ATD and the Counterforce

[Mark Kohut]

Billy,

I talk too much so, to focus discussion if it continues, FWIW I will just post a 
quick general agreement with 
Morris on the Counterforce and on the author's book-expressed perspective on the 
Traverse family.  

And I do think there is a deep moral vision in Pynchon but, again, that Morris 
nailed something important
when he said therre is no clear moral course expressed in the fiction.

I would add that there hardly ever is a 'clear moral course' in the best writers 
but we, some--and I mean me too, once--
somehow thought there ought to be with Pynchon.

I haven't read the scholar you speak of but in my readings of ATD, I was at 
points reminded of some Catholic
teachings on social justice---Chesterton, Belloc espoused aspects and there was 
even a recent [last 5-7 yrs] book of essays that included one by TRP'sold buddy 
Kirkpatrick Sale about it.

But I felt other beliefs of his more in his ATD vision.

Yes, whatever it is, tone is often very different imho. And I'm even 
wolftone-deaf...

Welcome. Stay. Continue.

Mark



----- Original Message ----
From: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
To: Billy Internicola <bartlebilly at gmail.com>
Cc: pynchon-l at waste.org
Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 5:00:39 PM
Subject: Re: ATD and the Counterforce

This/these question(s) goes to the very heart of, I'd say, all of
Pynchon's writing (the dynamics of societies power structure), and
there are no clear answers to the question.  That's why it is such
fertile soil.  For ever answer there is a problem.  Is it unsolvable?
Maybe (Pychon loves his Koans), but one cannot avoid taking a place
somewhere in the "Daisey-Chain," if not by trying to hide from it
altogether.

First-off, I'd like to correct the notion that GR's Counterforce is
passive or opting out of the game.  The strategy of the counterforce
is to alter accepted reality, re-frame the game in unexpected terms,
thereby throwing the opponent off balance: Shift the power balance
through a reworking of the accepted reality.  Does it work?  Maybe in
specific cases in the short-term, and maybe Slothrop was a "natural"
in its practice.

As to ATD, its position is far from clear.  Those (Webb) that took the
most direct opposition to power suffered the harshest consequences,
bot immediately (tortured death) and in the long run (fractured
family).

And consider the author's own course of action:  writings that are
unclear about any moral course, and refusal to speak directly to the
public about these writings.

This is as far as I can respond at the moment, but this could go on a
long, long time.

David Morris

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Billy Internicola <bartlebilly at gmail.com> wrote:
> The abstract was claiming that in ATD , TRP was taking a new turn and 
>advocating some sort of Catholic(?) activism, a counterforce that actually 
>fights back, as opposed to the counterforce in the other books ( Slothrop, etc) 
>who just opt out of the game, fade into obscurity, yo-yo,  etc.
[...]
> I've wondered if TRP was just attempting to mirror the spirit of anarchism 
>rampant in the era but I don't know if that satisfies my discontent.
>
> Of course postulating on an author's beliefs and intentions is just about the 
>biggest post-modernist no-no of all but I do not think a reading of ATD would be 
>complete if the reader did not feel this push to correct karma, offer acceptable 
>pennance, shoot Vibe, fly towards grace, etc
> If TRP is not "preaching" or "examining conscience " why is it there?