Chap 10, Misc.

[Michael Bailey]

caveat (Hannibal) Lecter!


**** buncha freakin' spoilers, I've been reading ahead ******
*** also a bit of a rant ****


 Mark Kohut wrote:
> I remember from Prof Krafft's words about the original Chap 10 that there was
> a lot there that got cut...lots of words modifying the Keep Cool but Care ethos
> model, I believe...
>

I was poking around in the book looking for that place I mentioned
where somebody develops the flipping and flopping and finds a codicil
or loophole or something, still can't find it - I remember, though,
when I read it, that I was satisfied with it.

I began to try to explain why I've come to agree with Professor
Krafft's view that the changes improved the novel.
Part of why I didn't go on, is I feel not quite equal to the task.
I'd be all too ready to accept a Chapter 9 in Munich, at first blush,
and I get so many things wrong - way more than I admit have I never
noticed before - that the explanation is bound to be unsatisfactory.

For instance, it was not - as I thought - the editor's, but the
author's idea to rewrite Chapter 9.  So the strengthening is of his
own vision.

That right there is a great clue...

He still keeps in plenty of Munich, between Mondaugen's dream set
there (his tears freezing and falling on the frozen couple is almost
as anguishing an image as the poor Bondel's tender breasts eaten by
the strand wolf) and his tears at the Treaty of Versailles.

It's a chapter that I can't gloss over: the horror!  It's why I've
never really focused on that chapter, and yet it's worth reading and
assimilating - like the history that Foppl's gymnasium allowed him to
forget, and the Dance of Death from his home town church.  There's
such a thing as a cautionary tale...by no means is Pynchon reveling in
this stuff, but (being a flawed person) I've tended in the past to
begin to have Foppl's dreams too and that scares me a bit

Reading ahead, where Slab argues Esther into the abortion, this isn't
somebody taking control of her body at all, this isn't the sort of
legal, cheap and rare that we applaud, is it...

or is it?

I was all het up about Schoenmaker's abuse of his role and how Esther
never really stopped saying no, 'cause she doesn't.  A-and, that's one
of the criteria that I've got a sort of detente with, not that it's
any of my business, but I've got feelings, darnit: rape, incest and
health of the mother.

If Slab were a mensch, he'd take her back and help her raise the baby.
 I personally see that as not just an ethical choice, but a pleasant
one.  How could somebody turn her down, "how can people be so
heartless?  how can people be so cruel?"  It's really frustrating, I'm
only one guy, and already married, but if I was a million guys, I
could marry a million single mothers and love them all...how could any
guy turn down something great like that?  And yet I know guys who
have.  I've never understood how...

So we get both sides of it, really: this is a justified abortion (but
only because Slab has chosen to be a douchebag - as is his right,
unfortunately, by some antiquated code of patrilinealism?)

So, how sick is the Crew's response - they all chip in, it's almost
like a press gang, she's waiting for a hero and none arises - what is
wrong with these people?

and it's a happy and fun party, too, maybe they are all having a
moment like that one where Foppl and his buddies get into the "I am
Shiva" shit eyeball deep...

and Fergus Mixolydian, with his Ford fellowship (jeez, you suppose
he's a cameo?) - may not have actually chipped in, but Slab uses the
$10 he borrowed from Fergus to put the collection over the top!

Is that FM Pynchon's stand-in - ie, world's laziest human (later to
write an essay on Sloth, and recipient of a grant)
(ah well, that part's definitely a side issue)

but the part he plays, could that be keeping cool but caring, sort of?
You're at the party with all the Sick Crew, not specifically chipping
in, but loaning money to Slab (the douchebag) out of friendly
obligation...
it's not like you're putting your imprimatur on this abortion

which is what I kind of think:  Esther came to Slab, allowed herself
to be convinced, and although I myself wouldn't counsel her the way he
did, nonetheless I respect their decision (do not like it...) and
although I don't think I'd be moved to chip in (too much like the
Dance of Death) I'd probably spot old Slab a ten-spot on the basis of
he's frickin' anguished enough about other stuff, give him an example
of kindness to warm his cold, cold heart!

People extremely close to me have chosen abortion.  None of them has
asked my counsel...which is good, because I haven't had anything
prepared...

but again, not my decision.  Esther defers to Slab.  He knows her
better than Fergus or I.  Schoenmaker's genes are certainly selfish
and perhaps not worthy, and Slab's passion may be truer than my logic?

> Even in what is here, P writes that McClintic never bought into the postwar cool
> as much
> as most.......
>

but he's taken with the metaphor, and even - though "no lyricist" - is
moved to write a song about it.  Nonetheless, I was reading ahead the
other day too (my teachers used to hate that, but that 4th grade
reader was excellent, couldn't put it down!)
and I know I saw a place where that tension was resolved beautifully.

I'm with Dr Krafft, I think what's in there is what Pynchon wanted in
there and it's probably better than the stuff that isn't in there.
(But someday, I'd still like to read it)



-- 
"Such regulations may, no doubt, be considered as in some respects a
violation of natural liberty. But those exertions of the natural
liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the
whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all
governments, of the most free as well as of the most despotical." -
Adam Smith