pynchon-l-digest V2 #1844

[jbor]

This is just such an astute and concise response that I will repost it just
for the sake of it, only adding my thanks, Cyrus.

best


----------
>From: CyrusGeo at netscape.net
>

> Doug Millison wrote:
> "Given Pynchon's attraction to history and the extraordinary attention
> he pays to the historical material that he works with, I've wondered
> why he didn't choose to write history, and synthesize a worldview
> that way."
>
> Doug partly answers that himself later on, but I would like to add a few
thoughts:
> To write history is to take sides. There is no such thing as an objective
> history/historian. Everything is always seen through a filter. Some filters
> are less opaque than others, but still opaque. And why, pray thee, good
> sir, would Pynchon want to synthesize a worldview, when he can shift
> between worldviews (which he does), thus presenting a much more complete
> and much less distorted picture (or, rather, a multitude of pictures)?
> Besides, Pynchon uses history in order to reach way beyond it, to something
> much more universal, fundamental, timeless and interesting: human nature.
> It is in that spirit, I believe, that Pynchon presents history as "at best
> a conspiracy, not always among gentlemen, to defraud" (GR, 164) and "not
> woven by innocent hands" (GR, 277).