Queer Theory & Futurism

[Ian Livingston]

I wonder, sometimes, about P's pastiches. He was, of course using
pastiche 20-odd years before Jameson made the term a characteristic of
pomo, and he was doing in such a way that he seems almost to making a
pastiche of superficiality as early as V. and CoL49. P's pastiches
seem to point toward something lurking beneath the surfaces, hiding
behind the superficiality of the times....

On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Little else?
>
> Philir writes:
>> I doubt that.  AtD seems to mock every form of pop
>> literature since WWI, westerns, boys books, of course, spy
>> novels, detective novels, I think most things.
>> It is, of course, oversimplification, but not less valid,
>> especially in a book that overtly attacks the obviousness of
>> politics, the world, and literature...
>
> I would suggest that TRP ususlly shows great affection, pays homage, to most of what he also 'mocks' in your listing ...........
>
> I was thinking of how different his expressed blowing-away of Futurism is,
> and trying to remember what other art movements or art forms he is so absolutely savage about, no seeming affection whatever.
>
> We remember he goes after Beethoven in GR.......
>
> And I do remember the surfacing of Anti-Romanticism, the historical movement, in ATD, despite his own grounding in Romance as Alice will remind us....(But ATD is ALSO a deep anti-Romance, i wish I could argue more fully and might)
>
> --- On Sat, 2/20/10, Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: Queer Theory & Futurism
>> To: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>> Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 9:31 PM
>> Little else?
>> I doubt that.  AtD seems to mock every form of pop
>> literature since WWI, westerns, boys books, of course, spy
>> novels, detective novels, I think most things.
>> It is, of course, oversimplification, but not less valid,
>> especially in a book that overtly attacks the obviousness of
>> politics, the world, and literature...
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:21 PM,
>> Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, but I'm having self-doubts over probable
>> oversimplification....
>>
>> He attacks futurism, we know..........but little else,
>> therefore???
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Sat, 2/20/10, Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > From: Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com>
>>
>> > Subject: Re: Queer Theory & Futurism
>>
>> > To: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>>
>> > Cc: "pynchon -l" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>
>> > Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 9:15 PM
>>
>> > Mmm,
>>
>> > Well put.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:58 PM,
>>
>> > Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Damn good question I say, and damned if I, quick draw
>> no
>>
>> > matter what, have an opinion.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Quick second thought: prolly. After the modernists
>> created
>>
>> > into the modernity they, and TRP, hated, and said
>>
>> > that....most art after that was compromised by being
>> part of
>>
>> > modernity.........???
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Which may be why 1) the modernists (and earlier) seem
>> to
>>
>> > matter most to TRP
>>
>> >
>>
>> > and 2) why some low artforms---mystery novels,
>> cartoons,
>>
>> > movies before they were 'films', etc. matter
>> most
>>
>> > later to TRP.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > --- On Sat, 2/20/10, Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com>
>>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > From: Phillip Grayson <phillip.grayson at gmail.com>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Subject: Re: Queer Theory & Futurism
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > To: "Monte Davis" <montedavis at verizon.net>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Cc: "Mark Kohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com>,
>>
>> > "pynchon -l" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Date: Saturday, February 20, 2010, 8:44 PM
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Obvious I guess and
>>
>> > prolly well explored
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > already, but with all the pastiche and such, is
>> there
>>
>> > the
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > possibility that AtD mocks an artistic
>> deterioration
>>
>> > since,
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > say, _Ulysses_ along with a cultural one since
>> WWI?
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM,
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Mark Kohut sez:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > > you will recall that marinetti's
>> futurism is
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > savaged big time in AtD...
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Indeed it is, and the rush of wind that the
>> Futurists
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > loved (re-read the dive-bombing, sport with the
>>
>> > flying
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > girls) blows straight into hair-straight-back,
>>
>> > Rockwell
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Kentish, wind-tunnel Nazi aesthetic:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > "Roland too became conscious of the wind, as
>> his
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > mortality had never allowed him. Discovered it so
>> . .
>>
>> > . so
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > joyful, that the arrow must veer into it. The
>> wind had
>>
>> > been
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > blowing all year long, year after year, but
>> Roland had
>>
>> > felt
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > only the secular wind . . . he means, only his
>>
>> > personal
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > wind. Yet . . . Selena, the wind, the wind’s
>>
>> > everywhere .
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > . . ."
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 
"liber enim librum aperit."