Meshugginah posts, and other things sundry
calbert at pop.tiac.net
calbert at pop.tiac.net
Sun Jul 6 07:47:18 CDT 1997
Funny how a little word can generate so much chaff. Interpretations
as projections of self and anon, excuse me if I fail to see the
relevance. So much IQ expended in ad hominem and mulieres
commentary, so little thought.
Consider the following, the Gershom-
Washington relationship as another example of the TRP high/low
game. Throughout the passage there seems to be an effort to
characterize Washington as something less than the man of the world
he would perceive himself to be. In fact, there is reason to
believe that he is a good deal less cosmopolitan than his putative
servant. For example, Gershom is described as having a career in
"showbiz" (G is also described as a Canaanite, I'll leave it to more
qualified voices to elaborate on the Canaanite/Jewish connection,
would this make him a colonial Sammy Davis Jr.?) that has afforded
him the opportunity to travel the colonies and amass a wealth
comparable to that of his master. He does not appear too servile, and
has no qualms about questioning his "masters" investment suggestions
in a quite "cheeky" manner - IN FRONT OF GW'S GUESTS.
When attributing the invention of the punch they are drinking W.
tells his guests that it was the work of "my Man Gershom". Though
this could be read very literally, what if we contracted the phrase
to "m' man G.", mimicking current street vernacular? By so doing we
can see W as a hep pretender, a type with which I am sure we are all
familiar. In this vein it would be very reasonable to expect that his
use of "meshugginah" is in the same spirit. It is the WASP trying to
sound cool by appropriating the terminology of what his group might
consider a lower, yet infinitely fascinating order, and doing so
incorrectly. Such an interpretation does not leave us debating to
what degree TRP pooched in his use of Yiddish. Why would a writer
with his reputation for accuracy not be able to find the correct form
of a relatively commonly used term? I hate to generalize, but are we
to believe that the drafts to M&D had never been read by anyone
jewish - in the world of New York publishing? To ascribe this to
error would be a considerable undertaking; to view it shorn of
personal projections and biases as a simple literary technique is not
only feasible, but to this intellectual plankton, the most reasonable
course.
This interpretation suffers only two major drawbacks,
a) it deprives Jules (sorry buddy, but I think you are on the wrong
track with this) of a cudgel with which to pummel trp for a lack of
sensitivity (don't give up, there will surely be other opportunities)
b) it robs Vaska, whose pronouncements on this has set new standards
for "self-embossed bombast", of the altitudinous perch from which she
has chosen to defecate on the Man.
My profound thanks to those who have patiently waded through my
inelegant prose to get to this point.
love,
cfa
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list