GRGR(9) Pointsman/Slothrop

[Andrew Dinn]

ckaratnytsky at nypl.org writes:
>      1) `habitually blank' (136.39) Why are these words italicised? Oh,
>      and whose are they by the way?

>      To me, this near-ironic use of a Pavlovian concept -- habit, I mean, 
>      or what is perceived as habit, through conditioning (this *is* a 
>      Pavlovian concept, is it not?) -- draws attention to the dominant 
>      character and topics of the section.  We are currently inhabiting the 
>      dream and, later, the inner mind of Pavlovian Pointsman, yes?, so 
>      terms like "predictable" and "constant" have a layered effect, in that 
>      their scientific as well as their everyday meanings are being invoked. 

That's what I thought which is why I asked. In particular Pointsman's
habituation is to blankness, whiteness - and in the light of the
previous and immediately following comments on the apparent randomness
and hence inexplicability of the rocket pattern I see that whiteness
in terms of white (i.e. random) noise. In other words he has been
conditioned, particularly *by his scientific training*, not to see (or
even look for) differentiating detail but to expect uniform
irregularity, lack of explanation even at a statistical level (no
scientist would assume regularity in phenomena but they are frequently
ready to presume randomness which itself is a form of regularity cf
the argument over Bayesian methods in statistics). And it is exactly
this training in not finding significance, explanation, reasons (as
opposed to the several canonical forms of reasoning in which he is
clearly intended to be proficient), which makes him such a disaster
outside of the laboratory.

>      I think the dream stuff here is dead-on tied to Pirate's/Slothrop's 
>      dream:  "More than an 'event'... our common mortality...these tragic 
>      days..."  Pynchon rocks the house with this subtle interrelations and 
>      dreamer Chris finds it very exciting.

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
...'?

>      11) `Even if the American's not legally a murderer he is sick' (144.7) 
>      Boy! that's rich!

>      I'm reading this as Pointsman's view that Slothrop is to be blamed for 
>      the death of Kevin Spectro, who got caught in one of the bombings.  He 
>      (Pointsman) feels that he (Slothrop) is responsible for the *all* of 
>      the bombings.  Is this what you're getting at, Andrew?

Never thought of Spectro. But yes, Pointsman seems to have turned the
correlation between Slothrop's map and the rocket falls into a causal
link, with Slothrop at the initiating end. Why? (Why is it Slothrop
directing the rockets, as opposed to the rockets [or those who fire
them] directing him to the relevant sites?) Well, because having a
blameworthy Slothrop makes it easier for Pointsman to justify his
unethical (ab)use of his subject. It's such a convenient smokescreen
he even believes in it. He can even convince himself he is doing good.

>      12) `We must never lose control' (144.36) Double boy! He continues 
>      `The thought of him lost in the world of men, after the war, fills me 
>      with a deep dread I cannot extinguish [...]'. These lines are really 
>      scary. Pointsman recognises that he appears `creepy' to others but 
>      only as a physical thing. But this is the mental creeps of a higher 
>      order which, of course, he cannot recognise.

>      Yes, it becomes a little clearer for me here, maybe:  Pointsman 
>      (misguidedly?) thinks Slothrop "a monster," whereas he fails to 
>      recognize the horror of his own monstrousness, yes?  But I'm not sure 
>      I understand what his monstrousness is.  The "should haves?"  The 
>      experiments?  The destructive self-delusions?  This is what you mean 
>      by "mental creeps," Andrew, yes?

Well, I'd say experimenting on Slothrop is pretty damning. I
personally find the dog experiments awful too but Slothrop is a
different order of abuse, not (to quote the usual argument) because
humans are more important than dogs and therefore should not be used
in experiments, rather because Pointsman is betraying one of the
fundamental sanctions which regulate scientific research involving
animals, human or otherwise, that of causing no unnecessary harm to
the subjects of his research (actually in this case objects would give
a far better term to describe how he sees them).

Pointsman is using a cooked up, gross excuse and is clearly doing it
for his own glory. So, lots of people make these sort of excuses for
their selfishness all the time? Yes, but the creepiness comes from the
fact that Pointsman will do so 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. How
the urge to further scientific knowledge is often rooted in the urge
to obtain greater and greater control over the world (a paranoid
overreaction - why does the world need to be tied down for us to enjoy
it - and an illusory perspective, given how each refinement seems to
feed the juggernaut, diminsihing the ability of any individual to
control it) and also in the urge to exercise greater and greater
personal control in one's own world - as manifest in Pointsman's
selfish desires for wealth, power and a larger research empire.


Andrew Dinn
-----------
And though Earthliness forget you,
To the stilled Earth say:  I flow.
To the rushing water speak:  I am.