V.V. (4): Stencil's impersonations

[jbor]

Yes, Stencil chooses these ... characters -- in fact, I'd even go so far to
say that he invents them, utilising "poetic license ... imaginative anxiety"
62.28-30 just as an author would (thus that reflexive aspect of the
postmodern novel) -- precisely because they are on the sidelines of the
drama which Sidney's journals focus on. But I think there is a difference
between Stencil's reasons for doing it this way (the aspiration to
"historical objectivity"; a disinclination to align with his father's pov,
perhaps a legacy of the suppressed resentment he feels towards his father
for the lack of filial nourishment he received as a child; a sense of his
own ineffectuality or non-participant status) and Pynchon's. In other words,
I agree with you that Stencil fils is being characterised by the
"impersonations" he adopts, but I also think that part of this
characterisation is that he is missing the main point about historical
significance and perspective that the *literary* contrivance he has
manufactured from the material portends. The quotes that David cited from
the earlier story and from H. Adams are very persuasive imo. It's the old
Pynchonian nested narrative or Russian doll trick again -- mise en abyme,
infinite regress -- and I don't think that Stencil's conclusions (or failure
to reach a conclusion) are necessarily Pynchon's, nor should they be ours.

It's also interesting to note that Melville's "confidence man" appears in
eight guises aboard the Fidèle too.

best

----------
>From: "J L" <trailerman44 at hotmail.com>
>To: pynchon-l at waste.org
>Subject: Re: V.V.(4): Notes, Comments, and Queries IV
>Date: Wed, Nov 15, 2000, 1:07 AM
>
snip
> The Impersonations' observer-status (in the "action", of course
> they have their own agendas) says most about Herbert's opinion
> of himself.  The quick-change artist finds it easier to adopt
> a peripheral role.