Prosthetic Paradise(2) Enfetishment&MS (fwd)

[Paul Mackin]

On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Michael Perez wrote: (in conclusion)
> This is the essence of my
> "measly little lives" theory from early on in GRGR.  As to what Pynchon
> reveals about his own ideas of morality, I really don't consider this
> all that much.  Does he think capitalism is good or evil?  Does he eat
> Count Chocula for breakfast?  I don't really care.  What he reveals in
> the books demands the attention of an active reader.  It is not in
> code, but is indeed open to many interpretations.  I don't think it was
> meant to be a morality tale, but since most people have decided for
> themselves what could be considered good or evil, moral or devoid of
> morality, GR certainly challenges the reader's beliefs.

I was following along nodding my head up to the part about challenging
reader's beliefs--then I thought, while there may be such a challenge
there to SOME readers, wouldn't the more usual case be that readers will
not so much  have their "beliefs" challenged or contradicted but rather
their knowledge bases and imaginations. Don't GR readers tend to go in
with a fairly strong set of social concerns and values already pretty well
firmly entrenched?  The book will do little to challenge or contradict
these. There is too much of a commonality in moral sense among readers and
writers of literary fiction for this not to be the case I would certainly
think. Therefore the proper reward for reading P is not having moral
ideas acknowledged and proclaimed. Rather it is the continual turning on
their heads (and then back upright again) of all thousands of ideas we
cherish and firmly hold so dear. It is not a moral exercise but an
esthetic one.

Or maybe not.

		P.