MDDM Ch. 12 Summary & Notes

[Dave Monroe]

Well, I picked up M&D the day it came out here, rifled
through it over the following week, and am only just
getting back to it now.  Didn't hurt to have gone in
knowing a little something about the historical
context to Pynchon's little historiographical
metafiction ((c) Linda Hutcheon), and I'm greatly
enjoying taking the opportunity to learn even more ...

Of course, what is "necessary" here and what isn't is
hardly easy, or even possible, to determine.  Is it
"necessary" to know, for example, that Mason and Dixon
were  historical figures, an astronomer and a
surveyor, surveying a boundary in British colonial
America just prior to the American Revolution,  a
boundary which later took on particular significance
during the American Civil War, et al.?  Maybe not, but
it doesn't hurt.  If it's ever possible to determine
what's "necessary" and what isn't, well, it sure can't
be done from the side of NOT being aware of the
historicality of any particular element ...

This historicality, by the way, I do write in broad
terms here, in both the narrow context of capital-H
History--e.g., that of Mason and Dixon, 18th century
astronomy and geodesy, the British colonial enterprise
in North America, the significance of the Mason-Dixon
line in United States history, et al.--and in terms
of, say, literary history, cultural history, and so
forth, and Pynchon's propensity to allude top just
about anything therein regardless of anachronism.  

Pynchon does indeed--well, duh ...--invent quite a bit
here.  As does any author of "historical" fiction, no
matter how "faithful" to "the" (hardly free of
invention itself) historical record.  And it is indeed
such invention, these inventions, which generate any
partcular interest in, not to mention enjoyment of,
such works.  I THINK we are in agreement here ...

Of course, you can read, enjoy, perhaps even offer
quite useful commentaries on, interpretations of, not
only Pynchon's novels, but nigh unto anything, in
ignorance of just about anything, but ... well, it's
not even a matter of degree, of "deeper" (presumably
"better") understanding, but, rather, of ... futher?
another, an other understanding ...  

You have yr Herman Melville, for example, I have my
Samuel Johnson.  For example.  We all do our own
legwork, but the value of this list, for me, at any
rate, is its enbaling us to follow those paths we
haven't taken, might never have otherwise.  To each
her own talents, then.  But then, of course, my
protest here was not about supposedly competing ways
of reading, interpreting, whatever, was it?  No ...

--- Terrance <lycidas2 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> Doing the research may tell you some things. It's
> certainly not necessary. M&D, like all Pynchon's
> novels, is not a research project or a encrypted
> study of history, it's funny and entertaining
> fiction.  Sometimes it's stupid funny and sometimes
> it's too smart for its own good.  A lot of the
> research Pynchon puts into the books goes to support
> very intricate and elaborate jokes. These are
> usually not very funny at all, but more like
puzzles. 
> What's funny is the dialogue when P gets it just
> right. I think he often takes it from TV and films
> and plays. Pynchon packs the pages with little known
> facts and lost or never recorded histories. He
> includes arcane theories and formulas. He slips in
> strange tidbits. In one Chapter he might parody
> several works of fiction or poetry. He layers
> pastiche. He may include fictions, poems, films,
> paintings, musical compositions, TV, comic book,
> letters, newspaper stories, journals, so on and on.
> He plays puns against puns.  He often makes fun
> of the sexual proclivities of authors or historical
> persons.  In Chapter 13 of M&D it's difficult to
> figure out what the hell is going on. Pynchon
> includes the history of relationships we know
> nothing about. It's safe to assume, few if any
> readers of M&D have any previous knowledge of the
> love affairs of Mason and Dixon and the other
> historical figures fictionalized in M&D. So why does
> Pynchon do it? I think it's also safe to assume that
> no prior knowledge of the history of these affairs
> is needed or even very helpful.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com