance is in the perfection of the fantasy.  Pointsman's dream is
"perfect", while Mason's day-dream is much more complex.  Mid-stroke,
he recongnizes in horror that what he is fantasizing about is not his
own assencion, but rather that of Maskelyne. For if Mason is appointed
as the Astronomer Royal, keeping Maskelyne sane would be a small part
of "preserving the Futurity of Astronomy in Britain".  This is also why
Clive knows no better way to express what he feels; he doesn't really
feel anything for Maskelyne, but has been choosen as the appropriate
representitive of some shadow committee as the appropriate one to
stroke Mason's ego (possibly bruised) probably just to keep him
available for further service.

I think the fantasies of the young tend to be much like Pointsman's, in
that they are wild, completely improbable, and exceptionally perfect.
Mason's fantasy *is* that of a more mature mind, drawing more on the
real and immediate experiences.  Mason, subconsiously, knows his
preterite status.

Pointsman's Nobel fantasy was written before the Pulitzer debacle,
while Mason's was written after.  I wonder if the increased sense of
reality and politics was a result of Pynchon's own reaction and
self-examination after the whole affair.  Did Pynchon, at one point,
hope to win one of the big ones?  If so, did he come to see something
darker in them after the whole affair?

Brian McCary