tsk tsk pt.3

[Paul Mackin]

Marlene McMullen writes:

But, I do think it is a good thing
for men to be reminded of the impact of the metaphors we tend to choose.
Even though no harm was intended, is it not integrous to see the validity of
the point being made?


This seems to me to be EXACTLY the right way to say it.
Can't speak for other males but  I am pretty continuously aware
of the cruelty explicit and implicit in Pynchon's language. ( in mine too on a smaller scale)
I definitely accept the validity of Dana's points. Also believe that if you take
out what is repugnant in the language you surely obliterate what is compelling
as well.  

								P.

----------
From:  Marlene McMullen[SMTP:mcmullenm at vcss.k12.ca.us]
Sent:  Sunday, September 21, 1997 11:49 PM
To:  Paul Mackin; pynchon-l at waste.org
Subject:  Re: tsk tsk pt.3

Paul writes:
>Being honest and admitting what you're doing is always a good rule. Would
Pynchon
>ever claim for a minute that when Slothrop meets up with Bianca that the
field
>of action is NOT the violated female body and all the image connotes down
through the ages in peace and war?  Great writers latch onto a powerful
image when they can.
>Even as do lowly p-listers.
>
> P.

I have no quarrel with the intentions of the creator of the metaphor that
initiated this discussion. Was it you? But, I do think it is a good thing
for men to be reminded of the impact of the metaphors we tend to choose.
Even though no harm was intended, is it not integrous to see the validity of
the point being made? And, I think Pynchon is an equal opportunity
genitalia-metaphor employer. From rockets to Snow-Balls to herds of Boyish
erections, the male apparatus is duly represented.