V.V. (12) Pynchon's letter to Thomas F. Hirsch

[Dave Monroe]

Well, lessee here, my two most extensive stencilizations of that Letter to 
Thomas F. Hirsch of 8 January 1969, "reproduced with Pynchon's permission," 
in David Seed, "Appendix: Pynchon's Reading for
Gravity's Rainbow," The Fictional Labyrinths of Thomas Pynchon (Iowa City: U 
of Iowa P, 1988), pp. 240-3 ...

http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0010&msg=66&sort=date

http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0103&msg=559&sort=date

The first of which contains, minus "it was part of their usniversal scheme" 
(which I did key in the second time), all of the passages, the "crucial 
points" you'd "be pretty sure"--not to mention pretty wrong ...--I 
"'elided.'"  But not "bother[ing] going back and finding what" I, or 
Terrance, or Doug, or ... "wrote" is par for the course here, so ...

But whether I not I "agree with what Pynchon writes" is "beside the point" 
here.  That literate/preliterate binary is problematic for precisely the 
reasons I hinted at in my firs rathousing of Hirsch and explicated in my 
second, i.e., "in the sense that" Claude Levi-Strauss's similar 
chacterization of the Nambikwara is upon Jacques Derrida's reading of it in 
his Of Grammatology (Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak.  Baltimore, MD: 
Johns Hopkins UP, 1976).

"As a distraction"?  Again, seeing as how this letter has resurfaced here, 
figured I'd follow up on a previous observation.  Pynchon makes an analogous 
move to Levi-Strauss's, Derrida made some interesting comments on that move, 
I've pointed out their applicability here.  Is Pynchon above and/or beyond 
the call of criticism, of critique, of, when all is said and done, reading, 
here, elsewhere, anywhere?  No, of course not.  Is this a damning criticism, 
critique, reading?  No, of course not, not even from Derrida ...

Which "third sentence" am I "snip[ping]"? Between the two postings, I seem 
to have cited all four passages you mention. But thanks for your "interest," 
albeit a very low yield, indeed.  And  I probably should have mentioned 
"archetypes" as problematic (those generlizations, possible mystifications) 
as well the second time 'round, but Pynchon already seems to recognize 
that--"I don't like to use the word"--so ...

And just because something "shows up over and over," "both in this letter 
and in [Pynchon's, or anyone's] fiction [and then some ...]," well, to quote 
George Gershwin (via, on my end, The Funseekers), "It ain't necessarily so." 
  Again, placing Pynchon above, beyond, well, being read, critically, 
responsibly?  Not sure ...

Actually, I believe it was von Trotha et al. who "came in and dismantled the 
Herero culture," or, at any rate, the Herero population (not QUITE the same 
thing, admittedly, nearly 20% DID survive, of course).

"Get[ting] inside 'the mind' of the Herero," "of Watts," of anybody, of any 
group of people, "getting the African side of it," is, of course, 
problematic as well, not in the least for a disenfranchised, yes, but 
nonetheless privileged (esp. vis a vis "the Herero," "watts," "Africa") 
white Norteamericano guy, and perhaps beginning with generalizations like 
"THE Herero," "Watts," whatever, but, but I agree, "giving them a voice," 
insofar as he can.  Like--indeed, via-- Herbert Stencil, his 
"impersonations" ...

Nothing is "simply" a "shorthand" for anything, I suppose, but esp. not 
here.  "German/s," "gnosticisms/s," "postmodernism/s," and so forth and so 
on.  Pynchon, by the way, refers to "the whole Kleinstaaterei hangup dating 
from before the Peace of Westphalia" as exemplifying a "busted up unity," 
but I would note that "Germany" was not--as you realize as well--before the 
nineteenth century quite a "unity" to be "busted up."  There are indeed 
interesting differentiations to be made betwixt "Germany," "German," and 
that German kultur, the first constructed on the basis of the third, 
constructed in turn on the basis of the second (e.g., Benedict Anderson, 
Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism; 
Eric Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality; 
George L. Mosse, The Nationalization of the Masses: Political Symbolism and 
Mass Movements in Germany from the Napoleonic Wars through the Third Reich). 
  Not sure what I might have done "perhaps deliberately!" here, so I guess 
it wasn't quite so "deliberate"(!) ...

But maybe I'll have to post ENTIRE texts to be commented on from now on?  
Hold on, let me get started on V. then, it's gonna be a while.  Sheesh.  Oh, 
and who is the "big one" again?  Missed that little revelation.  Find him in 
Al Capone's vault?  Doubleplusungoodsheesh.  But good question, Terrance.  
"Eternal vigilance"? ...
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com