GRGR(4)KK and "enthymeme"

[Thomas Eckhardt]

Doug wrote:

>Terrance thus sums up the two dominant views of GR, and TRP's work in
>general, as expressed here on Pynchon-L -- those who would deny the ability
>to find any ultimate meanings in TRP's novels (the yoyo ride), and those
>who find such meanings (the flashlight in the sewers). So many of our
>discussions here go in that loop. My reading of Pynchon tells me he's doing
>more than giving us sophisticated jerk-off stimuli.

Nobody ever has denied the "ability to find any ultimate meaning in TRP's
novels".  One can find ultimate meaning in the word "pencil" (oh,
phallocentric me!) if one wishes to. The question is whether the text at
hand allows for "ultimate meanings". In Pynchon's case the text doesn't,
though it certainly also doesn't allow each and any reading of it. 

a) My reading, debatable of course: There are no ultimate meanings, only
possibilities of constructing them in TRP's fiction. The act of constructing
them, of constructing "ultimate meanings" out of given data which perhaps
are only randomly connected, and the devastating effects this perhaps
natural activity of the human mind can have upon the real world and its
inhabitants, quite obviously is a central theme of TRP's novels. If Mr.
Pynchon "tells" us anything in his fictions, the first thing he tells us is
to be wary of "ultimate meanings". 

b) You say, in effect, that the statement that P's texts allow for various
readings is intellectual masturbation. This is once again an insult to
everybody who doesn't go along with your reading. Is this really necessary?

Thomas