Report from the New School

[davemarc]

For me, the biggest disappointment about the New School thing was the
bloodnessness Chris mentioned.  There they were, sitting under that great
orange arc (duly noted by the ever-observant RICH ROMEO), and claiming that
they loved M&D, but not really showing much feeling or overt enthusiasm.

The remarks were intelligent although not particularly incisive.  But, all
things considered, I'm glad I went.  Even though I was surprised (and
disappointed) at how many participating audience members hadn't read the
book, I found it  stimulating to hear it being discussed publicly
(particularly when the floor was opened and we were told we didn't have to
go to the microphone to ask questions).  

In many respects Francine Prose impressed me the most.  She spoke rarely,
but very sensibly.  I liked the gist of Wright's remarks though I disagreed
with some specifics.  He suggested Pynchon was paganistic; I'd tend to
describe him as "primitivistic."  Regarding the Duck Soup/Platoon
dichotomy, I differ a bit with him and Chris.  Here's why.

First, Wright made it a point to call M&D "subversive" and put forth Duck
Soup as another model of (anti-war) subversion while belittling Platoon. 
I've got a growing dislike for the term "subversive."  I tend to agree with
Don Delillo, who at a recent gathering on behalf of Wei Jingsheng (or was
it a promotion for his book?  or was it both?  or something else?) said
that while totalitarian governments destroy their writers, capitalist ones
absorb them.  With that in mind, I think there's got to be a better word
for Pynchon's writing.  And Duck Soup.  Further, I think the efficacy of
Duck Soup and Platoon may not be so different in conveying anti-war
messages.  Platoon stirred feelings of pathos (apologies if I'm misusing
that p-word); Duck Soup was effective as satire.  Two different languages
that I find equally valid.

Yes, I did speak with Rick Moody afterward.  I think he did a fine job, and
look forward to reading his review.  I wouldn't be surprised if it was
enriched by his contact with the list, but...perhaps I'll feel differently
after I read it.  He had a couple of regrets about things he said on the
panel; he didn't seem very comfortable with the whole shebang, actually.  I
don't think he exactly dissed the list, though it sure sounded like it when
he made that remark about foax dissecting Pynchon with those dang decoder
rings.  I guess he was probably thinking of some of us.  So now he's joined
the list of pundits who have felt it necessary to dis die-hard Pynchon
readers while discussing Mason & Dixon.  But I still have a lot of respect
for him--as well as those Pynchon vivisectionists (as long as they don't
make to much of a mess).

Mendelsohn(sp?) was earnest and informed, but I admit being amused by the
way he kept on referring to C49 and other past works.  Nothing wrong with
that, of course.  It's just that, yes, I wanted more talk about M&D and
everyone seemed extremely reluctant to really take the plunge.  There was a
lot of vagaries like "this is a great book," "he's a great author," "he
incorporates science and conveys a sense of wonder," "it's funny, it's
serious, it's a candy, it's a gum," and "read this book" (who promoted this
thing again?), but little of the substantive discussion we've gotten on
this list for--what--a month or so, now?  I was also dismayed that NOBODY
shouted out spoiler warnings when talking specifics.

Which brings me to Chris's comments about hoping for "a more lively, more
in-depth chat--the kind we have so often here on-line.  The participation
of list-members, frankly, might have injected the necessary oomph."  I
agree 100%.  Attending this panel discussion (and making a recent tour of
other literary mailing lists) has heightened my appreciation of this list. 
After immersion in our M&D exchanges, I felt, at the New School, like one
of those science fiction characters who get sped up and see everyone else
moving in slow motion.  The difference between our discussions and the one
at the New School was clear.  At our best, live and online, we really do
enjoy a lively blend of passions, erudition, and humor.  

davemarc