Femenist reading of IV

[rich]

there was a very interesting article about women who joined these women-only
communes in the 70s, even straight women, who not only wanted to distance
themselves from men, they didn't even talk to them--was in the New Yorker
within the last year.

Also, an article in Salon/NY Times I believe within the last year about a SF
group (think this is the name:  One Taste Urban Retreat Center,) where the
focus is on the female orgasm

about being compromised--Vineland seems alot more angrier regarding this
than in IV, no? is it Pynch is older, figuring we're all aware of the
history, perhaps?

rich



On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Robin Landseadel <
robinlandseadel at comcast.net> wrote:

> On Feb 19, 2010, at 6:39 AM, rich wrote:
>
>  . . . (are we equating feminist markers with pussy eating?-that sounds
>> weird to me) . . .
>>
>
> Hmmm . . .
>
> Managed to work/live in the S.F. bay area while all sorts of
> feminist/separatist goings on were going on. On the one hand such depictions
> can be interpreted as male fantasies and projections—hot girl-on-girl action
> for the trenchcoat crowd, just like back in the good old days of "Faster
> Pussycat, Kill! Kill!!!. On the other hand there was a significant movement
> of woymn who wanted noting to do with men—Mary Daly, the younger Z.
> Budapest, many others. Inherent Vice, in part, is concerned with the first
> glimmerings of the feminist/separatist movement.
>
> Mind you, everybody in Inherent Vice is compromised. T 'n A sez that IV is
> TRP's most feminist book and it may well be, but [using the sense of
> preterite as social strata and not getting out trousers in a bundle over the
> religious meanings of the whole Elect/Preterite schema] it is also the
> author's book most focused on society's rejects.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20100219/936eb56a/attachment.html>