Inherent Vice: Adherent Meaning

[John Bailey]

That inherent-vice-requires-inherent-value is a good point.

I think what I'm getting at is that Inherent Vice doesn't just mean
'flaw'. But it also doesn't just mean "element or aspect or feature
that threatens the thing itself".

Maybe it's "constituent element that makes the inherent value of the
thing not worth taking a risk on".

In the sense of the hippie movement, maybe we're the insurers here -
we might recognise some real positives to that countercultural moment,
but certain aspects (not just Mansonoid tendencies but the whole
unworkable utopian pipe-dreaminess of it all) makes us write it off as
never worth taking too seriously.

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:17 PM, alice wellintown
<alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why I ask is, is that Thomas Pynchon named his latest book Inherent
>> Vice. But how you take that term would seem to alter your
>> interpretation of the novel. If we say Bigfoot is the LAPD's inherent
>> vice, or Manson is the hippie movement's, or pot is Doc's, or
>> whatever... well, I'm still just trying to get a hold of the
>> 'inherent' part. Would Doc be a better or worse detective if he wasn't
>> high? A better or worse person? Etc etc etc please discuss.
>
> Interesting questions. Do you hire doctor House to diagnose your
> health issues even though he pops pain killers like tic tacks? Is he a
> better doctor because he takes the pain killers? Would he be better if
> he didn't take them. If he quit the drugs would he be almost as great
> and live a lot longer and perhaps save more lives?  Or would he die
> sooner, perhaps take his own life?
>
> My husband was a wall street wiz kid; he made credit default swaps and
> stochastic models. Believe it or not, he has a degree in philosophy.
> Gonna buy him that comic with Russell when it comes out. But me, a
> teacher of poetry who, although I try, can not even write an argument
> or quote a text, well, all I know is that it's a term people who
> manage risk, tangible and intangible, use a lot. I like the eggs
> example, but there must also be some value that is inherent as well,
> it's egginess as you said, makes the risk worth taking or not taking.
> Never keep all your eggs in one vice.
>