John Hamill's S&M

[Lycidas at worldnet.att.net]

Paul Mackin wrote:
> >
> 
> It's a well-known fact that P gets his theoretical S&M underpining not
> from Baudriallard, but from Tom Lehrer:
> 
> I ache for the touch of your lips, dear,
> But much more for the touch of your whips, dear.
> You can raise welts
> Like nobody else
> As we dance to the masochism tango.
> 
>                         P.

The reason I say be careful with this one is that for some
reason Hamill is compelled to apply theories that don't fit.
He admits that they don't fit and his essay would have been
excellent without them, but by applying, for example,  the
notion of metaphysical triangulation, Hamill concludes:

The themes for the desire for transcendence, paranoid
interiority, and preterite flight from determinate fate are
reconfigured in the form of sadomasochistic desire in
Gravity's Rainbow. 


This is right on.

However, Hamill's conclusion continues:

That occurs on a diological level through the interaction of
the individual character, given a framework of desire
through the notion of metaphysical triangualtion, and
semiotic systems. 

This is so typical. The notion of metaphysical triangulation
is Girard's not Pynchon's and although Hamill also includes
Girard's insights relative to the connection between
punishment, guilt, and metaphysical desire, he acknowledges
that Pynchon goes a step beyond Girard. How? Well with
"reader traps" and "character traps" of course. Why do we
need Girard and why do we need Baudrillard's "libidinal
economy" in the first place? We don't.