Pynchon's names and what they might mean

[Doug Millison]

rj, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Denial can't erase the
fact  that, as I clearly demonstrated in my earlier post, you accept the
half-name allusion in the case of Monk, and, surprisingly and most
illogically, reject it when it comes to considering that Geli Tripping
might be an "echo" of Geli Raubal that helps us to put the Katje-Pudding
sex act in a Hitler context (and I'm not setting up simple equations --
"Pudding = Hitler" are your words, not mine; I think Pynchon wants us to
think of many things when we encounter Pudding in that act, and Hitler is
among them, but nothing is as straightforward and simple as the the
one-to-one correspondence you set up as a straw man to knock down in this
instance).  Maybe you can explain when the method is valid and when it's
not -- it's difficult to tell from reading your posts. Much has been
written  on Pynchon's indicative naming.  Dugdale, for one, believes there
are political subtexts below the surface meanings. If postmodernism allows
that each critic  can more or less set up his/her own rules, what's wrong
with giving weight to  names and half-names that are in the text? Or is it
that this application just doesn't meet with your approval.  If so, we're
clearly in the area of personal taste, not worth arguing about -- and if
that's so, maybe you can remember that before you so blithely trash the
possibility that some other critical approach other than your own might
produce interesting readings of Pynchon.


d  o  u  g    m  i  l  l  i  s  o  n
http://www.millison.com
http://www.online-journalist.com