VLVL characters (was Re: Which side is he on?

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/2/04 6:00:45 PM, jbor at bigpond.com writes:

<< In _Vineland_ he's writing about a period in US history where a youth
movement rose to enormous prominence in culture and society and then was
fairly speedily overwhelmed by a repressive backlash which has prevailed to
this day. In his diagnosis of the failure/s of this countercultural movement
Pynchon interrogates both its rationale and its aims, and its relationship
to the Establishment which it opposed, or affected to oppose. For me, the
pivotal character in the novel is Prairie, and in her a question of where
the future could be headed. In my book, that's the "side" he's on. >>

I think this analysis is in need of adjustment. If there was a youth
movement that "rose to enormous prominence in culture and
society" then it did so like the Beatles did, by building- to a 
large extent- on the sacrifices and accomplishments of Black and 
other non-sanctioned artists and activists who taught it how, and
provided the language and style- even the legitimacy to do so. 
This is an important political aspect of the 60's that appears 
in Vineland as a complete parody in the upcoming section. The 
history it parodies, however, is a television reality: overly simplified, 
dichotomized, edited for prime time, sponsor friendly. 

All the characterizations, including Prairie, to some extent, are 
constrained by being parodies of television-like characters. Likewise, 
the movements and trends alluded to seem to be overly simplified 
to fit the limitations of a "tubal" reality. Artistically valid, of course, 
but dangerous to generalize from, because of what is left out, or 
left unexplored, except in tiny snippets, e.g., in the 24fps archives. 
I think that is one of the points of the novel. It warns us about being
conned into asking questions about a reality that has been constructed
by those in control of the media: They don't have to supply real
answers.

Pynchon, as is his want, is directing the reader to a consideration
of a reality of the 60's beyond that constructed for us by t.v. and the
mainstream media, which generally were not interested in portraying 
the increasingly broad and powerful political reach of the likes of 
Martin Luther King Jr, for example, which, before being cut short,
was beginning to extend far beyond restrooms, lunch counters and 
bus seats- a reality mostly unavailable, even for parody, in the tubal 
glow of Vineland.

Here's Nat Hentoff on that diminished perspective:

    In so far as most Americans think of Martin Luther King
    at all these days, it is as the namesake of a holiday. People
    may have a general sense of his courage and his refusal to
    compromise his convictions, but his specific politics are not
    remembered.

    I spoke to him when he came to New York's District 65, The
    Voice's original union... King told me of how, when he was a
    student in a theological seminary, a visiting speaker had first
    awakened him to the possibilities of direct-action pascifism.
    That speaker was A.J. Muste, later the chief strategist of
    the anti-Vietnam War movement. By the time we talked, King
    was already a vital part of the broad and deep coalition to
    end our involvement in the war in Vietnam.

http://www.eisenhowerfoundation.org/aboutus/media/VillageVoice_RescuingMartinL
utherKingJr.html

And see as well:

http://www.aavw.org/protest/king_0467to0468_abstract01.html


respectfully