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

[rj]

millison 
> (Likewise in the Slothrop/Bianca material it's
> far from clear if these are events that "really happen" in the novel or
> only in Slothrop's fantasy, if I'm remembering correctly; I haven't gotten
> that far ahead in my re-reading of the novel this time.)

It is intimated that both Miklos Thanatz and Margareta Erdmann (468.37,
397.17) at least, and probably a series of others (461.24-26) have
previously indoctrinated Bianca in matters carnal -- abused her,
exploited her, incest, pedophilia, whatever you want to call it. But,
even so, way I read it (pardon mon français and sorry to preempt the
host, but ... ) Slothrop pretty well fucks his brains out with her.
(469-470) It is important to pay attention to Pynchon's very deliberate
manipulation of the order of events in the narrative prelim. to this
sequence. On pp 468-469 at the section opening he wakes up, she's
suddenly there, waiting for him. 
> She moves towards him, smiling, pointing toes each step.(469.5)
When she's close enough she turns, he bites her ass. 
> She squirms but doesn't move away. (ll. 7-8)
Then she says to him: "Mm. There's a zipper there, could you . . . "
(469.8)

The actuality of this incredibly vivid scene, especially as compared to
that of the Zwolfkinder episode where Pokler isn't even sure whether it
*is* Ilse he meets, is intense. I'd need fairly specific textual
references to convince me that it is only Slothrop's fantasy at this
point, or that that is a conclusion Pynchon wishes us to draw; likewise
the conclusions presented as given re Pokler in Disneyland are tenuous
at best.

It seems to me that some readers need to centre their arguments about
the novel on a particular character -- Pointsman, for example, or Pokler
-- and are unable or unwilling to see beyond the ethical assumptions
that they have brought into the text with them. In order to maintain
this stance they must refuse to acknowledge or address the text as a
whole, or particular issues and events described in the narrative.
Unwarranted rancour and the attempted discrediting of others' points of
view or credentials then overtake and replace considered argument.
Shame.

*****

Paul refers to a theory I have seen reference to before hereabouts:

> Not that it matters to me (because it wasn't REAL, heh, heh) but somebody
> proved with algegra that Bianca actually was a big girl.

I'd be very interested to see the (legendary) working out of this
particular formulation with reference to the text. (I assume that it has
something to do with Bianca's conception on 'Alpdrucken' night, but I've
always assumed that that film was fictive.) 

Slothrop "knows he's vulnerable, more than he should be, to pretty
little girls" (463.17) when he first sees Bianca aboard the Good Ship.
After the colon in this sentence the description becomes objective (for
how, across the "distance" and "density of orgy-goers" could Slothrop
make out these precise details?) This is how Bianca is described:
"11 or 12, dark and lovely, wearing a red chiffon gown, silk stockings
and high-heeled slippers, her hair swept up elaborate and flawless and
interwoven with a string of pearls to show pendant earrings of crystal
twinkling from her tiny lobes . . . help, help. Why do these things have
to keep coming down on him?" (463.18-23)
Pynchon's trademark ellipsis here indicates a return to Slothrop's
conscience, and his moral plight.
 
There are reminders of Katje again here for him (as in all Slothrop's
subsequent conquests: was Katje his first I wonder?) But, of course, he
is being finessed into the situation. And yes, fantasy or no, he commits
the deed (though it does appear that Bianca is the active partner --
"his pretty horsewoman". (470.13)

best