M&D linguistic paper

[David Casseres]

Andrew sez
>Oh, I don't doubt that he recasts C20th English in C18th language (in
>part) because Dr Pynchonstein wants to inject a C20th vitality into
>the corpses he raises from their C18th graves. And maybe for the same
>reason as Baz Luhrman recently gave Romeo & Juliet the Ephram
>Zimbalist Jr treatment. A straight reconstruction would be a story of
>men in tights (or rather frock coats). Too much faithfulness to period
>detail and the nuances would not be comprehensible. So, if we mix in
>some formula C20th cues we are not only slyly nodding to the audience
>we are also setting up their expectations by riffing on their
>media-savvy experience. Does Vineland not do the same using TV
>formulae to re-present the 60s (and the early 80s).

Though still in the early chapters of M&D, I think there's more to it 
than that.  There's so much cross-reference that I'm convinced Pynchon is 
signalling us that this Tale is both the mirror (as you've suggested) of 
Gravity's Rainbow, and the beginning of a narrative about America that 
ends in L.A. in the 50's with Blicero's Rocket screaming across the sky; 
a narrative that is perhaps taken up again in Vineland, and parallel to 
the European narrative that began in the Thurn & Taxis story of The 
Crying of Lot 49, continued in various episodes of V., and ended with the 
launch of Blicero's Rocket.

So what about the language?  In each novel, the diction covers a wide 
range but is mostly in keeping with the ostensible period of the story.  
But in M&D, with its "linear" story marching forward (mostly) through a 
single span of time, the mixing of time-dialects serves the same purpose 
as the cutting back and forth in time itself that occurs in Gravity's 
Rainbow and especially in V..  The point is to tie it all together, to 
remind us that it's all really a single Tale, to keep us on that leading 
edge of the perception that Everything Is Connected.  Given that purpose, 
which seems very clear to me, I'm most reluctant to think any of the 
anachronisms are less than deliberate.



Cheers,
David