Kids

[Dave Monroe]

"Their gnostic world"--I think I'd agree on that, emphasizing the "Their," making
said gnosticism indeed a point of critique in Gravity's Rainbow.  But I'm not so
sure that Pynchon--that Gravity's Rainbow--is proposing as a viable alternative a
sort of romanticist, animistic, and/or mystic "oneness" or whatever with the world,
either (and, again, on my reading, gnosticism is characterized by a rdaical
alienation from the material world).

But I'd also like to emphasize that I'm not suggesting that Pynchon has any sort of
animosity towards children, or that he necessarily has an unhealthy (or even
healthy, for that matter) interest in adolescent girls (although, again, it has been
suggested).  Indeed, again, what's know of Thomas Ruggles Pynchon, actual human
being, is largely apocryphal, and making that leap fro text to author (and vice
versa) is a tricky business, at best.   I think I agree with some commentators here
that others are perhaps a bit too defensive of someone of whom they know very
little, of someone of whom they might never know any more.  Hagiography?  Well,
you'd need to know something of the lufe of a proposed saint to write that life, but
words like "genius" and "towering" and whatever do seem kicked about a bit too
easily, uncritically here.  Well, of course, we're all fans here (aren't we?), why
else would we bother?  Gravity's Rainbow is my very favorite novel of all time, and
The Crying of Lot 49 isn't far behind, but ... but Pynchon's texts are not without
their faults, they do have their moments of (at least possible) racism, sexism,
whatever ... unfortunately, it seems, none of "our" "great" authors, texts are
innocent, though some are more guilty, less redeemable than others, and, so far, at
least Pynchon hasn't proven remotely as (potentially, at least) objectionable as the
like of Pound, (Wyndham) Lewis, Celine, Heidegger ...

Terrance wrote:

> Dave Monroe wrote:  But it is undeniable that Pynchon--who
> seems to have
> > actually written the book at hand (which is Gravity's Rainbow, right?), I'm
> > not much of one to grant claims to the complete autonomy of texts from their
> > authors, an author, no matter how "dead" s/he may be, "The System" is not an
> > autonomous entity "out there," no matter how convincing that thought might be,
> > but, rather, a fictional construction of Pynchon's--does indeed place his
> > child characters (at least ...) in some very unusual situations.  Which is not
> > to say that, say, some sort of Humbertian nymphetmania (or worse), or some
> > sort of cruel intent towards children, can be attributed TO Pynchon, but it IS
> > notable, and recurrent, in his texts.
>
> Yes, it is noticeable and recurrent in Dostoevsky too, in
> fact I think V. and perhaps GR too is indebted to Book V of
> the Brother's K. That children are given more than simply
> sympathetic treatment or put in cruel predicaments in GR is
> an important thing to establish. What kind of world do they
> live in? They live in Their gnostic world. Perhaps the most
> convincing episodes is the Roger and Jessica Christmas,
> "what do you think it's a children's story? There aren't
> any. The children are away dreaming, but the Empire has no
> place for dreams and it's Adults Only in here tonight
Listen
> to the mock-angel singing
" [GR.135].
>
> The system, the evil gnostic world has no soul. Soul of
> Byron the Bulb? An evil Jewish woman that kills children? A
> Gnostic that dreams of a death kingdom on the moon? An
> animistic culture infected by the rationalization and
> individualization of Modern Christianity? What did the
> pre-Christian Herero believe?  The attribution of conscious
> life to natural objects or to nature itself or the belief in
> the existence of spiritual beings that are separable or
> separate from bodies or the hypothesis holding that an
> immaterial force animates the universe, from Latin anima,
> soul. Is Fragmentation PoMo or is it Modernism's Alienation
> with an "Anti-Paranoid" ("where nothing is connected to
> anything, a condition not many of us can bear for long"
> GR.434) Soul? Has Pynchon taken Modernism's "existential"
> impressions/concepts (existential in terms of the primacy of
> the individual, and of individual choices, over systems and
> concepts, which attempt to explain the individual; the
> absurdity of the universe; a reality that evades adequate
> explanation, and remains radically contingent and
> disordered; anxiety caused by absurdity, but also freedom
> caused by absurdity, since actions cannot be causally
> explained or predicted) and shackled it with mind forged
> post-modern manacles? The animistic sensation of being at
> home in the projected world is analogous to the comfort,
> something religious if you want, that young children and the
> historical questers (i.e. the Knights/Grail that Pynchon's
> profaned characters parody), maintain, affirm, and have
> faith in. Pynchon demonstrates more than sympathy for
> children and animistic cultures. Children have wisdom and
> they wisely accept the inevitabilities of life, often
> demonstrating their unflagging confidence in better times
> and their adeptness at living in the nonce with humor. Aries
> is only part of the story and those "few" passage in the New
> Testament (Luke in particular), Freud, Rilke, Blake,
> Rousseau. A good way to approach this issue is to examine
> Children's myths, dreams, and games in GR, which are
> directly contrasted with the "gnostic" world of the Empire's
> "dreamless version of the real." [GR.129] Slothrop as Pig
> Hero episode. In Cuxhaven the children play Himmel and
> Holle. Simple mythical version of the world belong to the
> children and THEY are not able to live with simple mythical
> versions of the world. Children must be kept out, their
> dreams crushed, their smiles and tears, their  humor and
> good will must be conditioned to be  captured on film and
> sold as pornography. Follow that Shirley Temple Paul noted.
> GR is a celebration of children and the child's wisdom,
> humor, and simple mythical projections, something religious
> if you want, of the world.