Saint Jack. II

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/19/02 5:32:27 PM, Bandwraith at aol.com writes:

<< In a message dated 8/19/02 3:33:29 PM, MalignD at aol.com writes:

<< Give it to him, my man.  Kick the stooge's punk ass.  If he shows his 
girly 
face, which he won't.
 >>

<Unfortunately, you're probably correct. It would be fun if he
were to hang around a bit, though, since his flames actually 
tend to deal with assertions that are arguable, rather than
the usual attempts at character assasination, or chiidish
name calling. (At least, he includes specific assertions and
attempts to support them along with the gratuitous venom.) 

Unfortunately for St. Clair, however, Pynchon is just not 
the ideological vehicle that he so fervently wished him to be, 
even in V. and GR. He recognized that himself with the publication of
Vineland- about which he could not hide his disappointment-
and again, apparently, with M&D. It's not that Pynchon doesn't
bring up all those issues which get St. Clair's juices un-phleg'd,
but that Pynchon is more interested in raising the questions
rather than in providing rhetorical ammunition for those
atop the barricades- who've made a career out of being atop
the barricades.

"Stooge" is not a bad descriptor, however. It encompasses the 
net reality of where St. Clair's vitriolic tends to lead, and implies his
usefulness, albeit unconsciously, to the forces he rails against.
Agent provocateur might yet be too strong- yet. But one senses
the frustration and anger with those he deems as "gray little men 
who rush forward to defend fascists." And, although his hatred
still seems pointed toward the right wing, there is in his
rhetoric a certain respect for the likes of "johnson and his gang 
of steel curtained thugs," so that eventually, one could envision-
if only out of pure frustration- St. Clair crossing over, into the
world he thought Pynchon had harbingered, the world of action.  

eh, Steely? >>
----------------------------------------------
One of the problems faced by radicals like St. Clair, et al., 
in these post-9/11 days is a complete inability to make
the case that they are any different than those boogey-
men they have attempted to make a living attacking (and
in some cases created first, or otherwise propped up) with
the broadly smearing rhetorical techniques exhibited by
St. Clair, in this, his latest resurrection on the P-List

Not to insinuate that there is anything good about the 
heinous activities of Al Quaida, but such attacks have 
served to demonstrate just how elitist St. Clair, et. al.,
actually are, and how dependent these radicals have always 
been on the same material structures as  the corporate 
economy they love to attack.

Not only does it become more difficult for St. Clair, et.
al. to differentiate themselves from the rest of what
passes as the status quo in "the civilized world," but in
these times, it becomes more dangerous. It's much
safer to attack "the tamed liberal lapdogs on the Pynchon

list," where at most they risk being responded to uncivily,
then to actually deal with what might be called list jargon-
the worm within:

    Train your slimey back-channel musings on a

      story by Cockburn next time and let's see how 
    "politely" HE responds. It would be one thing if 
    you were a reader of CounterPunch. But you're just

    freeloading off the Pynchon list.

so clearly evident in the production of such venom, which seems
to demonstrate St. Clair's real concerns: criticisms of HIS
stories, HIS position w/r/t to others in the radical elite, i.e,
cockburn (big billy goat gruff?), and, his fervent wish that
someone would actually want to waste their time subscribing
to CounterSlap, rather than being forced to deal with its
unsolicited arrivals on the P-List.