MDDM Ch. 67 Various

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

Whether or not these were the actual names used
by the "Indians" the clear implication is that they
have been baptised, which I think is another demon-
stration of Pynchon's concern that the "Indians"
are willing to incorporate the spiritual reality of
the whites into their dreams without sacrificing
their own spiritual identity. For me, this indicates
that Pynchon feels one of the basis of the
"white christians' neurosis" is a loss of the spiritual
connection with aspects deemed or defined as
less than human, and therefore, incapable of
being redeemed, not to mention original sin, 
expulsion from eden, yada, yada, yada. Wicks,
I agree, is insecure with the more "material"
spirituality of the "Indians."

A model for "Indians" given (or appropriating)
christian names might be the great Nez Perce,
Chief Joseph:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=chief+joseph&btnG=Google+Se

arch

(Take your pick from Google. Notice the variations
of the tribal name Perce, Pierce, etc.)

Nice post.


In a message dated 8/2/02 1:59:17 AM, jbor at bigpond.com writes:

<< I'm still not convinced that anyone other than Pynchon has named those
"Indians!" Pynchon hasn't "named" Charles Mason, or Jeremiah Dixon, or Hugh
Crawfford, or any other of the characters from history who inhabit his
fiction. It seems odd that he would create fictional (and seemingly jokey or
incongruous) names instead of using actual names for the men and women from
the Six Nations delegation who really did meet with Mason and Dixon on 14
June 1767, with Hugh Crawfford (or Crawford) acting as interpreter.
 >>