MDDM "Another Slave-Colony"

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

>Wasn't Mason the one who threatened to "kill" Wicks at Cape Town? (84)

>I don't know how you get sotto voce out of the word "declares", or that
>Wicks is suggesting that *the role* of Eve is more pleasurable. I'd say it's
>more likely a lewd sexist remark than anything else, an attempt to
>ingratiate himself as "one of the boys". I don't think Wicks is being
>characterised as fey, certainly not as "cruising" Mason.

I doubt Charlie would be joking about murdering Wicks 
because he was being "sexist," especially after the
treatment Mason's been getting at the Vrooms, but 
more than that it would be out of character for Wicks.
I don't remember specifically stating my impression
that Wicks might be gay to you, I believe it was made 
in response to someone else's post, NO MATTER, except
that I also mentioned that it might be for clerical
reason's that Wicks is so fascinated by Mason's internal
struggles, demonstrating uncertainty as to motive. Still Wicks,
inspite of your efforts to characterize him as sexist and
lewd- rather a stretch in my opinion- is probably either
gay or asexual. My vote is gay.
 

 >> I'm still inclined to the view that it's Mason's self-absorption and
 >> perception of his own pre-eminence in the partnership rather than greater
 >> depth or degree of characterisation which is at work here...
  
Well all that pathology certainly takes some detailing to
establish. I consider that "charaterization." All semantics
aside, Mason's inner thoughts and feelings are presented
in more detail. Call it whatever you wish.
  
 >> and that it's he
 >> who presumes that he has more at stake, that what's happening to him is
 the>> rightful focus of all attention, that all the perplexities and intrigue
 >> revolve around his personal past and present circumstances and
 >> relationships. 
 
 Right, and since he's a character and not the author or even
narrator, you've gone along way to making my point, and
continue to do so:

 >> He is paranoid, solipsistic, backward-looking, introspective
 >> - and deliberately characterised as such -
  
 >As I've noted, extrapolation from available source material is quite a
 >different process to complete fictionalisation. Pointsman is a fabrication,
 >Mason is not.

But Pynchon's Mason? Please point me to the relevant
biographical/historical evidence for all that pathology
you outlined above- I'll reserve judgement till I review
it. You may have me here, but from what I've seen, so far,
the majority of Pynchon's portrayal seems to be elaboration
not extrapolation, and to highlight specifically current
thematic concerns which dovetail with his earlier fictional
works, at that.
  
 >> where Dixon is more self-assured,
 >> sensible, wryly observant. And, I think, more sensitive and caring towards
 >> Chas (because of these traits) than Chas to he.
  
 > And I think it fair to say that Chas is the more responsible.

It may be fair but I think it's inaccurate. Dixon is more
carefree because he is not in charge. His career is not at
stake. He would just as soon be running lines in Durham. He
has no children, yet, nor an over-bearing father to whom he
must legitimize his actions.  

>Which begs the question: to what, or whom? And anyway, Dixon's loyalty is a
>form of responsibility, surely? There are numerous instances where Dixon
>goes out of his way to assist or protect Mason. And in St Helena he offered
>to repair Maskelyne's broken Plumb-line, which offer Mason refused.
>(119-120) In fact, I think that it's Jere's almost miraculous skill as a
>surveyor which is depicted as ensuring the duo's success and subsequent
>appointment to the American assignment. The Jesuit, Maire, remarks that he
>is "God's Instrument". (230)
  
Dixon is portrayed as a good man and surveyor, I agree, but
that characterization requires much less narrative work to
detail than complexities of Mason's troubled soul. Point
being: until I see the biographical evidence for all that brooding
darkness, much of which allows Dixon to demostrate his own
healthy mateyness- I'm calling it fiction. 

 >While I do disagree with your suggestions I've appreciated the opportunity
 >to put my own reading to the test - thanks.

My pleasure.