blicero's sexuality

[David Morris]

Here's my half-cent, short answer:

In GR Pynchon contrast human intellect with "just being," which is not the 
same as, but is close to, "human imagination rather than the natural 
instincts."  Remember, he even calls film a "pornography," meaning it is 
artificial capturing/representation of life into little squares of film. The 
intellect is bent on, amongst other things, CONTROL.  Blicero's witch game 
is described as a ritual concerned with protection from the horrors outside. 
  Human intellect in GR goes awry because at its root is the knowledge of 
immanent DEATH and human impotence.

David Morris

>From: lorentzen-nicklaus at t-online.de i'm interested here in blicero's 
>sexuality, and that's what eddins writes about it. so: is it o.k to be 
>perverse? what does pynchon say about "sado-anarchism"? what about shirley 
>temple? & what, after all, was your argument on the motif of homosexuality 
>as well as the motif of s&m in pynchon's work? this reading of eddins 
>(which is, please correct me if i'm wrong, also yours) makes definitely 
>some sense; yet the price for its "mono-contextural" positivism is too 
>high. thomas pynchon would never pay it.
>
> > > >kai quoting Eddins:
> > > >  "by dressing as a woman with artificial genitalia fashioned from 
>various synthetics and by interdicting the natural attraction between 
>gottfried and katje, blicero is undertaking to found a competing sexual 
>order, one that is entirely the product of human imagination rather than 
>the natural instincts and that serves death - the oven - rather than life."
> > > > (dwight eddins: the gnostic
> > > >  pynchon, pp. 148f.)

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com