Probably Naive But Curious

[Keith McMullen]

Due to offlist correspondence, a former p-lister was convinced that this was
Pynchon:

From: "Martin Scribler" <scriblerus@[omitted]>
To: pynchon-l@[omitted]
Subject: Irony?
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 08:47:53 PST

Alas perhaps I should have footnoted.

The main point I was trying to make is that a large proportion of
contributions to the list appear entirely self involved, or if they are
more than that, seem to be aimed not at a large community of readers
(and woodwork lurkers) but at a small group of 'list personalities'
intent on the perpetuation of their literary personae.  Whether there is
a high content of Pynchon in any of them is irrelevant: the point I made
still stands unchallenged, that the author and his works are being
replaced in the discussion by the contributors themselves.

Which brings me to apologise for the forceful ranting pretentious nature
of my comments - but if I had written something more reasonable, poor
Scribler would have been ignored.

Drawing fire seemed the only method of distraction that would stand a
chance of penetrating your discourse.  And arrogance seems to demand
(and receive) replies.

The bit about the student was ironic, of course - another way that the
discussion list is abused (apart from messages like this) is in its
occasional function as a help line.

The vehemence of the replies (I did like "woodwork lurker" - guess I'm
not in your gang) proved the point I argued first - impact and
appearance are everything to some on this list.  Myself, of course,
included.

Martin.