Spoiler's Reading IV pp 1-50

[Dave Monroe]

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 12:23 PM, alice
wellintown<alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:

>Monroe changed the List. Now it's got his style.

Surely you jest (infintely?) ...

> Robin and the boys can play. That's cool too.

Though this you've got exactly right ...

> I can't spend a lot of time on Pynchon. And, even given the world
> enough and time I would not do a Monroe encyclopedia job on IV.

On the one hand, on my 1st hosting stint (Ch. 7 of V., as I recall), I
simply looked back at what hosts and others had posted before (not in
the least, simply looking things up), and, on the other. Charles
Hollander was my inspiration in thinking, maybe some of this, at
elast, is capital-S Significant.  On the one hand, I'm a firm believer
in the value of basic research.  Not in the least with Pynchon, where
clearing away formalities like, where is this happening? what are they
talking about? is this for real, or ...? what does that word even
mean? allows one to move on to, say, on the other hand, what IS Going
On here?  What is OBA (sorry, quarter to the swear jar ...) poaaibly
Getting At, thining, maybe God--or, at any rate, Author --might just
well be in the details, at that.  Fortunately, y'all go on and
explicate/explain things nonetheless, in ways well beyond my Niels
Bohrlike ignorance of/John Hawkesian disinterest in things like plot,
character, theme, setting, so ...

And I do what I do because it's what I can do.  Maybe it's not
apparent, but I rarely have time, at least online. for complete
sentences, even, much less paragraphs, sometimes even thoughts.  but I
can serach, cut, paste easily enough.  And when hosting, I don't liek
to taint such "facts" wit an attempt at interpretation as well
(though, of course, choices/juxtapositions imply them anyway).  I look
at my task AS hosting: we've been given the space, pefrhaps even teh
furniture, but we still have to arrange everything, provide the hors
'doeuvres, keep teh glasses full and the guests mingling ...

It may or may not take all kinds, but I'm pretty sure we can use even
my kind 'round tehse parts.  Deferrential, glad to be of use ...

> There are far too many other books that deserve my time.

I am feeling this as well, but I still end up finding taht tehy don't
require so much of other peoples' time explainingh 'em to me, so ....

> I noted that Pynchon writes about organized labor and the history of
> working men and women in America way back on the first reading of V.

Problem is, you never raelly QUITE explicate yr assertions, Mr. T,
let's both be honest about that, much elss establish what their
Significance might be.  Y'all of course suffer from my similar modus
operandi, hinting, if even, in certain directions via seemingly simple
facts, not always transparent, or even translucent allusions, and
other peoples' inetrpretations, but rarely if ever making those
connections apparent ...
.
>  The perspectivism approach that Robert applied to Pynchon, it seems
> to me, fell apart during the VL read. As did a mountain of readings.

Though the thing about Robt. is, his one publsihed Pynchon reading
speculates far more wildly, even if not entirekly without some
justification, at least, than those which he castigates for allegedly
having done so.  And his "persepectivism"--in the sense that I'm going
to uunderstand/ue the word here--doen't quite extend to the readings
of others,   And, at aany rate, it's up to no opne else but you 'n'
rot. to make yr and Robet.'s readings here, no use complaining others
don't follow suit ...

> AtD confirmed my reading of his works.

How so?  See, that's one of those questions you actually have to
answer if yr going to expect to be taken seriously ...