VLVL Is it OK to be a misoneist?

[Paul Mackin]

On Sun, 2004-03-07 at 16:37, jbor wrote:
> >> "And yet, there's Pynchon's own apparent defence of Luddism --
> >> perhaps the most misoneistic and reactionary of all
> >> sensibilities -- in that 1984 article:
> 
> >> http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_essays_luddite.html
> 
> >> I suspect there's somewhat more ambivalence evident in
> >> Pynchon's writings than some commentators are willing to acknowledge."
> > 
> > Please reread the essay.
> 
> Thanks, I have. I think there's quite a bit of ambivalence in it: I'm not
> sure that he isn't being tongue in cheek with his apparent endorsement of
> Luddism in the first half of the essay, and there is enough hedging in that
> closing passage where he cites Byron (!) to make it difficult to work out
> what he's actually saying, what his attitudes are, and how serious he is
> being.
> 
> Similarly, in _Vineland_, Brock's recognition that misoneism is a factor in
> social and political realities is an astute one, and one which the '60s
> rebels didn't envisage at all.

Proposals for change can entail something completely new, something
somewhat new, and something not new at all. 

The middle option is the only one with any chance for success.

I think Pope had it right

Be not the first upon whom the new is tried
Nor yet the last to lay the old aside

(something like that)