Pynchon's interview with Playboy Japan

[Paul Mackin]

On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 12:17, Ghetta Life wrote:
> >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
> >
> >>The problem that a lot of people who think the interview is a hoax have 
> >>is, I am certain, that they do not agree with the opinions expressed.  But 
> >>they will never admit that.
> >
> >OK. You've call my bluff. I admit it. I don't agree.
> 
> http://www.ottosell.de/pynchon/playboy.htm
> 
> It's hard to know whether one agrees or disagrees with a confused 
> presentation, which is the case with this piece as a whole, but one can cull 
> out some of the major points made, not that they cohere into a logical 
> whole.  If one starts from the top and works through to the end, these 
> points stand out:
> 
> 1.  Pynchon's doesn't ride the subway for fear of chemical weapons.
> 
> 2.  Pynchon doesn't like "affectless" reporters. and yearns for "human 
> touch" and "power of emotion" in reporting.  He also dislikes hidden 
> earpieces.
> 
> 3.  Pynchon thinks "news" is scarce, but "propaganda" abounds in the media.  
> And this is bad because "The problem is the ordinary citizen cannot 
> distinguish the news from the propaganda."
> 
> 4.  Pynchon offers a definition of the two words above, which presumably he 
> agrees with:  News is something somebody wants to suppress. Everything else 
> is propaganda.
> 
> 5.  Pynchon has many paranoid thoughts about "Bin Laden" (but he says "it is 
> not only I who thinks like that").  These thoughts are:
> 
> 5a.  The Bin Laden we've seen pictures of on TV might not really be him (if 
> a real him even exists).
> 
> 5b.  Bin Laden is likely a "front man" for some other person or group which 
> is actually responsible for the WTC attacks.  Pynchon offers no specifics, 
> but includes these tangents for consideration: "We should not forget that 
> many of Bin Ladens brothers were once the business partners of George Bush 
> jr. in oil ventures. The doctor who always stood by Bin Laden was a member 
> of the group who killed Sadat. There might be others who ran away from Egypt 
> after the assassination in Afghanistan."
> 
> 6.  Pynchon says that it is natural and unavoidable for poor to feel anger 
> toward the rich, and that since Afghanistan is one of the poorest nations 
> around "[Afghans] just cannot help from hating [America].
> 
> 7.  He also offers this bit of wisdom:  "However, from the Arab perspective, 
> Israel is the origin of all the wrongs."
> 
> I can definitle say re. #3, it is obvious that no news is unbiased, 
> especially that which comes directly from the White House.  This is no big 
> insight, but I'd say most people on this forum would conclude they don't 
> swallow the news without personal anaysis and consulting numerous sources.  
> The "ordinary citizen" is an insulting staw man who empowers the hidden 
> menaces which move the mouths of affectless news anchors.
> 
> #4 is a cute phrase, but shouldn't be taken literally.  Those that do 
> usually subscribe to theories on websites like these (and maybe Pynchon is 
> truly one of such):
> 
> http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/
> 
> http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/illumin.htm
> 
> #5a&b are worthless random musings which don't lead to any cohesive 
> conclusions or theroies.
> 
> #6 is crap.
> 
> #7 is obvious beyond all get-out.
> 
> As a whole, if the interview is legit, it serves to lower my opinion about 
> the insight of this author ito any sophisticated wisdom.
> 
> Ghetta


I went through the same exercise as you did to come to my conclusions
about P's argument as it's been laid out for us.