Holocaust as metaphor? (is also Re: answering jody

[jporter]

I think a lesser artist would have shied away from such an offensive
juxtaposition. The novel is filled with contradictions, some contained in
set pieces, some spread out over the length of the novel. Slothrop comforts
a young victim of a rocket strike. Later, he fucks and deserts Bianca. There
is no priviledged point of view in GR, from, ahem, my perspective.
Objectivity is an illusion. No one is saved. No one is entirely evil. "It is
too late", but, "There is still time, if you need the comfort, to touch the
person next to you..."

jody

> From: "jbor" <jbor at bigpond.com>

> 
> ----------
>> From: jporter <jp4321 at IDT.NET>
> 
>> I read it as a reference to me, because I was offended by the failed use of
>> The Holocaust as a metaphor.
> 
> An example that is clearer in terms of this alleged "Holocaust as metaphor"
> thing, and which has always concerned or puzzled me I must admit, is during
> the Disgusting English Candy Drill when the text sez that Slothrop's
> "tongue's a hopeless holocaust" (118.11) while he's being force-fed all
> those sadistically-flavoured lollies in the shapes of war weaponry by the
> Quoad-witch. It is a metaphor, and there are, at first glance, two
> possibilities:
> 
> 1) Pynchon was making an allusion to The Holocaust; or,
> 
> 2) Pynchon wasn't making an allusion to The Holocaust.
> 
> If the first, then yes, I agree with you that, in the context of the scene,
> tone of the narrative at this point etc etc it fails terribly, is in
> exceptionally poor taste, and in fact goes beyond mere Holocaust-denial to
> verge on something far worse.
> 
> If the second, then why has Pynchon deliberately chosen such a loaded term
> for his metaphor?
> 
> But what I suspect, or perhaps want to suspect, is that somewhere between
> the "response" (how can the reader *not* instantly make the association with
> The Holocaust when the word is there staring them in the face like that?),
> and the "interpretation" (why is it there? what does it mean? why have I
> been laughing? how could I laugh at this?) there has to be another option. I
> can't countenance the suggestion that the word has slipped in there simply
> by chance, that it's *just* Slothrop's comically hyperbolic reaction to the
> tamarind-pepsin-nougat-cubeb-camphor "bomb" in his mouth (though it is this
> too). I'd like to think Pynchon's actually trying to do something
> responsibly with it, that it is deliberate -- that he has some reason for
> hitting the reader right between the eyes with a sudden and totally
> unexpected recollection of The Holocaust in what is otherwise perhaps one of
> the funniest setpiece scenes in the entire novel -- rather than
> irresponsibly, i.e. appropriating The Holocaust as metaphor simply for the
> purpose of *comedy* and thereby diminishing its significance ... reducing,
> relegating etc etc.
> 
> Slothrop, of course, c. 1944 is none the wiser and can't be blamed; this is
> something which is going on between Pynchon and the reader.
> 
> Dunno ... what do you think?
> 
> best
> 
> 
> ~~~
> "By 1945, the factory system - which, more than
> any piece of machinery, was the real and major
> result of the Industrial Revolution - had been
> extended to include the Manhattan Project, the
> German long-range rocket program and the death
> camps, such as Auschwitz.It has taken no major
> gift of prophecy to see how these three curves
> of development might plausibly converge, and
> before too long. ... "
> (T. Pynchon, 1984)
> ~~~
>