GRGR 11 Proverbs for Paranoids (was also Re: GRGR(11): transcendence/annihilation

[rj]

I tend to see the Proverbs for Paranoids as deriving from a narrative
source outside of Slothrop. I don't think he possesses the acuity or
commitment to devise them for himself -- yet. I think that, like true
proverbs, they are expressed unironically for the most part, and that
they are actually promulgating truths which Slothrop, if he was more
alert than he is, should be coming to understand by dint of his
experiences thus far. They are Slothrop's lessons, in other words, but
Tyrone's a slow learner. 

Also, insofar as Slothrop's dilemma is identified with that of the
reader (i.e. in trying to make sense of it all), the proverbs function a
little like Nietzschean aphorisms. I think that they actually provide
commentary on the narrative for the reader in lieu of their recognition
by Slothrop, and, that they are meant to apply across the board.

Thus, PfP #1 applies to Pointy and Blicero, as well as to Slothrop,
Katje et. al., and is a lesson about relativity and Control.

PfP #2 emphasises that "the Master" is undefined, and that various
individuals serve various "Masters".

Pointy's Master could well be Pavlov: Science is the abstraction or
higher truth served. For Blicero it is Rilke, perhaps, and Love is the
abstraction. For Slothrop and Katje the bodily Self is the Master, in
terms of hedonism and individuation respectively, and base
self-preservation is the issue for both.

I take PfP #2 to mean that when the Masters are immoral, like the heads
of those multinational corporations such as Wimpe who serve only power
and wealth, then the loyal creatures like Tchitcherine plying the
company line are not innocent at all. But someone like Gottfried, whose
Master is Blicero, is an archetypal innocent, *because* Blicero's
dominion is constructed upon an elaborate moral schema. Even the human
"Masters" like Blicero and Pointy fit into the hierarchy, too, for they
are creatures serving other Masters themselves.

Murthy Y:

> In sufism, annihilation is the annihilation of the self (via immersion
> in love and merger with the Master/Teacher standing in for God). It's
> quite different from Blicero's version (love of Death and pursuit of it
> via annihilation of everything - in essence, taking upon himself the
> functions of the Lord of Death).

We could also read Blicero as a (per)version of the Christian God who
willingly sacrifices his "Son" (Gottfried) as the ultimate expression of
His Love.

The characters in *GR* who have the greatest insight into humanity and
the world are the ones who are capable of and responsible for the most
wicked atrocities. Power corrupts, human nature etc. Witness Enzian's
"education". For Pynchon Slothrop is the Chosen One -- like the Gadarene
swine or Ursula the lemming -- who, against all odds and in defiance of
all logical imperatives -- just might be able to turn things around.

The reader doesn't escape the PfP #2 syllogism either. Our "Master"
whilst reading is "the author", our abstraction or higher truth "the
Text". In this we are just as indoctrinated by and devoted to the
inanimate by-products and cultural dross of the era as Slothrop is
within the narrative. We are *conditioned* to read in certain ways, and
this conditioning has been planted in us from infancy. This conditioning
must be subverted, but it is virtually impossible to achieve this from
within the system of the novel. Thus, the self-deprecating and
exasperated later characterisations of the author and his readers as
schlemiels like Slothrop once was, glozing neuters scuffling off into
some undistinguished mediocrity, still trapped within "The System" of
the novel.

best