Mason and Dixon

[Terrance F. Flaherty]

Paul Mackin wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Terrance F. Flaherty wrote:
> 
> > I know, I really was an ass to write what I wrote about
> > Wood's book. I don't think his essay is much help with this
> > topic. What do you think of his DeLillo essay? Or others? I
> > actually like some things his says about Melville,
> > surprised? I think TRP has big shoes to fill if he has
> > indeed inherited HM's Estate, but I think he wears them
> > well.
> 
> I didn't object to anything you wrote. I enjoyed what little I've read of
> the book. Skimmed the Melville, Pynchon, and Delillo pieces plus the
> ending material on Arnold and Renan and the humanization of religion with
> the Jesus-as-a-character-in-a-novel bit--a character in a novel instead of
> a real entity we are obliged to deal with as some kind of fact. Thought I
> was back with the Jesuits. 

Jesuits are pretty good readers as I remember. 

Wood is a very old fashioned guy. He goes out
> of his way to declare his own disbelief (for all the ususal reasons) but
> is obviously troubled over where he has ended up. A nice contrast to that
> science smug Weinberg Rich quoted from the other day. As I say I've only
> got started with the book and probably don't fully appreciate yet the
> connections Wood is making between religious belief (which at least
> formerly was real belief) and fictional belief with its own kind of
> reality.  I am definitely interested in finding out. It may explain a lot.

Well, I found this old fashioned guy, a bore on these
religious/fiction matters. Doesn't interest me a bit.
Doesn't concern me. In my post I played with his terms, his
estate and broken estate for example. In my post I suggested
a discussion of allegory to deal with his M&D essay. I still
think, on Pynchon, this is the problem I have with Wood. 
> 
> Naturally I don't think P should write the way Wood thinks makes
> good fiction. I like him well enough the way he is. I follow to
> a certain extent Wood's points about P's not giving us what W
> calls reality. 

Right, I agree, reality is not what a Pynchon reader should
expect, and I'm glad for this. I don't want to get into a
genre argument with terms, but I simply don't find Pynchon's
fiction real, and I love it for this. 


I always have had that feeling about P. I just don't
> get involved with his people the way I do say with Roth or any number of
> other good novelists. 

Right, why would you get involved with his "people" ??

It's more like a clever game than an experience
> of real people I can identify with. However I would say that Wood worries
> a lot more about so called meaning in the p-books and Pynchon's politics
> than I do. I just don't take the ideas that seriously I guess. Seems to me
> he doesn't either. He just has certain political mannerisms--probably a
> relic of the time he came of age.

Pynchon has politics, serious politics, some are naturally
political mannerisms of the age, his age, but I think he has
consistent targets and concerns. These are unique and I
don't think they are in agreement with other writers or with
the general political positions common to the age, or his
age. 

> 
> As for the DeLillo piece I really think Wood goes slightly overboard with
> the cold war paranoia thing. Of course Wood is saying that D is the one
> going overboard. Wood dislikes political paranoia in fiction the same way
> he dislikes allegory. Well maybe I'm a terrible reader but I kind of
> ignored the paranoia the same way I ignore Pynchon's so called politics.
> I think Wood's relative youth may be a problem. He can't have experienced
> much of the real cold war. He's obviously read a  lot of overblown stuff
> about it. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I thought it was a perfectly
> good theme for DeLillo to build his novel around. The way everything was
> tied together was awfully contrived but I did get involved with the
> characters. Even identified with them.
> 

That's a good point. Missing the cold war is more common in
mature persons these days. He is, I think 35 or so, and may
not have the same chills as an older guy, some of the
writers. 
>                         P.