IV "autobiographical"?

[Rob Jackson]

>> Rob:
>>
>> > I guess one of the things to debate is whether Doc's attitudes and
>> > behaviours are in fact Pynchon's after all, or whether there is a
>> > satirical distance between the author and his protagonist as John
>> > Bailey suggested. Depending on which way you jump on that question
>> > might change things up quite a bit.
>
> Tore:

> Can I jump both ways at once? I know Alice frowns on such behaviour,

Haha ... a-and can you imagine John Carvill's conniptions over those  
drugbust ops and shakedowns?! Hahahah!

But I agree and think you can jump both ways on the question, and I  
like the musical connotation of it being a "demi-semi-autobiography".

Doc is likeable, flawed, understandably human ... another in a long  
line of similarly-constituted protagonists. But do we forgive him  
everything? Is he ultimately "redeemed"?

It's these in-built foibles and ambiguities (moral ... political ...  
personal) that the "central consciousness" characters share (the  
Katjes and Bliceros as much as the Slothrops and the Zoyds and the  
Docs), and the way that they push the envelope for the reader to draw  
a line in the sand, that makes Pynchon's work really interesting ...  
the way it challenges us and makes us assess and reassess our own  
principles and attitudes. Those shades of grey ...

Whereas the detachment between, say, Marlowe and Chandler is much more  
clear-cut I think.

cheers

> but I think I'll go ahead anyway. There's obviously a fair degree of
> satirical distance between the author and Doc, but I also see a large
> degree of affection. Doc is IMHO one of Pynchon's more likeable
> characters, and even though his attitudes and behaviours may not be
> identical to Pynchon's, that's no reason to throw out this particular
> baby with the bath water.