V. (Ch 3) Impersonations and Dreams

[John Bailey]

I'm finding this discussion of TRP's spirituality really interesting, and 
everyone's been putting forward some really good arguments. For myself, I 
tend to side with Paul & Terrance's camps...I don't think we can find a 
solid doctrine which we can attribute to P. just by sifting through the 
novels, as one of the most striking features of his stuff is the way that 
almost everything is filtered through the consciousness of a character (or 
two...threeee....). GR is pretty damn hard to read without keeping this in 
mind, for me at least, which leads me back to VV:

If we take one of the Big Subjects of V. to be the encounter of the animate 
with the inanimate, then it's not a huge stretch to consider all of the 
narrative (not just the impersonations etc) as conveyed by the consciousness 
of the main character in each section. This is particularly easy in the 
multitude of chapters which are being recounted by characters (Mondaugen, 
Stencil, Fausto etc), but even Benny's bits have a strong tone linking them, 
which can be contrasted to other chapters. Fausto's Confessions, for 
instance, have a highly poetic/imagistic quality which is not similar to, 
say, the world as seen by the sailors or the Crew. In fact, it's hard to 
read the characters' personalities in separation from the world they 
inhabit, for the very reason that the environment is filtered through their 
own subjectivity.

I'm drifting a bit here.

But anyway, even if what I've just written is the case, I don't think that 
you could make the same statements for P's later work. GR has some (sort of) 
omniscient narrator (or many actually - often contradictory) which can't be 
located to a character. There is just too much comment going on, though I 
don't think this is indicative of P's actual beliefs, just musings and 
possibilities he might think are important. Vineland and M&D are very 
different but still aren't as focused as V. on the limits of consciousness 
and narrative. It's because that isn't their project. It is V's.

Hum.


>From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
>To: pynchon-l at waste.org
>Subject: Re: V. (Ch 3) Impersonations and Dreams
>Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 10:18:50 -0500
>
>I agree the words quoted from the introduction to STONE JUNCTION are not
>ironic.  Rather, to me the sense is fanciful.  Like "resurrection of the 
>body"
>appearing elswhere in  p-text. Not approaching  in any way a religious 
>hope--in
>that sense in which the  "resurrection of the body" is an article of faith 
>for
>Christians.  More like a "what if." Or an "if only." But, hey, I'll freely 
>admit I'm
>
>pretty terrible in the realm of spirituality. Monistic materialism is too 
>thoroughly
>
>ingrained. Perhaps I will have a deathbed conversion but right now its hard 
>to
>imagine.
>
>Enjoyed your reply..
>
>                 P.
>
>Lorentzen / Nicklaus wrote:
>
> > Paul Mackin schrieb:
> >
> > > Please excuse a poor nonreader of Eddins from treading into waters he 
>knows
> > > not of, but is anyone saying that late Pynchon believes himself to be 
>in
> > > possession of esoteric knowledge acquired through divine revelation of 
>some
> > > sort??
> > >
> > > Well, no, of course not.
> >
> >   wait a moment! jbor's observation that spiritual themes play a less 
>important
> >   role in pynchon's first two books than they do in the later ones is 
>certainly
> >   a right one. interesting in this context is the obvious switch to 
>chinese
> >   semantics in both, vineland and m&d, where gr stays with kabbalah (- 
>present
> >   in m&d too), astral traveling & tarot. perhaps trp has turned into an 
>american
> >   daoist?! that he, in any case, believes in the value and fruitfulness 
>of
> >   regular spiritual work becomes, imo, obvious in his intro to jim 
>dodge's
> >   "stone junction" from 1997 [!]: " ... stone junctions's allegiance, 
>however,
> >   is to the other kind of magic, the real stuff---long-practiced, 
>all-out,
> >   contrary-to-fact, capital m magic, not as adventitious spectacle, but 
>as
> >   pursued enterprise, in this very world we're stuck within, continuing 
>to give
> >   off readings---analog indications---of being abroad and at work, 
>somewhere out
> >   in it (xiii)". you may disagree, but i cannot recognize the most tiny 
>bit of
> >   irony in this very statement ...
> >
> > > But what then is gnosticism to him?
> >
> >   well, sloterdijk once defined gnosticism as "the original story of
> >   dissidence". in this sense the religious anarchist thomas pynchon was, 
>is and
> >   will always be a gnostic to me.
> >
> > kfl
> >

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com