IVIV (12): Yakkin' Broads

[Paul Mackin]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>; <kelber at mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: IVIV (12): Yakkin' Broads


> More depth.......if all around Doc are the 'yakkin broads' kind of males 
> are they more like The Whole Sick Crew, so to speak, around
>
> Doc as a kind of feminist male, thinking of women's pleasure a lot? Doc 
> eats Vs happily?.........Doc as the female-value-centered Pynchon?
>
> And,I want to just sign off on Laura's observation that
> in real life in 1970, there was a lot more fellatio (in general) than 
> cunnilingus I would generalize----but I was almost NEVER very close to any 
> scene like IV's California, the Haight, etc. ('cepting Yonge street in 
> Canada, 66-67)


Glad someone got around to mentioning this highly probable likelihood.

Fellatio is age old female wisdom. The tired warrior returning from battle 
is treated to hot baths and relieved of his sexual tension in ways that will 
hopefully avoid a not particularly desired nother  pregnancy. Or, in other 
circumstanced the semi-impotent mate is made to feel less useless and put in 
a less violent mood.

I suspect that Robin's mom was enunciating for her son a mostly theoretical 
postion (no pun intended) on the old question of what do women want. Why 
should not  the woman have equality with the man  in such matters? It is a 
kind of nice sounding, highly liberated idea.

Or perhaps Robin  misunderstood what the moms was really trying to tell 
him. Son, in casual sex, actual intercourse is not always the best answer. 
If you are offered a blow job gratefully accept it.  Age old female (and 
this time maternal) wisdom again at work. What good mother wants her boy to 
find himself responsible for knocking up some bimbo and  possibly ruining 
his life?

In other words I don't think anything all that radical happen circa 1970. 
The traditional phrase of abuse women would hurl at a man they considered 
unmanly was cunt-lapping bastard.  I suspect that sentiment may still hold 
some sway. Of course one should never generalize on such matters.

P.

>
> --- On Sun, 11/1/09, kelber at mindspring.com <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> From: kelber at mindspring.com <kelber at mindspring.com>
>> Subject: Re: IVIV (12): Yakkin' Broads
>> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
>> Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 12:36 PM
>> Assuming Doc to be the stand-in for
>> Pynchon as at least the viewpoint of the narrator, Pynchon
>> doesn't give Doc the "yakkin' broads" dialogue that some
>> (though not all)of the other male characters display.
>> Then, too, there's an odd (and completely unrealistic)
>> pussy-centric, female-pleasure focus to a lot of the sexual
>> goings on. Do we really believe that in the back seat
>> of the car Denis is going down on Jade, rather than vice
>> versa? Was that really what car-sex was all about back
>> then (or today?). All of this seems to be Pynchon's
>> way of apologizing for the male-pleasure focus of the Free
>> Love culture.
>>
>> Laura
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>>
>> >
>> >Broad---groan---intelligent criticism of IV that hits
>> home (to me) in judging this book's lasting value or place
>> (in TRP's oeuvre or in lit history).....
>> >
>> >I just want to add, Is this one reason why so many
>> almost-all-male reviewers liked this book so much?
>> >
>> >My only attempt at a discussion beyond what Laura's
>> layers reveal is to ask: could TRP be (partly) portraying
>> that guy he (partly) apologized for being in Slow
>> Learner?
>> >
>> >--- On Sun, 11/1/09, kelber at mindspring.com
>> <kelber at mindspring.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: kelber at mindspring.com
>> <kelber at mindspring.com>
>> >> Subject: IVIV (12): Yakkin' Broads
>> >> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
>> >> Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 11:50 AM
>> >> p. 197 – "'These broads are all
>> >> itchin to talk, because nobody in their home life
>> wants to
>> >> hear anything they have to say. Sit still for
>> two
>> >> seconds, and they’ll be yakkin your ear off.'"
>> >>
>> >> Layer one: an accurate portrayal of the lives
>> of
>> >> housewives at the dawn of the resurgence of
>> activist
>> >> feminism.
>> >>
>> >> Layer two: an accurate portrayal of a
>> misogynist
>> >> viewpoint of the day. Here's the problem,
>> >> though. There's nothing historical about the
>> >> comment. Bill Maher, whose viewpoints are often
>> worth
>> >> listening to, has a standard misogynist riff
>> running through
>> >> his routines -- being driven crazy by yakking
>> females is a
>> >> big part of this. He's mostly a progressive, and
>> it
>> >> only gets worse as you move rightward. The image
>> of
>> >> women in films, TV and the news is as bad or even
>> worse than
>> >> it's ever been.
>> >>
>> >> Layer three: Pynchon's depiction of women in
>> >> IV. Oedipa Maas in COL49, back there in 1965
>> >> California, is a housewife, a Young Republican,
>> but she's
>> >> logical and intelligent -- the essence of
>> >> rationality. Pynchon wrote that book prior to
>> the time
>> >> he depicts in IV. Assuming IV to be a mix of the
>> life
>> >> and attitudes of LA-1970 Pynchon and the current
>> NYC-2009
>> >> Pynchon-the-Elder/Family Man, well, where's Oedipa
>> or anyone
>> >> like her? Sure, the male characters are all
>> buffoonish
>> >> – but we never forget who's in the White House,
>> the CIA,
>> >> the Police Force, the Golden Fang. Amidst the
>> >> housewives, the stewardii and bimbettes only two
>> women
>> >> modestly stand out: Sortilege, the flaky New Ager,
>> who
>> >> stands out by virtue of having a steady boyfriend
>> so that
>> >> she's not actively fucking everyone in sight; and
>> Penny,
>> >> who's an ADA (sexually taken with Doc and
>> certainly willing
>> >> to, at least metaphorically, put out for the
>> FBI). The
>> >> reality is that a woman with Penny's job back in
>> early 1970,
>> >> wo!
>> >> uld have been relentlessly discriminated
>> against and
>> >> harassed, relegated to chicken-shit assignments,
>> etc.
>> >> Pynchon gives a very inaccurate, anachronistic
>> portrayal of
>> >> her situation.
>> >>
>> >> The endless parade of mini-skirted bimbos starts
>> to get
>> >> really boring after a while. There's really zero
>> even
>> >> knee-jerk social commentary to be gleaned from it
>> about
>> >> "(sob) the oppression of women." For those of
>> you
>> >> who've seen the TV show Madmen, about the
>> advertising
>> >> business in the early '60s, the show does a
>> helluva better
>> >> job of showing us the roots of the rebirth of
>> feminism in
>> >> the 70s. Assuming then, that social commentary
>> is off
>> >> the table, why is TRP depicting women this way in
>> IV?
>> >> To paraphrase (don't have the book handy) his
>> description of
>> >> a racy pinball machine in GR: "A little
>> offensive to
>> >> the ladies, but all in good fun."
>> >>
>> >> Laura
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>