better version of Playboy Japan interview with TRP

[Otto]

Thanks Robert, a helpful explanantion (I like the irony!) -- what strikes me
is that we still haven't got the questions yet, and the answers alone are
not sufficient. I did *not* get the impression that Pynchon has taken a
point of view of "supporting" or "condemning" the war on terror at all. I
see that as a New Yorker he's afraid of further attacks, a very normal
reaction.

I don't share your doubts about the authenticity (simply: why should the
guys from Playboy Japan make this up) but of course the Playboy generally
isn't the no. 1 source of reliable information. There have been good
interviews in the Playboy, for example with Charles Bukowski in Playboy
12/1977, done by Jörg Fauser (a picture of that can be seen here)
http://www.triptychon-factory.de/joerg_fauser.htm -- interesting guy.

On the other hand I don't understand Doug's enthuthiasm about this
"interview" which is, I insist, still incomplete. It's like the short
CNN-interview, the kind of answers of a normal man who has chosen
reclusiveness (this media term) to be able to lead a normal life, not as a
tick. If he likes to let us hear something special we get something like the
Watts-article, the Luddite-essay or the other non-fictional stuff we've
read.

I'm neither disappointed nor surprised by Pynchon's answers we've read so
far. "America always looks for an enemy" is not a very definite
Bush-critique, or? More of a statement about the US-society in general. This
is very different from what we read from Chomsky via Doug & Barbara.

What I find interesting are his remarks on the merely symbolic value of Bin
Laden (which makes the guy smaller than he's actually being painted by the
media). By this Pynchon claims for a demystification of Bin Laden. If you
read closely he is saying what Mr Bush has said too, that this campaign will
go on for years and will not be ended with the capture or the death of "the
usual suspects" -- there's more to come, more terrorists, more attacks, more
retaliation, and hopefully one day --after many onion layers-- the knowledge
who the ones are using religious fanatics like Bin Laden as their rodeo
clowns (if one is gone, there'll be another). I have a strong suspicion that
Pynchon is very right when he says (quoting the founder of the Daily Mail):
"News is something somebody wants to suppress. Everything else is
propaganda" -- that the US-government definitely isn't telling all it knows,
for obvious reasons btw.

Another thing is the very differentiated point about Israel, where he is
rejecting Bin Laden's opinion expressed in the various videos and statements
that the US-support for Israel is the "reason" and "justification" for the
9/11-attacks. No word on bad US-policy in the past.

What he's pleading for instead is a more investigative and critical
journalism, not merely believing and repeating any official statements. This
is ok in my opinion but goes not only for times of war.

"Proverbs for Paranoids, 3: If they can get you asking the wrong questions,
they don't have to worry about answers." (GR 251.38-39)

If you type in "Japan+Playboy" into Google you'll get more hardcore links
you can work on without a flatrate, while "Pynchon+Playboy+Japan" - did not
match any documents." With "Pynchon+Playboy" you get
http://people.mw.mediaone.net/lmeyer1/
with a dead link to Jules Siegel's website (old url).

Otto

From: jbor:
> I think the argument goes something like this, Otto: Now that Pynchon has
> finally broken a deliberate forty year silence by speaking out - so
> comprehensively and thoughtfully - in this, his first official press
> interview, strategically vouchsafed to a journalist from that forefront
> progressive, left-leaning, anti-corporate, anti-global capital,
humanitarian
> organisation, Hef's Playboycorp empire, anyone who ISN'T a card-carrying
> George Bush Jnr-hater and anti-US propagandist should NOT, under ANY
> circumstances, be permitted to discuss or even to read Pynchon's work.
>
> As if.
>
> best
>
> Otto wrote:
>
> > Doug:
> >> Pychon's critique of the US war --
> >>
> >
> > Which critique?
> >
> > Otto
>