More on "homeland"

[Malignd]

One reads the word "homeland," thinks of September 11,
and concludes that Pynchon is alluding specifically to
that.  Furthermore, some argue, he is passing
judgement on is believed to be (by the reader and
Pynchon) the fascistic policies of the Bush
administration in the period following September 11. 
This conclusion despite the context of his use of the
term being a passage about England during World War
II, attiudes of English citizens re government power
during wartime, and, further, as an example of one
such (as it happens, changed) attitude, Orwell's
toward the Labour Government.

Beginning with the last-mentioned first, Menand notes
in his article about Orwell re fascism, protest, and
government control:

"Orwell was opposed to Nazi Germany. But he thought
that Britain, as an imperial power, had no moral right
to go to war against Hitler, and he was sure that a
war would make Britain fascist.  This is a theme in
his novel 'Coming Up for Air,' which was published in
1939, and that winter he was urging friends to begin
planning 'illegal anti-war activities.'  He thought
that it would be a good idea to set up an underground
antiwar organization, in anticipation of what he
called the 'pre-war fascising processes,' and
predicted that he would end up in a British
concentration camp because of his views. 

"He kept up his antiwar agitation until August, 1939.
Then, with the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact, he
flipped completely. In 'The Lion and the Unicorn,' in
1941, he accused British antiwar intellectuals of
'sabotage.' They had become 'Europeanized'; they
sneered at patriotism. (This from a man who, two years
earlier, had been proposing an illegal campaign
against government policy.)"

This change of attitude might at least raise some
questions as to what or whom P is alluding to by
"unseemly" arguments; as well as raise questions as to
what the parallels are between now and then, Pynchon's
attitude and Orwell's.   

In any case, the argument that the passage alludes to
9/11 seems largely to hang on the word "homeland,"
that P's choice of that term forces the parallel.  But
is that necessary or true?

Consider another use of, and connotation for, the
word, from the Die Wehrmacht, a publication of the
German army.

>From a 1939 article "Why and What For?":

"Why are we fighting?

"Because we were forced into it by England and its
Polish friends. If the enemy had not begun the fight
now, they would have within two or three years.
England and France began the war in 1939 because they
feared that in two or three years Germany would be
militarily stronger and harder to defeat. The deepest
roots of this war are in England's old claim to rule
the world, and Europe in particular. Although its
HOMELAND [CAPS mine] is relatively small, England has
understood how to cleverly exploit others to expand
its possessions. It controls the seas, the important
points along major sea routes, and the richest parts
of our planet. The contrast between England itself and
its overseas territories is so grotesque that England
has always has a certain inferiority complex with
respect to the European continent."

Considering this, Pynchon's use of the term "homeland"
is entirely in keeping with what he is specifically
writing about: England, WW II; the changed attitudes
once the bombs started falling at home, "altering the
landscape and producing casualties among friends and
neighbours" (One thing when they're mucking about in
the colonies; quite another when they're bombing the
homeland!); and justifies no strong claim that he's
alluding to anything else.
 

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