MDDM Comparing Wicks and Ishmael as narrators

[jbor]

Thomas wrote:

> But in the case of Wicks it is made clear from the beginning that he
> embellishes his
> narrative at will, whereas this is not the case with Ishmael. Does not this
> make the
> narration of events Wicks can not possibly have witnessed, more plausible, in
> terms
> of cohesiveness of the narrative as a whole, instead of less?

Even though Wicks is self-conscious in his tale-telling, often ponderously
so, he isn't in control of the narrative in the same way that Ishmael is.
And there are a couple of separate reasons for this: the direction, detail
and flavour of Wicks's tales are quite often influenced by the need to be
sensitive to his particular listeners, as well as by the explicit demands
for content and explanation made by various members of his audience;
secondly, that implied narrator intervenes both outside and *inside* the
tales which Wicks is ostensibly telling.

I think there's a different attitude to plausibility in Pynchon's texts. As
Otto noted, one of the main themes - or *aims* - of Pynchon's work is "to
unveil the illusion that Narratives could tell Truths". Brecht's "alienation
effect" (*Verfremdung*), and Shklovsky's notion of the technique of
"defamiliarisation" (*ostranenie*) are indeed pertinent.

In _M&D_ I can't envisage "a more general perspective" where all the
narrative agencies are in alignment with, let alone subservient to, Wicks's
POV, but I am able to do this quite comfortably with Ishmael in _MD_.

> But neither Cervantes nor Sterne do ever go as far as P. There is
> never a complete breakdown of "ontological boundaries" or some such - Amadis
> de Gaul
> does never enter the narrative of Don Quijote.

I think that when Don Quixote and Sancho become aware that the first volume
of their adventures has suddenly hit the top of the best-seller lists, and
begin critiquing it within the self-same narrative, the ontological
disruption is acute. I think that 'The Ghastly Fop' stuff is a deliberate,
and respectful, travesty of Cervantes.

By the way, thanks a lot. It's been a real pleasure to be able to have this
discussion.

best