That tedious Holocaust discussion

[Thomas Eckhardt]

Kai wrote:

> the problem with such a - creative &, thus, likable - view is, of course, that
>   it lacks criteria for differentiating real insights from pure projections.

Well, at least in this case it doesn't. I will stick to the opening scene of GR.
There are numerous motifs that a reader might associate with the Holocaust. These
are possible references. They are not specific, which means they might not be any
references at all. It is, in fact, up to the reader: You might or might not think of
the Nazis or the Holocaust while reading about "spokes shaped like Ss". You might
take this to be a statement about what those spokes look like. You might think it is
also a reference to the SS. Both interpretations are equally valid, and there is no
way to prove one or the other. None of them is obvious, none of them can be
dismissed as mere projecton. The implied narrator is leaving it up to you and if he
wasn't, this passage wouldn't be half as brillant and mesmerizing as it is.

>   mean, football ("soccer")teams are, correct me if i'm wrong, completely
>   absent from pynchon's work, yet they probably don't have any meaning in his
>   universe at all ...

This doesn't deserve an answer, Kai, and you know it.

Thomas