GRGR Finale Re: Scrollophobia in GRGR?

[Nazi Nanny]

-----Original Message-----
From: Otto Sell <o.sell at telda.net>
To: Paul Mackin <pmackin at clark.net>; pynchon-l at waste.org
<pynchon-l at waste.org>
Date: Sunday, September 10, 2000 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: GRGR Finale Re: Homophobia in GR?


----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Mackin <pmackin at clark.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: GRGR Finale Re: Homophobia in GR?


> I don't particularly agree or disagree with either side of this
> controversy. Arguing the point is like trying to nail jello to a
> wall. Who can know whether Pynchon's words reflect some degree of
> what we might be tempted to call homophobia? Would he himself know for
> sure? Wouldn't he be too smart to claim the case to be one way of the
> other. Feelings about homosexuality, as about race and 'the other' in
> general, are bound to be exceedingly complex and can  range all over the
> map. Homosexuality may seem to one to be natural, joyous, inspiring,
> heroic, sad, funny, tragic, terrifying, disgusting, immoral, or all of the
> above. Most importantly one's feelings on such difficult topics are almost
> certainly going to be in significant  degree unconsicous or
> semiconscious. In any event none of these feelings is mainly voluntary or
> is a valid expression of a person's character or measure of goodness or
> badness. But more importantly  such feelings absent or present seem quite
> beside the point especially in the present discussion. This is because
> the only thing with any real operative meaning in discussing homophobia is
> BEHAVIOR--how well or poorly a person treats others different from
> himself, personally or through his elected representatives, as fellow
> human beings deserving of as much right to happiness as anyone else. So
> the key word is BEHAVIOR and at last I get to the point--it being simply
> that the writing of highly literary novels for grown up educated readers
> does not under any stretch of the imagination constitute BEHAVIOR in the
> realm of respecting the human rights of others. Therefore, the term
> homophobic cannot even hypothetically be applied to the words of
> Pynchon--or their potential interpretation by others--regardless of what
> in our wildest imagination the man may possibly feel one way or the the
> other about homosexuals. In other words P can use homosexuality with all
> its possible stereotypes anyway he sees fit. It's always a purely literary
> call. And it clearly follows that textual analysis in the effort to prove
> any thesis along these lines is a totally redundant nonstarter. IMHO.
>
> P.
>

>"What if phile changes to phobe?" (GR 473)

Damn it is annoying scrolling down this length of re-quoted text to get to a
one line response.