Kids

[hraudask at sun3.oulu.fi]

KXX4493553 at aol.com wrote:

> First, thank you, Jill, for your very good reply. 
And, Heikki, I think
> "Kids"
> is almost a porn but not quite a porn

Have seen the flick; what I meant was *social porn*, 
not just *porn*. These superficial sensation-oriented 
lowlife portrayals without any referring to causes etc. 
While Pynchon's art is hardly reducible to some 
deep "final causes", this does not mean that it is 
surface only (which some "postmodernists" are often 
accused of). IMHO, Pynchon's writings rather question  
the very division to "depth" and "surface".   


Heikki