grgr (28): cosmic windmill mandala (--- "graphicity" in pynchon's prose)

[Lorentzen / Nicklaus]

 " a   s y m b o l   s h e ' d   n e v e r   s e e n   b e f o r e [34/52]
  
  both tanner (crying 186) and mendelson (132) build on religious connotations 
  associated with the tristero in agreeing that the muted horn signifies a 
  desire to 'block' or 'mute' the trumpet of apocalypse. 
  this aspect goes hand in hand with the more obvious association with muffled  
  or altered forms of communication. 'as the logotype of  w a s t e, a major   
  facet of the tristero, the muted post horn signifies silence rather than   
  speech or writing'(richwell, pynchon's crying, 50). 'the muted post horn,   
  emblem of dispossession, renounces authorized channels of communication.   
  tristero only communicates only through alteration of licensed signals:   
  through parody or strategic silences' (palmeri 994).
  davidson broadens the term of the discussion to include human relationsships: 
  'the muted post horn - both verbally and pictorially an ambigious sexual 
  symbol - suggests that, in much of america, both communication and love are 
  fundamentally flawed' (46)." (j.k. grant: col49 companion, pp. 52f.) 

kfl


me, myself & eye:

>  this cosmic windmill mandala (- & once more there is jungian "quadricity")on
>  page 624 made me think of the function of "graphicity" [?] in pynchon's
>  work. 
>
>  in v we have all the vs in the chapter headlines, the kilroy (436) and the 
>  hands (471f.).
>
>  in col49 there is on page 34 the posthorn (- "a loop, triangle and
>  trapezoid") 
>  that reappears on page 58.
>
>  in gr we find the "celluloid margins" in between the chapters, the emblem of 
>  the schwarzkommando on page 361, the houseboat formula on page 450 and, 
>  eventually, the mandala sign, which initiated this whole thought of mine.   
>   
>
>  in vineland and m&d there are no graphical signs. why?
>
>  and: what is the function of "graphicity" in trp's early novels? is is there 
>  just to relax our paranoid eyes? (this can never be wrong ...) does it
>  suggest 
>  that language is "only" a medium? did pynchon want to connect himself with
>  the 
>  popular visual arts? (is there a secret collage book version of gr? i'd kill
>  to 
>  get it ...)or is it just a 60s thing one cannot understand anymore today? 
>
>  sagt ein bild mehr als tausend worte?! kai frederik lorentzen  
>