aw. Re: Where did ...

[Mark Kohut]

Who reads TP....almost entirely males..(despite his 'feminism', I aver) . Science-math-interested types 'cause from earliest notices, "scientific' concepts and use, such as entropy, were mentioned.   thought to add to the difficulty of reading him, so had that cachet and seemed to scare many women (who THINK they don't do math or like science as much).  many math and science readers are still grasping the anti-science and yes, anti-some-math vision, in my experience...and judgment....many others love the use and getting-science in some larger perspectiveness, I think..............
 
As you know, even the 'shortlist' for the Nobel is secret to the Academy but he continues to be a bookie favorite because he is the kind of writer----Very unparochial, perceived-as-leftist, loved by best writers [other Nobelists---Jellinek, Coetze, ] etc....
I also think the bookies' lists and odds get set by word spreading that so-and-so is being considered. The Committee DOES try to commmunicate
in absolute secrecy to many self-chosen candidates to find out if they will accept the award. But there is a crack in everything, as L.ohen is always singing....When Sartre did not show up to claim his and they worried
about Beckett (I think), they want any winner to show up and give another 'famous' ---"worth any number of old ladies" speech. [Faulkner. Hate it myself]
 
The above is why I am convinced he will NEVER win the Nobel and have said so more than once. 
 
Most readers I know--but I am not typical--know of him....very few have read any of his works.  perceived as way too hard to read. Like school again, only worse, harder...
 
No, those onion jokes would hardly be funny about anyone else....Salinger, when alive, for the first with another adjective than Pretentious...like Phony
and second plays on his 'difficulty' and reclusiveness.....joyce, say, was never reclusive so.................
 
TRP's status is high among real writers..in my experience...and would have raised his status if real writers' status had not fallen so in my lifetime. it is real writers, such as many who kept raising Shakespeare's rep when he started as an equal among equals (or less)....yet 
 
My 3 cents.............
 
mark
 
 

From: Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es>
To: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
Cc: "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: aw. Re: Where did ...


Paul,
 
    Then you might find my area of research interesting; don't worry, I won't go into it. However, in the future you and other P-listers may be able to help answer questions about who reads TP, why he's always short-listed for the Nobel and yet few seem to know of him (i hope to show this in my research) despite having been on the Simpsons, and other mind bending Pynchon puzzles.
    About the question of status ascension (or acquiring cultural capital), I submit two bits from THe Onion (humor often unveils what otherwise would remain covered). "Pretentious Congressman to be Sworn in Using Thomas Pynchon Novel" 05.28.07. And, "Man Reading Pynchon on Bus Takes Pains to Make Cover Visible" Dec 20, 2000. Would this be funny if we substituted the name for some other Nobel short lister? Or a canonic author (eg James Joyce)?
    I look forward to talking more to you about this.
 
Ciao
MCC
From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
To: pynchon-l at waste.org
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: aw. Re: Where did ...


On 9/23/2011 6:27 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen wrote: 

>Matthew,
>
>Wasn't it me who asked about your Bourdieu approach to Pynchon here when all the other people
>did not even give a damn?
>
>Personally  I'm certainly among the very few P-lister who have neither anything against French theory nor against the sociology of literature. 
>
>So I do not quite get why you behave like you do. Is it because I'm not 100% in agreement with you 
>on each and every detail? If so, I suggest you join a list of parrots. 
>
>I also think that my contribution on Mann's sources for "Doktor Faustus" could be helpful
>(if you already knew about Mann's lifelong work on Nietzsche or his collaboration with Adorno, this wasn't recognizable from your mail, and then it's not a private letter exchange between you and me).
>
>You read a lot of Bourdieu, but you're not a learned sociologist; this makes it difficult for you to see certain problems in Bourdieu's approach, especially the oversimplified concept of agency.
>
>Let me, nevertheless, say that I think your research project sounds promising. Always thought that 'literary field'  is a key term for the sociology of literature. 
>
>Just out of curiosity: Was there anybody else on this list who discussed with you sociology of literature in general and Bourdieu in particular?
>
>Perhaps you think it over for a while and then try again ;-) 
>

Not to necessarily claim precedence but I have long held that Bourdieu is the guy to go to when it comes to understanding why so few read Pynchon.

No matter how assiduously one reads the long, erudite, many-times-obscure, works, it does not seem to increase one's status in society one iota.

:-)













>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY-yMPd4LYc
>
>
>
>On 22.09.2011 23:22, Matthew Cissell wrote:
>
>
>Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne/ Und die trägt er im Gesicht.
>> 
>>Typisch, Kai. Sehr typisch. 
>>Shark, Shark!   (Yawn.)
>>Please continue.
>> 
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20110923/3c43ecff/attachment.html>