Yet Another Plea to Stay Pynchon-Focused

[vze422fs at verizon.net]

on 2/2/03 11:14 PM, davemarc at davemarc at panix.com wrote:

> From: Eddie Bettano <eddiebettano at yahoo.com>
>> Oh well, maybe if we talk about something we know
>> about, like Pynchon maybe, we might save the list from
>> this crap.
> 
> From: <barbara100 at jps.net>
>> How can you be saying that? Your political shit is littered all over this
>> list.
> 
> From: Otto <ottosell at yahoo.de>
>> I don't understand your complaint here, since you feel free to post &
> answer
>> to every political topic you like.
> 
> Would more people "get it" if the suggestion came from another source?
> 
> Not long ago, this mailing list was a unique resource for people with an
> interest in Thomas Pynchon.  Today, it is no longer such a resource.  It has
> become just another staging area for polemics and personal infighting.
> 
> If you want to engage in those activities, please find another place to do
> it.  There are many to be found on or off the list.  There are, however,
> basically no other places online where people from around the world can
> focus on Pynchon.  So the loss of this list as a forum for genuinely
> Pynchon-related discussion would be significant.
> 
> If you have a genuine interest in Pynchon, think about the first time you
> came upon this mailing list.  I imagine that you were excited at the
> prospect of having Pynchon-focused discussions, learning new things, and
> perhaps meeting others with similar interests.  I'd like to believe that you
> didn't think to yourself, "Oh, here's a Pynchon mailing list.  I'll make it
> a point to bicker with other subscribers and harangue them with the kind of
> political discussions that I can already find all over the Net."
> 
> I also imagine that new subscribers genuinely interested in Pynchon who took
> a look at the past month of posts and get a strong impression that, despite
> having the name pynchon-l, the discussion group isn't about Pynchon
> anymore--and that any dropouts from the mailing list who checked in again,
> thinking about giving the list another try, would drop out pretty fast,
> seeing no reason to subscribe.
> 
> I realize that it may not seem easy for some subscribers to extricate
> themselves from ongoing arguments (Pynchon-related or not) and personal
> conflicts.  But there's a lot to be gained and regained from doing just
> that.
> 
> Please respect this unique mailing list's original concept, and keep it as a
> valuable Pynchon resource.
> 
> d.
> 
> 
> 
Uhhh...Ok. It's just that he's so damned political.....or politically
ambiguous...people just get inspired. Then they piss each other off.

It's a little free-wheeling, but fun once you get into it; It's like a
running bar argument. I look forward to Terrance saying something obnoxious.
It's like professional wrestling where you get to play along!

I believe the subject was "Entropy". I'm surprised that we didn't have a few
more dueling physicists bickering over the definition of the title, and
referencing back to the intro where Pynchon discusses his ignorance at the
time that he wrote it.

"Under the Rose" should be more productive. There will be a discussion of
relevance to "V". Baedekker and the Cooks tours will be compared. The
definition of the word "peregrine"? How about the importance of the Middle
East strategically in pre-World War I Europe? The behavior of British
intelligence operatives in Egypt will become fit topic for conversation. Ian
Fleming anyone? The burgeoning sixties counterculture that Pynchon was
experiencing at the time that he wrote V? The influence of James Bond upon
that culture? The CIA? Kissinger? George H.W. Bush? Oh shit! Here we go
again.

The depth of the subject matter lends itself to this sort of transference.

As Warren Zevon says, "It's a hopeless cause, there's no use trying'".

Have a nice Tuesday.
Joe