TOO reBEel or naught to reBEel ?

[Joseph Tracy]

> Let's see what you actually said that I was responding to.  Here is  
> what
> you wrote about 24fps:
>
Yes I  included some of my own thoughts about the failures of the  
counterculture to connect to  the history of resistance to  
plutocracy, exploitation and imperial expansion and introduced the  
thought as such (The 24fps collective is a good representation of the  
leadership of the youth wing of the 60s counterculture radicals.). I  
can see that I didn't fully elaborate my thought( about connecting to  
historic resistance)  as relates to the text , but I did contrast  
that failure with Prairie's discovery of her roots and history which  
was my way of bringing the thought back to the events of VL.
The core idea is about connecting to the history of resistance,  
having some democratic structure, some wisdom.  Some of this is  
indicated in the research of the students  of pr3 , but when push  
came to shove it was follow the leader or shoot the leader.  The  
novel is clearly related to a historic period when attacks on leaders  
were common and sometimes violent. I do think that Pynchon is  
contrasting the disconnectedness and youthfulness of 24fps to the  
connections to the past that form later, particularly in Prairies  
story, but also we see the remnant of 24fps becoming and recognizing  
itself as a kind of historic archive.
> What is there in the text to suggest that the failure to connect to  
> "the
> success and methods of the Civil Rights movement" is what "the  
> problem"
> is with 24fps?
That isn't what I said. I said " The 24fps collective is a good  
representation of the leadership of the youth wing of the 60s  
counterculture radicals" and then spoke of problems I saw in that  
historic leadership.  My intent was to relate the failure of many   
60s radicals to connect to the history of war resistance and police  
state repression to the failure of 24 fps and PR3 to root themselves  
in a process or wisdom that could have exposed Frenesi and prevented  
a killing based on lies that could have been  exposed with some  
simple cross checking and questions..  One core lesson of radical  
history is the danger of infighting, another is the danger of  
betrayal, another is about over reliance on leaders and a 4th is  
about the dangers of violence in terms of popular support.. All show  
up in the text.

The problem that is peculiar to 24fps is the seduction of high drama  
and exciting film  as opposed to actual effective action. Frenesi   
seems to personify this divided loyalty that slips into betrayal. The  
others  don't confront her though they are clearly concerned with her  
connections to Brock and her disappearances.  They end up being  
manipulated into helping document internecine violence in an anti- 
war, anti police state movement .Total fuck-up.

I too am interested in the book as a literary work, though I find it  
difficult to imagine completely separating the literary effectiveness  
from the appeal of the unique political and historic  POV that  
Pynchon offers.

I thought I was being reasonably careful about separating my own  
political thoughts from those I find in VL, but I know that  that  
separation is  imperfect and open to question. I share your sense of  
the importance of letting the writer speak for him or her self  
through the work.  Part of what I have done through these posts is  
elaborate thoughts  and textual observations on the pattern I do see  
in VL of showing how groups and individuals  connect to and learn  
from family and history. The other side of that , which i see Pynchon  
exploring, is showing the results of substituting propaganda and  
entertainment and the terrors  and rewards of an aggressive  
militaristic state for that history.



On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:33 PM, Ray Easton wrote:

> Joseph Tracy wrote:
>> Actually Ray, the substance of what I said was drawn from the  
>> text.  The 24 fps is all young and some of their disagreements  
>> and  those of the earlier film collective from whom they got the  
>> equipment reveal  several naive and youthful ideas.  Even  Frenesi  
>> is at first in an elated state of naive hopefulness about the"  
>> revolution". She is the only 24fps 'er who has lefty roots to some  
>> degree, but  she grew up in LA hollywood movieland. When she  
>> realizes her own danger and vulnerability she takes refuge with  
>> the powers.
>> Prairie is much more saturated in her own history and place, much  
>> freer to make her own mistakes and taste the allure of mallworld,  
>> and is part of an extended left leaning clan. Much of the book is  
>> devoted to outlining this inquiry into the personal-historic roots  
>> of her situation.  I think this clearly empowers her to resist Vond.
>>
>> DL starts out as the object of patriarchal abuse. She connects to  
>> the eastern tradition of self defense to protect herself , sees  
>> the patriarchal abuse of the larger society,  is tempted into   
>> aggressive vengeance, then connects to a fuller healing aspect of  
>> eastern tradition with Kunoichi, and Takeshi and Karmic  
>> adjustment.. I think the parallels of these stories are similar.  
>> Youthful rebellion and self reliance must connect to a kind of  
>> larger family, deeper roots or one gets trapped in  a cycle of   
>> abuse/vengeance.
>> So I don't see that part of my thoughts  as extra textual  
>> supposition,  I find them strongly embedded in the text and am  
>> listening for a text based refutation.
>
> Let's see what you actually said that I was responding to.  Here is  
> what
> you wrote about 24fps:
>
>>  The problem is not with the rebellion against the excesses of the  
>> empire or the form of turning the cameras on the repression. The  
>> problem is that they are without experience, they fail to connect  
>> deeply and patiently to the success and methods  of the Civil  
>> Rights movement, or to the well of progressive sentiment in those   
>> who rallied around FDR and the New Deal and to all those who knew  
>> there was further to go.  They end up out of their depth, seduced  
>> by anger, by the thrill of pushing their parents buttons, seduced  
>> by their own success at getting attention and unable to use the  
>> attention effectively.

> What is there in the text to suggest that the failure to connect to  
> "the
> success and methods of the Civil Rights movement" is what "the  
> problem"
> is with 24fps?  Or with Frenesi?  I admit it's been a while since I've
> read the text, but I can't recall seeing anything like that.  Please
> correct me if I'm mistaken.
>
> If only 24fps had been more connected to New Deal politics, all would
> have been well?   Again, I can't seem to recall anything like that in
> the text.   Please correct me if I am mistaken.
>
> It appears to me that you have taken Pynchon's *description* of 24fps,
> applied to it your own "progressive" politics, and produced this
> critique.  My quarrel here is NOT with the critique, though I do not
> share its politics, but with the notion that this is what Pynchon is
> saying in Vineland.  But perhaps you did a not intend this as anything
> other than a statement of your own political views.  In that case  
> there
> is nothing to discuss.
>
>> I think Pynchon's  basic political and philosophical  sympathies  
>> are pretty obvious and are stated with equally clear force in his  
>> several esays: Watts, Luddite, 1984 intro, blurbs for other  
>> writers and book reviews.
> It's splitting a hair that I'm sure no one but me is interested in
> splitting, but...
>
> I have no interest at all in what Pynchon's politics are.  I'm
> interested only in the question of what "political views" might be
> present in Vineland.  I assume that the former certainly influence the
> latter,  but for me the former hold no interest whatsoever.
>
> Ray
>