V.V. (13) "And they heard a Bondel one night ... " 277.17

[jbor]

----------
>From: Dave Monroe <davidmmonroe at yahoo.com>
>

>> Kautsky? Italia Irredentia?
>
> Again, spent and recouped force plus a nationalist
> cause feeding into fascist ascendancy ....

It's hardly an "alignment", however, particularly as the Irredentists and
d'Annunzio (and Mussolini) had just been fighting *against* the Germans and
Austrians in the War. And Kautsky was pretty influential there with the
German F.O. and from his tenure in Vienna. If he was such a "spent ...
force", then why does Pynchon have Weissmann mention him at all. You give
d'Annunzio short shrift, particularly considering that long discussion
between Godolphin and Vera (247-249). And what about Godolphin at Port
Arthur (247.2), Mondaugen's father at the Kiel Revolt (260.12), the Treaty
of V-ersailles, the League, the Union, the Protectorate, Abraham Morris? Why
deemphasise these explicit historical references? How is it that that brief
snippet of conversation, decontextualised from the characterisation of its
speaker and then distorted into some ominous "alignment" which is supposed
to forebode Nazism and the Holocaust, is somehow more significant than the
rest of the historical allusions in the chapter (leaving aside the fictional
aspects) anyway?!

>> I think one needs to factor in Weissmann's
>> characterisation: he is paranoid,
>> deranged, attention-seeking ...
>
> With a fashionable interest in fascism ...

And "silk lounging pajamas, rhinestone pumps" (265.29) etc. And Kautsky. And
Italia Irredentia. And d'Annunzio.

>> "merely"??? And, actually, the "present" of
>> Mondaugen and Stencil retelling
>> the story is 1956, the "present" of its writing
>> several years after that.
>
> The "present" within "Mondaugen's Story," and my
> response stands as follows ...

But surely Stencillized, problematised etc. Or do such demurs only apply
selectively?

Btw Michel mentioned that Lenin met with Rosa Luxemburg in "that quarter",
the Schwabing quarter, if not that particular cabaret, too!

> Again, there are reasons why ceratin stories get
> written about certian times, at certain times.

Indeed. Pynchon's commitment to the Civil Rights cause in America comes
through loud and clear in all his published material from this time.

> Pynchon is not writing a history here, but he does
> respect historical fact ...

An interesting distinction. Does it mean anything?

> Rather than merely
>> "foreshadowing" the Nazi
>> future
>
> "Merely"?  And, again, rememebr, Stencil, Pynchon, we
> all come after that "mere" fact ...

Which makes the *lack* of actual text time it gets (as opposed to the space
and volume it is given here) even more significant.

>  -- which is the "superficial" and "hardly
>> profound" connection being
>> made in the chapter,
>
> Which is hardly to say it's not being made.  Keep in
> mind that Pynchonian modesty as well ...

Are you seriously trying to attribute those comments in the first paragraph
of the Hirsch letter to "modesty"! (Let alone the rest of what Pynchon sez
in the letter!)

> And Fascist Europe is to be excluded from said
> "Westerners"?  Again, should not be deemphasized ...

Nor emphasised disproportionately at the expense of the text.

best