Prising some Character and Emotion out of Pynchon's Books

[Michael Bailey]

 Campbel Morgan wrote:
> A correct reading? Well, I think we do a decent job of learning a lot
> of things so we are certainly not guilty of "Benny Yo-Yo" who  learns
> not a thing and is still standing there in the same clothes he came
> in, at the conclusion of his-story.  If flat characters are also
> non-dynamic characters, Benny is a flat, non-dynamic, inert, and
> heartless figure not even worthy perhaps of the term, character.

But let me interject (as Danny Rose might say) how about thinking of
this type of character
in a McLuhanesque "cool medium" sort of way; he demands your involvement,
he isn't just going to say what he's going thru, you have to lean into
it a little perhaps,
give him a little credit on the basis of his honest face.
He's an allusive character rather than a declarative one, is that fair to say?

> While Benny has no cognative or intellectual curiosity about the
> "facts", the truth, the true interpretation, the true  reason, true
> origins, the true motives, or the truth about life itself or the human
> condition--all those Realist and Modern concerns, Stencil has too
> much. The Middle, the possible, the subjunctive, is a good reading.
> But when this kind of reading argues that the novel, GR advocates
> Mafia or Drug Dealing or that AGFTD, written by an author who lives in
> a city that was only recently bombed, not once but twice, advocates
> violent anarchy, it's time to pull back to the Modern Reality of
> possible readings. Remember too, Pynchon's texts are Modern in this
> sense: they reject the gnostic dehumanization of the sacred. Human
> Life is sacred. Right?
>

Indeed! I'm one who suspects crypto-Catholicism at times -
but even when not doing that, I try to point to the frequent and
vigorous assertion of a sophisticated, yet sweet and gentle,
near-maniacal allusiveness.  That in itself doesn't preclude
misreadings that promote violence.... Come to think of it, neither
does character-and-emotion-driven reading.

But the allusions are constant and instructive; even the declarations
are allusive...
allusions to other texts, to other places in the text, to well-known history...

They are a form of continual guidance.
I imagine a class reading V. aloud, pausing
between paragraphs for a beloved prof...
or maybe a squadron of recruits and a gruff but caring sergeant on a
vigorous hike...
doing call-and-response:

"and the barmaid named Beatrice harkens back to..."
"Dante!";
"and what is she his guide to?"
"Heaven!";

"Your life is the most precious thing you have. Why?"
"Because without it you'd be dead!"
"Whose soliloquy does this humorously undercut?"
"Hamlet's!"
"Does it work?"
"Once!"
"And the next time, what do you do?"
"Distract 'em with the sock tucker, the cork soaker and the coke sacker!"

"Pig is to Benny as Benny is to who?"
"My own smooth gentrified ass!"
"Eigenvalue is to Schoenmaker as..."
"...maintenance is to decoration!"
"What do interior decorators plan for people to see down hallways?"
"Vistas!"
"What do Benny and his ilk tend to prefer to a sense of empowerment in
the workplace?"
"Finding three empty bottles to redeem for a can of beer!"
"V. is to Gravity's Rainbow as..."
"...the Suez Crisis is to World War II"
"V. is to Against the Day as..."
"...the Fashoda Crisis is to World War I"
"Stencil is to Hamlet as Rachel is to who?"
"Your mom!"
"Is that right or is that right?"
"Sir, yes sir!"
"Don't call me sir: I work for a living!"

-- 
"My God, I am fully in favor of a little leeway or the damnable jig is
up! " - Hapworth Glass