Saure Trauben der Mathematik

[Paul Mackin]

On 8/5/2012 1:57 AM, Michael Bailey wrote:
>   Mark Kohut  wrote:
>
>>   most of the buried
>> heroes of his work could not read said works....that it was condemningly
>> elitist in what it required of its readers....
>>
>> C'mon, all weigh in on this one. Be very interesting what most plisters
>> think about THAT, imho.
>>
> i think that is typical elitist underestimation of the aptitude of the
> working class to understand interesting stuff even if it is fairly
> complex: most erudite stuff can be understood by anybody willing to
> put in the time...
> viva la revolucion!

But even if they CAN, is there much reason to think they WANT to?  I got 
a theory that places probable readers of Pynchon-type highbrow novels 
pretty much in the middle of the socioeconomic order.   Those lower down 
are too busy scratching together a living to be interested in reading 
about their own exploitation,  Those higher up are already stretching 
their brainpower  to the limit maintaining their high status careers.

P




>
>
>
> Prashant kumar wrote:
>> His charlatanry is
>> honed to the point of being functionally equivalent to understanding.
> that is nicely put
>
>
> alice wrote:
>
>> use of it.  This is, while absurd, not a complete waste, as Sanatayana
>> is a far better thinker and writer than P in many respects and, while
>> pragmatism, as discussed in several critical studies of P, may not be
>> all that significant in the fictional lives of P characters, it does
>> make it into the books.
> it's like that scene where Slothrop gets his hips up on his elbows and
> does a few feeble "bicycle" calisthenic movements --
>   when i read pynchon i'm inspired to think at least a little...maybe
> even research
>
>
>
>
>