Pynchon and fascism

[jbor]

on 30/5/03 4:55 PM, Paul Nightingale at isread at btopenworld.com wrote:

> I said the opening para of the Foreword juxtaposes 'Blair' to 'Orwell',
> which raises the question of identity. Has my analysis (of the way the
> text works, or sets up oppositions) been followed by an interpretation
> of what it means?

I think you've framed your conclusion in terms of what Pynchon/the text is
"doing", rather than what the text "means", but I'd still argue that this is
an interpretive response to the text.

Let me say that I don't think that in itself is problematic (it's not so far
from "deconstruction"), and I'm all for interpretations, particularly
analytical interpretations; it's just the distinction between "analysis" and
"interpretation", as though the former is somehow more reliable or reputable
than the latter, which I'm contesting.

I think this is perhaps the nub of the issue.

best

> I've certainly concluded something about the way P has
> composed the paragraph, but does this amount to saying I know what it
> means? Have I offered a reading that separates meaning/message from
> text? To my mind, 'raises the question of identity' addresses the way
> the text is organised around such juxtapositions ... and I've attempted
> to show how subsequent paragraphs work in the same way. This is how I
> read anything, looking for A juxtaposed to B.