GRGR(9) Pointsman/Slothrop

[Paul Mackin]

Inspired by Chris (that), John and Andrew to look more closely
at the Pointman-dream subsection, I noticed something I didn't
remember seeing commented on. It was the (unusual) tense shifts.

This may be tedious, but could be importrant, so here goes:

Ignoring the initial subordinate clause,
"when weak stimuli get strong responses",
the subsection starts in the past tense (noncontinuing action),
"When DID it happen?",  (all emphasis supplied)
 followed by a quite natural use of the past perfect,
"You HAD NOT HEARD the . . .",
 continuing on for ten or so lines in which action is conveyed
only by verbal adjectives, describing mainly what had not been heard
(which in itself needs comment).

Then returning to the past tense,
"You SLEPT, . . ."
"It WAS indoors . . ."

Then to the present perfect,
" a round white light, quite intense, HAS GONE sliding . . . "
so that the shift to the present sounds quite natural,
"Then suddenly, it APPEARS again, . . ."

The present tense continues for a few lines until the ellipsis (. . .),
when the past tense and the past perfect are again used, 
"No one KNEW what the round light signified."
"A commision HAD BEEN APPOINTED . . ."

Then, after another elipsis, the present tense again,
"The assembly AJOURNS." 
"You LOOK quickly over at a clock."
"It'S the street before your childhood home."
continuing for the rest of the long paragarph.

Then, in the short, final paragraph of the subsection, it's back to the past,
"You SAT bolt upright in bed, . . ."

Does anyone except me find these tense shifts at least
interesting? Not that they seem awkward exactly. I never even
noticed them before. Going to take some time to figure them out.

  				P.
-------
> From: ckaratnytsky at nypl.org
> To: no To-header on input <unlisted-recipients:;>
> Cc: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: Re[2]: GRGR(9) Pointsman/Slothrop
> Date: Friday, January 31, 1997 4:08 PM
> 
>      Quoth Andrew re Pointsman's dream:
>      
>      >Interesting idea linking it to Pirate. Certainly sounds better to me 
>      >than all that holy-centre approaching/avoiding stuff but I will have 
>      >to think about this. One reason I asked about the dream is that it is 
>      >retold in the 2nd person. Who is saying `you this ...' and `you that 
>      >...'?
>      
>      And quoth the pugilistic Polonius Mascaro:
>      
>      [snip]
>      
>      >This p.o.v. reveals, in typical Pointsman fashion, how it thinks even 
>      >of itself as an *other*; Pointsman sees himself in his dreams as a 
>      >subject (or, as Andrew points out, an *object*) of his own awareness
>      
>      I went back last night and had a look at Pirate's dream in the first 
>      chapter.  Interestingly, there is none of the "you this..."  and "you 
>      that..." in that sequence -- Pirate experiences the events and, 
>      importantly, I think, the *sensations* of the dream directly.  There's 
>      no other, no distancing 2nd person filter.  The phrase "an 
>      interdiction, from which there is no appeal" on p.137 in the Pointsman 
>      section also links to Pirate (only I can't find where else it appears 
>      at the moment).  The observation you make, Andrew, about Pointsman's 
>      habituation to blankness/whiteness is well done, I think.  I was 
>      wondering what to do with that.  You would include the white flowers 
>      as another emblem of this habituation, yes?  (This brings to mind 
>      Blicero and *his* flower of choice, the lovely enzian.  Hmm, what's 
>      all this about flowers, do you think?)
>      
>      Andrew on question 12 after some snipping:
>      
>      >the creepiness comes from the fact that Pointsman will [make excuses 
>      >to justify his selfish actions] even to the point of destroying 
>      >Slothrop's mind. And the comment about losing control really gives 
>      >the game away. Anyone who needs to control things around them this 
>      >much really has problems. Remember Pynchon's aside at the seance 
>      >that `control was always the problem'. He was not talking about 
>      >Peter Sachsa. He was talking about the Ned Pointsman's of this 
>      >world.[...]
>      
>      Also, note two things about the last paragraph of p.144:  "There's 
>      something here, too transparent and swift to get a hold on--Psi 
>      Section might speak of ectoplasms..."  and "Whatever we may find, 
>      there can be no doubt that he is, physiologically, historically, a 
>      monster.  We must never lose control.  The thought of him lost in the 
>      world of men..."
>      
>      First off, I think there's a pun here (and in the line you cite above, 
>      Andrew) on "control."  As in, what kind of control *is* there for an 
>      experiment like Slothrop?
>      
>      Secondly, this image of an on-the-loose transparent blob recalls our 
>      friend, that lymphatic monster, the Adenoid, another link to Pirate 
>      and chapter one.
>      
>      Sure glad I had that cigarette after lunch.
>      
>      Now on to, whoa, this Steely/Tinasky thang.  Boy, RUTHSINGS, I've 
>      gotta hand it to you:  You may not post very often, but what you post 
>      is "cherce," as Spencer Tracy would say.  (The rest of us would say 
>      "choice.")
>      
>      That Chris
>