Pynchon defines Thanatoids?

[Mark Kohut]

ian writes:
When P. sticks to something, it seems to imply an expansion of the metaphor itself. 

As I reread, I feel this all the time. Combined with feeling--I think--that all of the 'baggage' of certain conceptual metaphors do not apply, just what he uses--and expands--of the metaphor--esp. the conceptual ones. 

Like a less conceptual writer, actually.

And why there are so many 'red herrings', it seems, as too many metaphoric entanglements can prevent seeing the metaphors in the books full of their own associations yet AS IS, if that makes sense.

mark


--- On Tue, 3/2/10, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon defines Thanatoids?
> To: "Kai Frederik Lorentzen" <lorentzen at hotmail.de>
> Cc: gavinf at homemail.com.au, pynchon-l at waste.org
> Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2010, 9:37 AM
> I have to go with the "both / and"
> approach whenever I look at themes
> in P. Yes, Freud is inevitable, as is Jung, Wittgenstein,
> etc., but
> there always seems to be more to it. When P. sticks to
> something, it
> seems to imply an expansion of the metaphor itself. The
> Dead are never
> dead to us, really. In the Western hemisphere, for
> instance, we are so
> haunted by our holocaust, we can't look directly at it, but
> have to
> focus our attention on the German, Bosnian,
> Anybody's-but-our-own. The
> same with our revulsion at direct regard of the labor
> abuses, racial
> abuses, and sexual abuses a mere lifetime ago. We are too
> young to
> acknowledge the severity of our own crimes. Death is not
> real. Denial
> creates an umbra of shadow that permeates the present and
> whispers
> longingly in our ears for release. The dead are not dead
> enough. We
> have not made our amends with them. They call to us, urge
> us to
> something we sense but cannot say directly. It may be
> neither thanatos
> nor eros, but something that includes both.... It troubles
> us. We turn
> on the Tube. The dead have voices there.
> 
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
> <lorentzen at hotmail.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Actually you are, imo, mixing up two different things
> here.
> >
> > One of Pynchon's basic themes - from "V"'s V to the
> Zombies in "Inherent Vice" -
> > is the growing presence of what Freud called the death
> instict ("Todestrieb")
> > in modern man. This is, especially via the returning
> Vietnam soldiers, also connected
> > to the effects of 20th century warfare. The simple
> definition "Vineland" gives of
> > "thanatoid" is "like dead, only different". You could
> also say --- FROZEN.
> >
> > Another (important) theme in Pynchon is how we exist
> in memory of our dead relatives
> > and friends.
> >
> > Kai
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfilSjFKHyI
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> >> From: gavinf at homemail.com.au
> >> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> >> Subject: Pynchon defines Thanatoids?
> >> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 21:54:38 +1100
> >>
> >> Hi all
> >>
> >> I have been a fan of TRP for years but only
> recently discovered the
> >> wikis and this list. The Vineland wiki contains
> some thoughts on who
> >> or what the Thanatoids really are, and such
> discussion I have seen
> >> focusses their context in Vineland with respect to
> The Tube and the
> >> 60s. None of the discussion seems very certain or
> conclusive. I think
> >> TRP himself has since provided us the answer. I am
> nearly finished
> >> Against The Day and discovered this on page 922 of
> the Jonathan Cape
> >> hardback edition: "...but our dead never stopped
> belonging to us,
> >> they haunt us every day, don't you see, and we got
> to stay true, they
> >> wouldn't forgive us if we wandered off the
> trail".
> >>
> >> It all makes sense now.
> >>
> >> tonebuddha
> >>
> >> PS and yes, ATD is blowing my tiny little mind
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "liber enim librum aperit."
>