MDMD(2): Deflation and Friendship flip-flop

[Paul Mackin]

>> 
>> Greg writes:
>> 
>> > it has long been taken for granted (by
>> >reviewers & a number of scholars) that TRP is "the paranoid's paranoid",
>> >and assumed that he takes all of these conspiracy theories seriously.

>> >Paul Mackin comments:

>> >>>>>This is a little contrary to what I (but who am I) had taken
>> for granted all these years--namely that the writing makes sport of
>> conspiracy theories. Of course, this doesn't mean P couldn't belittle
>> paranoid thinking and still be in its grip at the same time. He COULD
>> be a raving schizophrenic (if these unfortunates rave) for all we know
>> personally of him. But did anyone think the latter to be the case based
>> on the writing. Moreover, it's my recollection that at least some of
>> the initial reviewers of GR emphasized the mockery of it all. I will await
>> further advisement, correction, and chastisement.

To which John Pendergast comments:

>This is a great question. I think the mockery you sense is the natural
>result of writing a narrative--it would be impossible, I think, to write
>a truly paranoid novel since the very act of doing so would show they
>artifical connections between events which render them "fictional". Are
>you paranoid if they are only really after you because it moves the
>story along? That would seem to be the real question Pynchon asks.

>>>>>So, actual paranoia cannot LIVE or BE LIVED at a distance
(via writing), only JUDGED? Dismissed, mocked? Never embraced,
except through merciless use? But whatever its dominion, has it
not served The Pincher well? 

Now, what do you all suppose the tall guy is rily like?

                                        P.

This reply is at least an exercise in proper attribution, correct,
John M?