Noir Classics

[David Morris]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 2:57 PM, David Morris<fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > How fortunate we are for your guidance.
>
> Were you a professional asshole of some sort in a former life?


Aren't you the crusader against ad hominem?  Your halo just slipped.

And tenacious?  No, you just can't stand not having the last word.


> Meanwhile,  even Pynchon's
> short stories hardly hold up to to something like Forster's "flat" vs.
> "round" distinction, or Gardner's "moral fiction," much less Wood's
> How Fiction Shirks or whatever,  But they don't have to.  Pynchon
> doesn't have to.  Nobody and the texts they wrote in on has to.    Adn
> it seems to me that as often as not Pynchon is doing something really
> other than else entirely.  Regardless of his (few, vague, semipublic,
> apocryphal, even) statements to the contrary.  Seemingly inexplicable
> presences seem Imbued with Significance nonetheless.  Without having
> worked out just how, I'd suggest that, say, the relationships,
> exchanges, what have you, between the various characters in the
> various books are at LEAST as important a sthe characters
> 'themselves," that maybe even taht the relationships "have"--generate,
> necessaitate, what have you--the charcaters more so than vice versa.
> All those familial, sexual, what have you relationships.  Allegory.
> Vs. plot, narrative, characterization, story ....
>
Nobody HAS to do ANYTHING.  But it that doesn't mean it might not stink.

Tenacious Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20090709/1b3a9df3/attachment-0001.html>