GRGR (15): Good & Evil (was Enzian...)

[Seb Thirlway]

[snip]

>Tim went on to say:
>>There are plenty of examples in Pynchons fiction of groups of
people sharing
>>alternative moralities eg: the folks aboard the Anubis, the
guests at
>>Foppls's "villa" in V. These people exist in their own moral
universe. And
>>the morality of relationships between characters -
Enzian-Weissmann,
>>Slothrop-Bianca, Katje - whoever... they are all subjective.

>I believe that these "alternative moralities" are both social
analogies to
>the cruelty and evils of WW2, and the well from which it
erupted.
>I don't believe GR's little details of coprophagy (I had to look
that one
>up), sadomasochism, and pedophilia, are the part of any moral
question. I
>see them as the demonstration of an unambiguous moral judgement.
>
>p3++

I don't know about "social analogies" - perhaps you could make a
convincing causal connection between these "alternative
moralities" and the large-scale evils of WWII.  As in the old
definition of obscenity in British law - "likely to deprave or
corrupt".  In practice, I'd probably agree with you if you did -
though I'm not familiar with any of these practices first-hand.
In the book, as you sit there reading it, or as it was written -
I think: no way, I can't see any "unambiguous moral judgment"
there at all.  What you get is something much more disturbing -
after x pages of illuminated, ecstatic writing that sweeps you
along, you suddenly get swept along by the same momentum into a
subject matter of eating shit, pain, submission, or sex with a
young boy or girl...and the writing is so well done, so much
inside the protagonist's thoughts, with just as much lyricism and
humanity attributed to Pudding, or Blicero, as to Roger Mexico
for instance, just as much sheer skill and exuberance in
describing Bianca as Slothrop sees her in the cabin, as in
putting across Roger's thoughts of Jessica ... that, hooked on
the prose, you don't _quite_ stop in time.
There's no moral judgment in these passages, or even
subsequently - nothing that could be described as Pudding,
Slothrop or Blicero "getting their just deserts" (though what
happens when Slothrop returns to the Anubis is horrific, but I
can't quite work out that connection - I don't think it's an
obvious pay-back).  And all this bodily fluid stuff never seems
shabby or deflated either - TRP is having fun, the time of his
life it seems, writing these parts of the book, making his prose
as seductive as he knows how to, on purpose I think: exactly so
as to draw you in, make you forget that what's happening is
something you might normally think of as wrong, or revolting.

I really wondered when GR first knocked me sideways (at 17)
whether TRP was really _endorsing_ all this...I don't know
anymore: is he taking a nasty swipe at lyricism in general -
lyricism, self-justification through beatiful words, erudition,
they're all morally neutral, and just look where I can lead you
with them...?  Anyone can read Rilke, even child-abusers, and
even weave Rilke into their apologia - and even convince you,
make you forget the morality that, soberly, you subscribe to: if
they're skilled or expressive enough.  if that's the point it's a
point that hits home - cf. lots of interesting posts about the
romantic "love = death" obsession a few weeks ago (from the FTP
as I'm new here) which I probably wasn't really wanting to hear
at 17 being enthralled with Mahler/Rilke/Wagner and all that lot.

IMO the coprophagy, SM and paedophilia are not "little details",
but some of the points in GR where TRP really pushes it - too far
for the Pulitzer judges anyway.  Any "unambiguous moral judgment"
on these sections has to come from the reader, and TRP does his
best to make moral judgment difficult.



seb