Content analysis of slothrop666. usw.

[barbara100 at jps.net]

And how are Barbara is a madwoman, and Barbara likes getting gang-banged, and Barbara is a loathsome bitch Pynchon-related? Or is this within the 5% you're speaking of?


Original Message:
-----------------
From: Terrance lycidas2 at earthlink.net
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:25:23 -0500
To: pynchon-l at waste.org
Subject: Re: Content analysis of slothrop666. usw.




> 
> I don't know if I speak for the sorta silent majority on the Pynchon
> List or not (assuming arguendo that there _is_ one) but I neither know
> nor give a damn if slothrup666 is in reality Mr. Millison or Mr.
> Morris, or Mr. Malign, or Jerome David Salinger (though I kind of lean
> towards the Salinger theory.) I _do_ think the issue is monumentally
> irrelevant and tiresome and wonder if we could just leave it? Get on
> to the conflict of grape v. grain in _Mason & Dixon_ or some such?
> 
> maab

"As far as we're concerned, pretty much any Pynchon-related topic is OK
on this
list, from Pynchon apocrypha through light discussion of our favourite
passages, to
litcrit as heavy as you want." 

If we stick to Pynchon related posts the multiples will not post. 
They may try to sneak and snipe, but they will need to do it with a
Pynchon related post and we will be able to know who is doing and we
will be able to prevent the ad hominem. 
This will do a lot to get the list back to what is is supposed to be. 
Anonymous posts are not a problem. Even personas, in and of themselves, 
are not a problem. The Pynchon list requires that all posts be Pynchon
related. If we stick to this rule we can eliminate 95% of the problems
here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .