Enthymemo (is Re: re P's intentions etc

[jbor]

----------
millison:
>
> Focusing exclusively on Pynchon's text would also seem
> to preclude one particular pleasure that Pynchon's works offer us,
> too:  tracing out the allusions (historical and artistic) that he has
> so obviously worked into his text -- the kind of thing that Charles
> Hollander does in his articles, for example -- and using them to
> interpret the text.  Why some critics would deny that approach
snip

Not so sure about that "obviously". As I understand it, the "approach"
involves finding a half-name in the text which is shared by an actual
personage and then inventing some sort of commentary on historical events
which Pynchon has supposedly encoded in his narrative. A recent article of
Mr Hollander's in 'Pynchon Notes' utilised this process to suggest that *The
Crying of Lot 49* was an "encrypted meditation" on the assassination of JFK.
Let's see if we can make it work for Blicero/Weissmann. Here's one:

Chaim Weizmann (1874-1952). Born near Pinzk in Russian Poland, but emigrated
to Britain. As a biochemist he held an influential position in the
explosives department of the Admirality from 1916 to 1919. He was recognized
at this time as the leader of British Zionism and was consulted by the
Foreign Office during the preparation of the Balfour Declaration of 1917. He
became head of the World Zionist movement in 1920 and of the Jewish Agency
for Palestine in 1929. He was elected first president of Israel in 1948.

http://israeliculture.about.com/culture/israeliculture/library/weekly/aa0124
00c.htm
http://www.wzo.org.il/home/dev/lab.htm

Now, I wonder what a "magic eye" critic (of an anti-Semitic bent) might be
able to do with this particular "enthymeme"? Emigré ... biochemist ...
explosives ... involvement with the Foreign Office ... the creation of a new
political state in the post-War world ... "Look high, not low" ... &c Very
evocative. I'm sure that the "particular pleasure" afforded to the reader
whose own ideological viewpoint is in concert with this critics' would be
just as palpable. However and thus, I don't believe it is a valid or
legitimate way to read the texts at all, particularly when framed as a
critical, didactic enterprise (no personal disrespect to Mr Hollander
intended.) It is an approach which prescribes authorial intentions and
attitudes where none are textually explicit.


PS Interestingly, the current president of Israel, Ezer, is Chaim Weizmann's
nephew:

http://www.mercurycenter.com/breaking/docs/068914.htm

http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/~dafid/news/weizman.html