ATDTDA (8): A mug's game, 237-239

Paul Nightingale isreading at btinternet.com
Wed May 16 23:28:06 CDT 2007


Informed that he will be going to Cambridge to meet
Renfrew, Lew thinks he’s wanted “for muscle”: cf. Reef
and Frank on their way to Nochecita (199). Lew is then
introduced to Clive Crouchmas, “protection” in the
form of “[a] gent of average height and unthreatening
appearance”. Another card, then; and Lew’s anticipated
role is denied at the outset, just as Reef’s joking
had begged the question regarding Frank’s presence.

The Cohen reminds Lew that this is the voice he heard
previously at Mme E’s; so CC is the voice manifest. At
the outset, the Cohen mediates, then an independent
narrative voice presents CC’s backstory. When the
Cohen reappears on the page, that is to say speaks,he 
interrupts CC (bottom of 238), who wonders why “all
the precognitive talent around this place” cannot be
put to better, ie more profitable, use (238-239).

The rest of the passage, Lew forgotten and off the
page, concerns the Cohen’s attempt to silence CC,
contain him. The reader is placed in Lew’s position,
hearing what he hears. However, given that no
commentary is attached to the dialogue that ensues,
Lew is effectively absent. CC insists he “should be
Best Boy at Colney Hatch” and claims he “thought [he]
saw ...” what? Again the Cohen interrupts, saying “one
hears this sort of thing all the time”. From “saw ...”
to “hears ...”: at first sight, something of a
non-sequiteur perhaps. We’re not told what CC thinks
he “saw”, although we might speculate (a gambling
term, of course) that his vision concerns the fate of
his investment; what the Cohen refers to (“this sort
of thing”) does regard “this railway Concession” and
the prospect of a long shot coming home first.
However, “it’s still a fool’s bet and a mug’s game
...” etc, to which CC replies, wondering, “is there
any sort of discount on the dues we pay” when our
unlikely long shot does pay off?

Here, one is reminded of the ambiguity of the novel’s
title, its connotations of (a) a
promise/threat/forecast of retribution if behaviour
now isn’t corrected, or (b) an astute investment made
now in anticipation of a future pay-off. And one might
continue to ask, or at least wonder, why Lew has been
denied any input to this scene as it unfolds.




More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list