re Re: MDDM Ch. 56 Vortex

[Doug Millison]

I doubt Pynchon is "inserting these references gratuitously", given the
complexity of his texts, the time he appears to spend on them (30 years in
the case of M&D), and the complex yet coherent webs of allusions that he
presents.  I don't see how a reader can categorically rule out the
possibility that Pynchon is doing something purposeful with references of
this sort, that Pynchon is playing with their double-meanings, as critics
such as Dugdale, Hollander, and others suggest and demonstrate with
readings that take into account the multiple meanings of names, artistic
and historical allusions, etc.  It's entirely possible that Pynchon is
playing a game other than one which is bound by a critical theory that
lamely accounts for such obvious allusions by bracketing them "lexical
coincidence."  In the present case, it's obviously the case that M&D
readers read "Vorticists" and think not only of its meaning in the
historical setting of the novel, but also in the context of the larger
framework of artistic and literary allusions that Pynchon works into this
novel and indeed into all of his writing; I doubt that it's any more
coincidental or gratuituous than M&D's anachronistic allusions to many
other 20th century cultural phenomena, and I agree it may be difficult to
reconcile all such references in an interpretation that neatly fits within
the parameters of one or another literary-critical method.