VLVL2 (1-5): Summative Thoughts (addendum)

[Michael Joseph]

> Great post, man.
>
> Yes, it is important to remember that the carrier pigeons are "each
> bearing a message for [Zoyd], but none of whom ... he could ever quite
> get to in time" (3).
>
I think the birds are messengers, but their messages escape rational
processing. Like Shade's 'texture not text,' Vineland's birds constellate
perceptions of coherence at levels of abstraction Zoyd nor the reader can
assimilate.

> In a sense, each chapter *has* been a series of "messages" for Zoyd,
> messages that he is somehow out of time or out of step with.
>
Yes, "out of time" is an important point. Out of time symbols reverberate
throughout Vineland, even in the Hawaii chapter, which impresses some
perhaps as a throwaway chapter. (Think of Kahuna Airlines: ALWAYS HIRING)

 > Guilt has not been a major factor in these chapters. >
> Guilt implies a sense of responsibility, no?  Is he mere schlemeil, a
> pawn in the hands of fate?
>
I think Zoyd is one, however that word is spelled (schlemihl?). But what
kind of schl...? And what is the character of the schle... but an innocent
(Graves "smiling innocent on the heavenly causeway"), a model reader, in
other words, whose point of view, as Don notes, permeates the narrative
after his departure. If Prairie is a reader whose perceptions anticipate
ours, Paul N's early observation, then Zoyd's perceptions must have an
Ur-sensibility that foster Prairie's: if hers are child-like, then Zoyd
must be a kind of Ur-child.  To anticipate your question below, Tim, I
think Pynchon is arguably the most self-conscious of contemporary authors,
and his persistent creation of Pynchon-like narrative figures may be a way
of placing himself within the text so as not to impose upon it by his too
conspicuous absence. Pynchon/Pigeon/Zoyd/Prairie forms a gracefully
attenuating authorial arc: absent author, transcendent
messenger, cipher, child symbol of unspoiled, open space make a pleasing
series of reflexively dynamic, interpenetrating, "entry points" whereas
a Zoyd-less progression would be weaker, perhaps even sentimental. Hector,
hmmm. Hmmmm.

Michael


> Has anything been established up to this point to equate Zoyd-guilt with
> goverment snitching?  government anything?
>

> By the way, you bring up a good notion about the point of entry into the
> novel.  Yes, Pynchon has *chosen* to make our point of entry into this
> novel a character like Zoyd.  Why?  To what effect?  Why not Hector, or
> Prairie?  What is achieved (in terms of narrative) by making Zoyd our
> entry-point?
>

> Tim
>
>
>
>   Well, since you brought it up.
>
>   At the risk of provoking the Australian welfare authorities again, I will say that the five chapters we've read provide more support for the suggestion that Zoyd's pigeon dream had to do with premonition than they do for the assertion that it was an expression of some free-floating anxiety about his disability guilt. In the first few sentences of the novel Zoyd wakes from a dream in which he has missed an important message. Maybe it was a warning. Something he needs to know about is coming up fast.
>
>   In the next five chapters there's nothing, really, that suggests Zoyd has a guilty conscience. About anything. But a lot of weird and unpleasant stuff starts happening to him, and we learn enough about his history to understand he has good reason to be having bad dreams about the government's continuing interest and intervention in his life.
>
>   Zoyd not only provides the point of view for the first five chapters, he is the point of entry into the novel. Now that his perspective is established, it filters all of the rest of the narrative for me, whether he's present or not. I think that's probably true of most readers of who have hands-on experience of 1968.
>
>   Don
>
>
>
>