Pynchon, Coetzee, "the Holocaust as metaphor" and more

[Terrance]

Malignd wrote:
> 
> <<If one argues that the near absence of the Holocaust
> from GR is proof that Pynchon deliberately avoided the
> subject because he believed "such subjects" (i.e.,
> genocide of the Herero) should be handled with care,
> history and documentary probably being the best way,
> one would need explain the apparent change in
> Pynchon's attitude after V. and CL49.>>
> 
> "Proof" would not be the word I'd choose, but forced
> to respond to the above, I would argue that, for
> reasons good and bad, the genocide of the Herero is
> not nearly the hot button that is the Holocaust.  It's
> not difficult to imagine being willing to handle one,
> albeit it with appropriate ginger, but avoiding the
> other altogether.

OK, "Proof" is not the word I wanted either. Fair enough. 
Are you saying I've compared watermelons to gefilte fish? 
Well, if the Herero genocide is not to be included under  "such
subjects" along with the Holocaust, what historical events are to be
included? 

My point, anyway, is that P does not handle such subjects with care or
avoided them.  In fact, Pynchon's novels, deliberately  handle them
carelessly, recklessly, and flippantly.

There is question that I think worth asking: Why does Pynchon turn
genocide into a Disneyland Tourist Attraction and describe "such events"
as the Holocaust, the genocide of Native Americans, the Catholic Irish,
the Herero, with language and style that is deliberately offensive?