"one's homeland"

[barbara100 at jps.net]

The only one changing Pynchon's words is your man Jbor.
Besides, it's like we tried to tell Malign, the 9/11-ness of the fascistic
disposition paragraph doesn't hang on one or two particular words. It's not
just "homeland" or "bombs falling" --it's

fascistic disposition
all too ready to justify
altering the landscape
casualties among friends and neighbors (that must be especially poignant
living in New York)
subversive (if you don't wave a flag on your antenna)
the unseemliness of an argument (we heard you, Arie)
the homeland in danger (orange alerts)
no one is likely to be listening (for fear and propaganda)
one could certainly argue (and draw correlations of your own)
censoring news
restricting travel
subordinating civil liberties
self-defined wartime necessity

All of these are buzz words for me that conjure up images framed in the
year-and-a-half since 9/11. They're all the really important subjects of the
day. They're what everybody's talking about on alternative radio! Seriously.
9/11 is subtly but consistently alluded to throughout the paragraph, and
arguably throughout the greater essay.
And just because you had the last word with Doug, you're not finished.
There's still six or seven others who already had the last word on you, and
your man.


----- Original Message -----
From: "s~Z" <keithsz at concentric.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: "one's homeland"


> >>>Hogwash.  All you have to do is read the Foreword,
> look where Pynchon suggests you look, and know what
> "homeland" means.  It's not rocket science. <<<
>
> Do we have to change the meaning of bombs falling into something else, or
> can we stay with the words Pynchon chose?
>