Gibson

[Paul Mackin]

On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 11:01, Richard Romeo wrote:
> David G sed:
> > Haven't read PR yet myself (it hasn't come out here
> > yet and I haven't been able to find a scan of
> > it) but it is Gibson's first book set aggresively in
> > the present. Maybe he simply couldn't ignore
> > Nine Eleven? Would a book published in 2002 seem
> > absurd if it made no mention of it?
> > ------------------
> My question is why he felt the need--it doesn't, after
> reading the novel and thinking about in retrospect,
> feel an integral part of the novel--it feels added on
> or squeezed into the plot. 
> just my opinion

This seems right to me.Though I don't think Gibson should be faulted for
anything beyond lack of imagination. More generally, 9-11 clearly (IMHO)
does have its abuses as well as uses. It is often said that after 9-11
nothing would ever be the same again. There is obviously a reputable,
sombre, even honorific, meaning carried here, but there is also
unfortunately a rather disreputable side. 9-11 can be like a
sledgehammer to hit the opposition over the head with--e.g.,Bush
invoking 9-11 last night as the obvious answer needing no further
elaboration to the question: why war now. 

P.