GRGR(3) 50.31 Love Pointsman

[Keith Woodward]

At 03:28 PM 6/9/99 -0400, Paul wrote:
>Do you mean women might be an example of a portion of the audience  which the
>accusations, taunts, kiddings,  fondlings, whatever they are,  are expressly
>not meant for? If so, did the prof elaborate?

My prof suggested that many of the "you"s appear to be directed at a
masculine audience.  I honestly can't recall any particulars at the moment,
but when I do, I'll post them.  If I recall correctly, he was suggesting it
at the same time that we were discussing Annette Kolodny's feminism (which I
think is quite interesting and perhaps does have some connection to this
portion of the thread).  She argues (please, someone correct me where I err)
that there is a feminine way of reading/writing (the implication seems to
include communication in general) that is seperate from the patriarchal
traditions of reading/writing in western lit.  It's been some time since I
worked with it, so it would be best if someone else could fill in
particulars (or I'll try to reread some of it and repost later).  But, in a
broader context, Pynchon ribs us about taking apart the text, saying
something to the effect of its being "annotated, explicated, and masturbated
until [we've] squeezed out its last limp drop."  Then somewhere else, he
uses the "you" directly:  "Caught you with your hands down your pants."  He
makes phallic associations with the text and the reader and addresses the
reader-qua-interpreter in that same manner.  This is just an example (and,
no doubt, relies on interpretive strategies itself), but the suggestion was
that there are many similar examples in GR.  

>Are some readers BEYOND being implicated in P's fantasies?

And, if so, who could They possibly be?

>What are these excluded readers supposed to be doing while the favored ones are
>being scolded or titillated?

That's a good question.  But I wonder if we all don't experience it at
different points in the novel.  I think many are put off by the
Katje/Pudding scene.  (of course, there's a nosejob scene in a certain other
text that always does it for me.  I read it with one eye shut.  blegh)

>Did you ever notice (or its it true) that in certain controlled  narrations,
>such as racial  jokes,  that the listener is automatically and involuntarity
>implicated? (this is a slightly different point)

Yeah, it is a slightly different point, but I think it falls into the same
category.  I frankly think it's one of the coolest things that happens
between reader and text in GR.  It's so important to reading the book, too.
Gives me tingles thinking bout it because it makes you want to attribute
some kind of agency to the text itself.  You're going along having a great
time when, all of a sudden, uuuuggg, waitaminute, this guy's messin with me
again.

Keith W
keith w