pynchon-l-digest V2 #1610

[Dave Monroe]

I am neither a fisherman, nor a fisher of men, Terrance.  'Nuff said.
But I would point out that that reception end is one that no author, no
text, can ignore, and that my interest is not so much to nail down
allusions with any one-to-one specificity, much less in any grand
unified theory (which is perhaps where my aspirations fall short of
Charles Hollander's, though I think he ultimately does neither, nor did
he quite intend to, and Jody's points are not only well-taken here, but
I've made them myself, elsewhere, at least), but to trace out as many of
the possibilities, as many of the probabilities, even, as I possibly
can.  And there's only so much I can do, so ...

But, as with science fiction, there is (ironically?) nothing that is so
much about its own context of production, reception, as the "historical"
novel, meant generally here in reference to works set anywhere but their
own immediate contexts of production.  Those Shakespearean traedies and
historical plays come to mind.  As does that Pynchonian ouevre.  WWII
and beyond, the post-Kenedy 60s, the Reagan 80s, 18th century North
America, the fin-de-siecle through mid-WWI c/w the late 1950s ... if
there is any doubt that there are reasons these settings are chosen,
there should be no doubt that they have no small effect, "intentional"
or otherwise ...

But that's an interesting question, Paul, IS Pynchon Telling us
Something?  And what IS that Something?  This is no doubt the source of
much conflict not only here, but in the act of reading in general.
Think the past couple of millenia of the reading, of the construction,
even, of The Bible, or even the past couple of centuries of the reading
of the U.S. Constitution, to name a couple of other documents the
reading of which have immediate effects on my life, not to mention
hundreds of millions of others.  But I will note one thing, you can't
have your realtivism and your
moral/ethical/political/interpretive/whatever high ground, either ...