Jollyosophy: Postmodernism is opposed to materialism

[jolly]

 The traditional Marxist notion is that literature and art reflect the material realities of the day. This is not prima facie mistaken, even if we do not wear Maoist caps or bleat out folksongs. Material and economic realities (and injustices) are of a higher degree of seriousness and  importance and  urgency than mere word play or, indeed, aesthetics. We might read novels, but we can't eat them; we might look at paintings, but they won't do as a concubine.  . 
 
 Any approach to a text that does not begin from material reality, or does not hold that language can adequately represent that material reality, is in effect a type of idealism, even if apparently linguistic or rhetorical or nihilistic.  And that is the sin of post-modernism; although proclaiming an end to metaphysics or platonism, the decon. critics  fail to adhere to the barest minimum of a historical and economic materialism--whether that materialism is construed on Darwinian, Marxist, or positivist grounds.  
 
Such material concerns may be (and are) boring and trite to sophisticated literati;  a film as Norma Rae is not very exciting, but it is as important (perhaps more) as a space opera; a materialist novel such as Dreiser's Sister Carrie is to most somewhat dry and plodding, but it is weightier and possesses a great deal more verisimilitude than say The Wasteland or jazzy hedonism of the Great Gatsby.   Pynchon's books do, I think, to some degree, meet this critieria of addressing material reality ( and that material, capitalist reality is now of course infused with technology, and brutalities and injustices brought on or amplified by technology).  As mentioned in one post, the Trystero in the COL 49, is the great unwashed, the preterite, but the losers and outsiders are portrayed in a more enigmatic and allusive fashion than say a Steinbeck would have done ( not that Steinbeck is the worst model an aspiring writer could have) .
 
 There are no good grounds for idealism or immateriality or an aestheticism  which denies the primacy of material needs--money, sex, employment, technology. ( I will posit that those words signify fairly objective states of affairs), or of narratives which demonstrate  the  challenges and absurdities encountered in obtaining those needs, or of how business or corporate culture controls access to economic necessities. 
Being aware of (and perhaps being a victim of) those injustices brought on by being denied those needs, offends, and creates within the rational and perceptive person a duty or obligation to address and represent those injustices, whether contemporary or historical.  But sentimental or pastoral social realism ala Steinbeck or folksongs is no longer viable: the social realist is now by necessity an economic and technological realist (and I think TP is that), with a certain amount of specific knowledge about economics, even finance and speculation, as well as computing, etc.  
 
.     

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20041016/b6567bb5/attachment.html>