Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion

[barbara100 at jps.net]

So, an objective reading is one nearest to the author's meaning, even though
you don't think it's really possible to read objectively.  Too many
interpretive steps along the way, you say.  Okay,  I agree.  But does that
mean we shouldn't try? Try to read objectively?  Why else would the cover of
my copy of GR say "the most important work of fiction yet produced by any
living writer"?  Surely not for the great insights into my flushing cheeks
and my little black cat.  It may not be possible, but I still think we
should strive for objectivity.




----- Original Message -----
From: Nick Thornton <Nick.Thornton at liffe.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 6:08 AM
Subject: RE: Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion


>
>  ...and when the list member says the author is a religious man and refers
> to a paragraph in the authorial point of view that supports religion? Is
> this this now objective? I'd suggest not because of the several
interpretive
> steps between reading the text, making the subjective judgement
"religious"
> and linking the narrative voice with the physical author. Can anything
other
> than a statement of fact about the words on the page be objective (e.g.
the
> word "church" is used ten times)?
>
> I'd agree with the view below that all readings are subjective and subject
> to personal perspectives (I'd actually go further and say that reality is
> just a negotiated construct, but maybe that's another thread...)
>
> regards
> Nick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Ryckx [mailto:michel.ryckx at freebel.net]
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 12:30 PM
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: Re: Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion
>
>
> Subjectivity is when a list member says that the works of mr. Pynchon
> indicate the author is
> a religious man, and someone else says: no, it's clear he's an atheist.
>
> Paul Mackin wrote:
>
> > "barbara100 at jps.net" wrote:
> >
> > > Sheesh! now I'm more confused than I was.  Are you saying I've got it
> backwards, Paul?
> >
> > No, not exactly backwards. Just using your post as a jumping off place
to
> express my
> > dislike of the subjective vs objective readings idea. A personal
> idiosyncray. To me all
> > readings are subjective. Prefer that other distinctions be made.
> >
> > Personal vs impersonal
> > Local vs Global
> > supported vs unsupported.
> >
> > Semioticians or linguisticians have a word for overly personal readings.
> Is it
> > "empirical" by any chance? Don't know.
> >
> >         P.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Original Message:
> > > -----------------
> > > From: Paul Mackin paul.mackin at verizon.net
> > > Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:51:34 -0500
> > > To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> > > Subject: Re: Subject/Objective Reality/Illusion
> > >
> > > barbara100 at jps.net wrote:
> > >
> > > > So what are objective and subjective readings anyway?
> > >
> > > The normal way of viewing it is that reading and writing are
subjective
> > > although there are objects involved -- the book lying open in my lap,
> the ink
> > > spread over the pages, the yellow tablet on my desk, the pencil.,
etc.,
> etc. .
> > >  .
> > >
> > > > We love to toss those
> > > > words around--I remember them bouncing off the walls in class--but
> what do
> > > > they mean in the context of reading a novel?
> > >
> > > Not much I would honestly have to say.
> > >
> > > > A Thomas Pynchon novel, for
> > > > example. Is an objective reading one where we focus on the intent of
> the
> > > > writer--Gottfried as a gross example of the consequence of war and
> political
> > > > corruption--
> > >
> > > Subjective. How could it be otherwise?
> > >
> > > > and a subjective reading one where we feel the text through
> > > > personal filters--the flush of my cheeks when I pictured him stuffed
> into
> > > > his death capsule wrapped in bridal lace and Imipolex G?
> > >
> > > Blood rushing to face is objective.
> > >
> > > > If these are our
> > > > objective and subjective choices, I'd have to ask, How could we read
> one way
> > > > without the other? Objective/Subjective--it's like the yin and yang
of
> > > > literature, and reality.
> > > >
> > >
> > > p.