M & D and ATD, thematic homage, parallels, etc.

[David Morris]

On 4/26/07, Paul Mackin <paul.mackin at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> On Apr 26, 2007, at 3:47 AM, Tore Rye Andersen wrote:
>
> > Daniel Harper:
> >
> >> In M&D the Native Americans (and America in general) seem to be a sort of extended metaphor >for purity, for "innocent savagery" or whatever, but are not really intended to be "real" people.
> >
> > Well put. While richly portrayed with plenty of realistic details, the America/Vineland the Good of M&D is in many ways a metaphor, or perhaps a dream of innocence and unlimited possibilities

[snip of great GR text]

> > This is not realistic history so much as myth, with Europe standing in for "the bare mortal World" and America for "the realm of the Sacred." To call it a myth or a metaphor, however, is not in any way equal to detracting from its importance in Pynchon's work. In both V., GR, Vineland, and M&D, Pynchon reserves some of his most beautiful and intense flights of rhetoric to elaborations of just this metaphor

[another such snip]

> > Despite having published an early story in the journal "The Noble Savage", I don't think Pynchon seriously believes in that particular construction. I do think, however, that the colonizing instinct is probably the single greatest villain in Pynchon's novels and has been along - from Mondaugen's Story in V., up to and including most of AtD. And just as Pynchon does not portray any redeeming features in his cartoon villains Blicero and Scarsdale Vibe, so he's not interested in nuancing his depiction of the evils of colonialism by introducing realistic, un-mythical, musings over the possible imperialistic behaviour of those noble savages. Such a historical revisionism (or is it actually a revisionism in reverse?) would weaken this particular mythical edifice, and it would open up for possible excuses that Pynchon in this particular instance won't allow us.
>
> Glad this discussion is taking place.
>
> Is anything really at stake then (besides fine writing)  in these unrealistic, mythical, un-nuanced depictions of imperialism, colonialism, capitalism, anarchism, innocence, edens, paradises,  etc.?
>
> Fending off possible excuses can't be what Pynchon labors mightily for..
>
> More likely  those portentous-sounding passages like "Does Britannia, when she sleeps, . . ."  serve mainly to make our nerve endings tingle, which they make mine do exceedingly well..  The more such passages the better as far as I'm concerned. And don't tell me I'm trivializing Pynchon's art. I'm  recognizing it for what it is.

Well Paul's "what is is" goes along with his earlier statements that
Pynchon's long sentences like the ones snipped above can't be parsed,
presumably because they are primarily "poetry," and thus never
intended for such inspection.  But I don't go along with him there.
If he wanted to be so vague, he would have been more so, like his
beloved Rilke.

Instead Pynchon writes in contradictory extremes meant as many-layered
metaphors, encompassing psychological theories, historical theories,
and theological theories, etc.  None of these are fully resolved, and
conflicting evidence to them doesn't devalue them because of that, so
there's no need to "fend off excuses."  If he'd found the unified
answer he'd have started a church by now, but, given his love of
celebrity, he'd probably be that man behind the curtain.

David Morris