"Difficult"?

[jporter]

 Jules does some nice work here:

 I think that's because he doesn't have plots in the
>conventional sense. It's one of the more appealing qualities of his writing.
>You don't have to begin Gravity's Rainbow at the beginning. There is no
>beginning. It does open with a specific scene, but the book's organization
>is topological rather than logical. It describes a space and its contents,
>which relate to each other the way furniture and decorations in a room
>relate to the room and to each other. There is some sense of chronological
>time, but it is not very important in the novel's structure, which takes you
>through an exploration of a multi-dimensional map.
>

And again:

>"I wonder if anyone has commented on what it means: we are Gravity's
>Rainbow. You know-the spectrum is a manifestation of light energy. So
>Gravity's Rainbow would be the spectrum of gravity -- all that has mass, I
>guess. But I don't really think it applies, because gravity isn't energy;
>it's an effect of the shape of space,

Ah, but Jules, there is no absolute spacetime, only that which exists
between two or more masses. There is gravitational energy stored in the
shape of space, The more curve the more energy- neither is a cause or
effect of the other, they are synchronous.

 supposedly. I think it's really just
>another manifestation of what we call sexual attraction, love, that which
>brings one to join with another."

Or perhaps rejoin with one another? Almost there with this passage:

>These are preliminary thoughts. My main point is that the book is about the
>leap from shit through flesh to spirit and that this process is Gravity's
>Rainbow. The process is not described as a linear plot, but as eruptions
>along a continuum. The continuum is not any place in particular but the
>stuff of the book itself. If you look through the book, you'll find specific
>references to gravity as a manifestation of the life force and the planet as
>a living organism.

Rupert Sheldrake would be in harmony- this is almost "Morphic Resonance"
What's missing is an explanation of habit or memory, in the sense of
morphic fields: the strongest being closest in spacetime to the big bang-
'swhy the subatomic masses of the various particles are what they
idiosyncratically are, why the constants have their quirky values,
etc...Another definition for an increase in disorder could be a weakening
of the "morphic field" perceived as a loss of memory of initial forms.

Throw in some of Maturana's and Varela's autopoesis, spice it up with some
Jungian archetypal acausal synchronicity, and, who knows, the beginnings of
a new paradigm?

jody