Is Pynchon antirationalist? (part 3)
o j m
p-list at sardonic201.net
Tue Oct 19 10:10:25 CDT 2004
continued...
It is important to note the role that the casting of the two
cowboys play: S.Z. Sakall, with his heavy German accent (which Osbie
imitates in the film), is an impossible cowboy. The character, who
represents Osbie (or perhaps a prospective member of the Counterforce)
fails to make sense, even at the level of casting. Sakall is certainly no
John Wayne. In fact, incongruities abound. Rathbone attempts to engage
Sakall in a rational dialogue, but at every turn Sakall refuses to enter
into such discourse, beyond insisting, Vell, vere both seeing him. That
means hes real (534). When Rathbone tries to explain this as a joint
hallucination, Sakall manages to withhold recognition through a pretty bad
pun: Who sez its a joint hallucination? Hoo, hoo! If it vas any kind of
hallucination--Im not saying it is, now--it vould be peyote (534-535).
Every time Rathbone attempts to return the conversation to the logical
realm, Sakalls response is laughter, or a pun, and it becomes evident
that, though this method is quite silly in some respects, theres a method
to what Sakall/Osbie is doing. Just as Rathbone approaches the debate
through an empirical sensibility, Saskall approaches the debate from an
alternate mentality.
Once we understand that Sakall represents Osbie, everything
becomes clear. Katjes original interpretation, though superficially
sensible, fails to parse out under a close reading of the text--and where
her story fails, this alternative interpretation proves successful. Sakall
says: Vhen you been out on the trailand you know vhich trail too, dont
you you sniveling punk--for as long as I have, you know ah real midget
sheriff from ah hallucinated vun (534). In other words, when youve done
hardcore hallucinogenic drugs for as long as Osbie has, you learn to be
able to tell the difference between something real and something imagined.
You learn to tell the difference between a drug-induced state and a normal
state. So Sakall gives his expert opinion: the midget sheriff (Slothrop)
exists. This, however, will not and cannot satisfy the thinking of
Rathbone. I hadnt known either class existed. You must obviously have
seen midget sheriffs all over this Territory, else you would hardly have
invented the category. O-or would you? You know, youre just dodgy enough
to try anything (534). There is a note of doubt here: perhaps the
discourse of a Pointsman cannot account for everything. Rathbone is
confounded by the testimony for which he cannot account. In fact, if we
substitute the hypothesized counterparts for Osbies names, this passage
becomes quite revealing. You must obviously have seen [Slothrop] all over
this [Zone], else you would hardly have invented the category. All of a
sudden, Rathbone seems downright worried about Slothrop, now out of
control, wandering through the Zone--and, in a strange way, the passage now
hints at the disintegrating of Slothrop into bits and pieces left
throughout the Zone. Once They lose control of Slothrop (assuming They do),
it becomes imperative that They explain him away: something as absurd as
the legend of Slothrop can wreak havoc on logical discourse. This
explains why Sakall finds the midget running away so hilarious. Slothrop,
finally realizing that he is the pawn of a system he cannot understand,
runs out of their control, leaving Rathbone/Pointsman in a very awkward
situation. Osbie laughs so hard he falls off his horse into the trough.
That is, he sheds the last vestiges of rational behavior. Rational in the
last sentences is couched in quotation marks for the following reason: it
should be clear Osbie acts in an extremely rational manner
he just doesnt
subscribe to the same understanding of rationality as Pointsman and The
Firm. This is the foundational moment of the Counterforce: Osbie presents
Katje with a new sensibility, a new rationality--not a counterargument.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20041019/84bcc552/attachment.html>
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list