a fascist by any other name

[pynchonoid]

Interesting question, why didn't Pynchon come out more
boldly and call a Bush Admin. fascist a fascist (a
spade a spade, in the US regime change deck)?

Is it because, as Terrance suggests with macho verve
and unwitting absurdity, Pynchon "doesn't have the
balls"? 

Is it because, as fq so sagely suggests, Pynchon
writes such "shitty" essays that he can't make himself
understood, readers can't figure out what he's trying
to say?  

I don't think so. 


The foreword to a backlist classic of 20th century
literature needs to put the novel in perspective for
readers over the next many years without dating it too
badly with topical references. This is a case where
Terrance's genre discussion might make sense.
Pynchon's foreword is also going to be included in a
new edition of the Signet mass market paperback
version of _1984_, I've heard.  Most of the readers of
the Plume and Signet versions of _1984_ won't be
familiar with Pynchon, but Pynchon readers are already
studying the foreword; these readers can put this
foreword in the context of his other non-fiction
writings, and see that it's Pynchon playing his usual
coy and cagey tricks.  Am I referring to 9-11 and
calling Bush a fascist, or is it just gas?  Which do
you want it to be? 

Which is not to say that Pynchon leaves things
indeterminate.  He makes it clear in the foreword that
the US, post-9-11, is uncomfortably similar to the
kind of society Orwell writes about in _1984_.





=====
<http://www.pynchonoid.blogspot.com/>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com