IVIV (13) scene one question

[Mark Kohut]

John Bailey writes:

> It is odd. We don't know that Puck is
> dead, but a few pages later we
> get "In theory he knew he'd just killed two people..."
> 
> Don't really know what to make of that.

I agree with Rich and others who think aspects of this whole encounter are very important for some of "Inherent Vice"'s deeper, let's call it "moral' meanings---with a title like IV, we can, ya think?

Yes, it is odd but I read it this way: Doc does not know whether Puck is dead. He did not think he was when he shot him up. He used Puck's own heroin--and just drew 'some of it' into the syringe, so there is no reason for Doc to think that it was an overdosing amount. 

His 'in theory' line comes after Adrian shouts about 'what he did to Puck'....Adrian, seeing bloodied Puck comatose, seems to think he is dead, at least. Maybe Adrian 'knows' this, but we don't know.

So, after hearing that and after shooting Adrian, Doc thinks that it is possible that he has killed two people, but he does not know for sure about either one, with the text indicating that about Adrian, "dead enough" after seeming to come back to life, so uncertainty still rules in the police or P.I. mind. "In theory, it is possible, etc.]

Peter Petto writes: 
So there is some inherent vice in all of us, [and more] 

and I think that leads us back to some crucial words in the text about Doc's actions, which rich first alluded to: "then going down after him [Puck], giving in to a fury Doc understood would provide the balance he needed to coast through this, grabbing Puck's head
and continuing to beat it almost silently against the marble doorsill till everything was too slippery with blood"...p.327

Let's parse a bit: "fury' would 'provide the balance" he needed????  Puck is a real bad guy, as Rich has noted, [he also noted Bigfoot's manipulative bad guyness which I cited without acknowledging him] but it takes so much anger for Doc to 'kill (or almost kill?) like this? So, is such 'fury' THE  example of Doc's inherent vice? Anyone's inherent vice in trying to escape from evil? IS evil like Puck's and Adrian's an inherent vice in IV that "needs" a furious reaction against?  Is this a meaning to the phrase 'provide the balance"? Doc's fury is needed to overthrow evil guys' inherent evil? 

 Could knocking Puck out have been enough to escape from, as often is enough in other noirs---yet, I think that other P.I.s often get too violent in escaping is another genre staple, anyone?, anyone? 







> 
> Why the "in theory"? They may as well be dead so for all
> intents and
> purposes he is a killer, even if they turn out to be
> alive?
> 
> Might fit with the description of Prussia not as being
> dead, but "dead enough".
> 
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Uh...if Doc was intending a lethal overdose after a
> beating of felt fury, why did he "handcuff Puck in case he
> came to" ?...p.327
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 11/6/09, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: IVIV (13) scene one question
> >> To: "David Morris" <fqmorris at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: "John Carvill" <johncarvill at gmail.com>,
> pynchon-l at waste.org
> >> Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 4:12 PM
> >> I agree and its not like I don't
> >> understand why--in a stricter sense,
> >> Puck is knocked out and handcuffed when Doc gives
> him an
> >> apparent
> >> OD--even if you're doing it to the most evil
> person on
> >> earth, it's
> >> still technically murder
> >>
> >> I can't imagine another mainly sympathetic
> Pynchon
> >> character ever
> >> doing something like this but as has been noted
> Pynchon is
> >> working in
> >> another vein (insert pun here)
> >>
> >> Rich
> >>
> >> On 11/6/09, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'd not call Doc's killing of Puck murder. 
> When
> >> one is trying to
> >> > escape from someone who's about to kill you
> and from
> >> the person who
> >> > ordered your killing, just about anything is
> fair.
> >> >
> >> >> one thing that really differentiates Doc
> from Zoyd
> >> is that Doc killed
> >> >> somebody--Puck is murdered by Doc; at
> least w/
> >> Adrian one could point
> >> >> to self-defense but thinking legally here
> it does
> >> beg the question
> >> >> about Doc's past--we're given the goofy,
> at times
> >> genial, laid back
> >> >> hipster but there's the skip tracer past,
> the
> >> aforementioned run ins
> >> >> w/ Puck and Adrian, etc.
> >> >> I'm not sure there are answers to these
> >> questions.
> >> >> In noir, you know the PI's are badasses,
> who've
> >> done some shitty
> >> >> things but their behavior doesn't come
> across as
> >> jarring as it does
> >> >> with Doc--guess we are programmed not to
> think of
> >> Pynchon's
> >> >> protagonists this way--if not total good
> guys, at
> >> least folks you can
> >> >> root for in some way--Slothrop, DL,
> Dixon, Lew,
> >> etc.
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
>