Symbiosis or S&M Double Stuff

[Terrance]

jbor wrote:
> 
> on 22/1/02 5:05 AM, Terrance at lycidas2 at earthlink.net wrote:
> 
> snip
> > When at
> > the Washingtons, they divide their labors effortlessly.
> 
> I'm not sure that it's entirely voluntary that they are doing this, nor that
> they hold the upper hand in the encounter/s at any point. 

Right, I'm not sure that I can think of an act in any P novel that can
be said to be Entirely Voluntary. The men have adopted the practice. It
hasn't been forced upon them. They have adopted the practice of dividing
their labor when it comes to conversation (a practice I think rather
common, husbands and wives, partners and couples at parties, etc....)
and they seem to divide their labor w/o much effort, simply taking on
the nearest interlocutor. In a novel where language is so much labor, I
think this arrangement can be characterized as labor effortlessly
divided. 
Of course, luck, chance, forces visible and invisible are at play. Mason
ends up talking with Mrs. W. 

I did not mean to suggest that our boys are getting the better of the
americans, only that their partnership, though sometimes cemented
antagonistically, is being tested and thus far they are passing the
tests. In fact, they seem to be learning their lines and roles, playing
along so to speak. 

Their
> double-teaming is again purposely disrupted as it was by Ben F. back in
> Philadelphia, and eventually they start bickering and putting one another
> down at 285-6, as the hemp's effect sets in and their discomfort becomes
> manifest. But what's all that about a "Torpedo"?

Right, but I can't imagine Mason and Dixon not trading barbs. Can you? 

Torpedo? Oh yes, well we did have a bit on the electrical etymology back 
at 

Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 
  Subject: MDMD(6): 'Torpedick' 

Hope that helps. 

> 
> My impression was that old Martha is actually trying to flirt a little with
> Cha. (283.1-15 - 'The way to a man's heart .... ' etc ) Though Mason remains
> thin-skinned and obtuse, as usual, babbling on about Plato. (In the context
> of his chat with Mrs W., his launching into a long-winded "Apologia for
> Astronomy", as well as his allusion to the 'Republic', is pompous and
> inappropriate. She was, after all, merely chiding George gently for his
> domestic incompetence, and generalising this to all males, rather than
> making an "accusation of unworldliness" 281.24 against "his Profession", as
> Mason incorrectly imagines.)

Yeah, again, can't imagine this not being the case with Charles. It
seems to be his way with women. 

> 
> > Yes. BTW, Ben's Universal Balm is what? Snake oil? Money?
> 
> His use of the word "wagering" at 269.18 leads me to suspect the latter.
> 
> I also think that at 281-2 Gershom is speaking to George about the Land
> Charter for western settlements - GW perhaps still complaining about
> "General Bouquet's Proclamation" (277.1), and using the pronoun "we" to
> refer to the Ohio Company - after the Seven Years War, rather than to M & D
> about *their* contract.


Quite right, I wrote Gershom, but S/B  George at 276. "Don't suppose you
have a copy of that Contract..."