MDDM Ch. 67 Various

[Paul Mackin]

Without any intention to compare Indians with cats I couldn't help being reminded
of the following:

The Naming of Cats

 The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter,
   It isn't just one of your holiday games;
 You may think at first I'm as mad as a hatter
 When I tell you, a cat must have THREE DIFFERENT NAMES.
 First of all, there's the name that the family use daily,
   Such as Peter, Augustus, Alonzo or James,
 Such as Victor or Jonathan, or George or Bill Bailey -
   All of them sensible everyday names.
 There are fancier names if you think they sound sweeter,
   Some for the gentlemen, some for the dames:
 Such as Plato, Admetus, Electra, Demeter -
   But all of them sensible everyday names.
 But I tell you, a cat needs a name that's particular,
   A name that's peculiar, and more dignified,
 Else how can he keep up his tail perpendicular,
   Or spread out his whiskers, or cherish his pride?
 Of names of this kind, I can give you a quorum,
   Such as Munkustrap, Quaxo, or Coricopat,
 Such as Bombalurina, or else Jellylorum -
   Names that never belong to more than one cat.
 But above and beyond there's still one name left over,
   And that is the name that you never will guess;
 The name that no human research can discover -
   But THE CAT HIMSELF KNOWS, and will never confess.
 When you notice a cat in profound meditation,
   The reason, I tell you, is always the same:
 His mind is engaged in a rapt contemplation
   Of the thought, of the thought, of the thought of his name:
     His ineffable effable
     Effanineffable
 Deep and inscrutable singular Name.

jbor wrote:

> Otto wrote:
>
> > 1. Is it really more far out than naming a "German" Herero Enzian or giving
> > GW's house-slave the Jewish name Gershom?
>
> The whole thing with the naming of Enzian by Weissmann after the Rilke poem
> is spelt out in the text. Gershom is a much more fleshed out
> characterisation in the novel, and there is that Gershom Nimmo who was GW's
> appointed surveyor for the Great Dismal Swamp where all the slaves were
> hiding out and perhaps being cared for by Southern samaritans. With these
> "Indians!" it's little more than a list of names. I don't think it's far out
> - well, a couple of the names are way out there, I guess - I just didn't
> know what to make of it. Bandwraith's ideas hold up pretty well I think, and
> there seems to be deliberate pluralism in it all, as if names don't really
> matter to the Native Americans at all. (Cf. their extended amusement over
> the "Tribe with no name" at 663.33.)
>
> > 2. Contrary to the historical record at least he lets them have names and by
> > doing so, personality.
>
> I don't know that he does do this. I don't get any sense of individuality or
> characterisation of any of them. By Ch. 68 they're nameless again: "The
> Indians laugh." (662.17)
>
> > 3. Wasn't it a white & racist habit to rename colonised people instead of
> > leaving them their birth names?
>
> Like Robinson Crusoe. But it's Pynchon rather than anyone in the text who
> has named them. And these "Indians" are actually free, and their lands are
> still theirs, as I understand it.
>
> best