Watts article (Re: NP Genoa)

[jbor]

on 7/22/01 5:05 PM, Paul Mackin at paul.mackin at verizon.net wrote:

> Rob:
> Although young Pynchon  was trying to be helpful, to speak of the violence of
> Watts as perhaps being an expression of  WHO THE PEOPLE ARE is patronizing in
> the extreme. 

Hi Paul

I didn't read it like that at all. Not an "expression of" but an "attempt to
be". I read it to mean that the people of Watts weren't permitted to be "who
they are": because they were made to dress and act and cut their hair to
conform with "white" expectations, to get jobs, to be respectable members of
the society etc; because they were victimised and harassed and killed by the
police in the streets just because of "who they are"; because their identity
and heritage was totally devalued by the dominant culture; and so forth. And
that, with every other option closed to them, only by violence could they
attempt to be "who they are". I don't think that he meant to say that he
believes the violence defines them or is part of their identity. Not on the
strength of the rest of the article at any rate.

Perhaps it's just an ambiguity in that sentence? Or maybe I've got those
rose-coloured specs on again.

best


> >
> > "Far from a sickness, violence may be an attempt to communicate, or to be
> > who you really are." --Thomas Pynchon, 1966,  still under 30 (slightly) and
> > trustable.
> >
> > But, hey, not everyone is getting the message. The Washington Post sez this
> > morning that despite the rock throwing and Molotov Cocktails only of tiny
> > proportion of the protestors are doing anying  but protesting--not engaged
> > in violence.