The meaing of mathematics in Against the Day.....

[Ray Easton]

Robin Landseadel wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 8:20 AM, Ray Easton wrote:
>
>> Robin Landseadel wrote:
>>> First off, Joseph's right—maths are a big theme all the way through 
>>> "Against the Day," one would have to be DENSE [like Doc, I guess . . 
>>> .] not to see that. Thus time travel and multiple appearances by 
>>> Tesla and other science fiction/fantasy paraphernalia associated 
>>> with these massive, foundational, changes in math—particularly the 
>>> rise of 'imaginary numbers'. Again, and I repeat—I'm sure it was not 
>>> lost on Pynchon how central Quarterions are to computer animation 
>>> and the creation of fully imaginary visual realms. If "Against the 
>>> Day" is about anything, it's about quantum shifts.
>>
>>
>> Please explain to me what the zeta function has to do with any 
>> "theme" of AtD.  I'd really like to know.
>
> I'm not a mathematician and I suspect that you are. Of course, forks 
> are spilled all over the roads in AtD, some are like 
> Vectors/Quaternions others are [literarily] AC contra DC, still others 
> are along the lines of Alchemy v. Science, Animism v. Newtonian 
> Physics v. Quantum Physics. . These "forks', as I said before, fill up 
> the book. I really don't know much of anything concerning 
> "multiverses" but it's clear that Pynchon is pointing to that concept 
> as well. Perhaps you have a higher standard for this sort of thing, On 
> the other hand perhaps there's something about the comic tone of AtD 
> that sets you off. I found a multiplicity of genre voices in AtD. This 
> theme also suggested to me another theme related to the concept of the 
> Multiverse. Maybe you know a great deal more on these subjects and can 
> elucidate us on the subject. Perhaps words won't do, perhaps only 
> equations would suffice. Of course, Pynchon is a writer, after all . . . 

I disagreed with the claims made by a blogger about the manner in which 
mathematics is used/discussed in AtD.

As I've said before, I do NOT think the lack of a discussion of the 
"foundational crisis" is a flaw in AtD.  I do not think the book suffers 
from the absence of such.  I do not think the fact (as I see it) that 
the details of the actual content of the mathematics presented in AtD 
has little or nothing to do with any overarching theme is a flaw in 
AtD.  I have posted about the manner in which I see mathematics being 
used in AtD before, and I don't find this use in any way objectionable.  
It is true that I think the book is crap, but not for reasons of that sort.


>>
>>
>> Who said "the rest is Crap"?  Not me.  I don't find any of the novels 
>> "crap" with the exception of AtD.
>
> Saying AtD is "Crap" will suffice for the moment. Amazing how much 
> time is spent on blogs and forums in claims of intellectual 
> superiority. Perhaps it's built into the nature of the medium?
>

I'm not claiming that I am Pynchon's intellectual superior nor that I 
myself can write a better novel than AtD.  If that were the standard 
that needs to be met before judging the worth, or lack thereof, of a 
novel, I suspect that none of us on this list are in any position ever 
to have any opinion about the value of any novel. 

But I can (sometimes) recognize crap when I see it.

Ray