V.V. (16) Esther and Slab, the abortion argument, and the Holocaust

[jbor]

----------
>From: Doug Millison <millison at online-journalist.com>
>

> I'll post more about Esther in V. when I get my hands on my copy of
> that book again.  Somehow I don't think Pynchon wrote those passages
> with "jbor's" need to deconstruct the Holocaust in mind --

No, this is not my "need", nor anything to do with what I wrote. The passage
in question (cited below for the third time now) clearly exposes Esther's
hypocrisy in playing the Holocaust card in her argument with Slab. As well
as exemplifying the hypocritical tactic she is using, Pynchon, by way of a
detached narrative statement, uses the word "phony" -- twice -- just in case
the reader might be uncertain as to his general opinion about such
hypocrisy.

       So they talked metaphysics while the afternoon waned. Neither
    felt he was defending or trying to prove anything important. It
    was like playing one-up at a party, or Botticelli. [...]
       "How can you say there's a soul there? How can you tell when the
    soul enters the flesh? Or whether you even have a soul?"
       "It's murdering your own child is what it is."
       "Child, schmild. A complex protein molecule, is all."
       "I guess on the rare occasions you bathe you wouldn't mind using
    Nazi soap made from one of those six million Jews."
       "All right--" he was mad-- "show me the difference."
       After that it ceased being logical and phony and became emotional
    and phony. (354.1-14)

> but I do
> have to admire that opportunistic Biblical exegesis approach, prying
> out bits and pieces of Pynchon's text to confirm a prejudice and meet
> the needs of the current argument. Very clever.

This sounds more like you, except that you're not very clever at all.

best