discussion deconstructed

[Otto]

Doug:

> I'm not "opposing" a PoMo approach to literary criticism.

You are doing this for years now.

> If PoMo concepts are used to make an original argument,
> take the discussion of Pynchon's work in a new direction,
> illuminate some aspect of it in a way that hasn't been
> done before -- I welcome that;

I don't have the impression according to your posts

> Pynchon Notes, my favorite magazine,
> publishes thought-provoking articles that use contemporary
literary-critical
> approaches to explore Pynchon's work in new ways.

It was always puzzling me that you like PN.

> I just don't see "jbor's"
> point in applying his own stale PoMo regurgitate to Pynchon's work --

"regurgitate" -- very biblical.

> string
> together a bunch of tired lit-crit cliches and make some pompous-sounding
> conclusions about Pynchon's novels in the abstract, so what?

This is opposed to your opening sentence.

> If "jbor"
> wants to make Blicero the tragic hero of GR, he/she's welcome to do so; I
> agree with Swing, it's a terrible misreading, since you have to ignore or
> rewrite so much of what Pynchon has written in the novel in order to make
> the case for such a reading, but because it's so weak it doesn't really
add
> up to much but wishful thinking anyway, sort of cute, really, in a
> sophomoric way.

I don't know if I buy Robert's view of Blicero, but I definitely don't
believe your attempt making a silly Christian writer, forwarding Christian
values, out of Pynchon.

"jbor's" approach here is the cafeteria style of Biblical
> exegesis, take what you want, leave the rest -- quote a bit here and
there,
> string citations out of context, ignore huge portions and hope nobody
> notices, then make your case and loudly damn all who would disagree.

What about answering DM and his "Creation cursed" posts then?

>
> I do have a hard time taking seriously a school of thought which declares
> that there are no universal truths, no facts only interpretations, and in
> the same self-cancelling breath sets itself up as the truth. But that's
> another subject entirely.

Postmodernism doesn't set itself as "The Truth" but is an interpretative
tool to read literature and other texts.

Otto