Poststructural Inc.

[Otto]

Rob:
>"It's quite clear, then, that the ideas of Derrida, amongst
>other poststructuralists, do provide ample ground for intelligent
>discussion and interpretation of Pynchon's work.
>

To which I absolutely agree.

Jolly:
>Heh heh heh. I guess you should inform Mr. Pynchon of that as well,
>since his works are significantly influenced by the positivist/behaviorist
>tradition.
>

Of which he has informed you personally, I assume. To me it appears that his
novels, especially "Gravity's Rainbow" (see the Pointsman-character) are
very critical of and rejecting behaviorism.

>
>Anyways like most rants from  Poststructural Inc.  the writer
> begs the question of why "logocentrism" (which of course no
>one really bothers to define,

Well, I've offered "kind of" definition; see Ann Jefferson.

>apart from vague remarks about
>some presumed platonic center, or "writing" and visualization)
>is in ltself wrong or misguided.
>

Any evidence if any sort for this rant?

>
>There's an assumption that any view that depends on reason or
>clarity or even the lowest degree of deductive or inductive
>necessity is itself tainted. Yet there is no necessity to any
>poststructural "arguments" or themes either.
>

You are contradicting yourself.
May I remind you, there are many ways to skin a cat.

>
>We are not required, except in the Belle-lettres Biz,
>to attend your Heideggerian Church, bozo......
>

I admit that your choice of words makes me wonder if discussing with you is
worth the effort.

Otto