Bartleby and Occupy and short hist of sit-ins

[Mark Kohut]

and he's wanted privacy since he was 'poor'....and when being personally
public might have made him more money.......
 
I say in Pynchon's vision he wants privacy for all, not just for 
the rich.......
 
An egalitarian right to be left alone to just live.........


________________________________
From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
To: "“pynchon-l at waste.org“" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: Bartleby and Occupy and short hist of sit-ins


the only thing, the only real thing the rich covet is privacy, thats what they're buying into, an exclusivity of privacy. guess what? Pynchon is pbly among them 



On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:

I think pynchon has a vision of human 'privacy' as a fading (or lost) right in our world. From Teflon
>with his camera while Benny was 'doing it', he shows us the invasion of our human privacy
>
>His work, his books, are of course as public as a woodworker's creations or housepainter's--only
> different.
>
>Yes, he resists celebrity totally; refuses to be "owned".
>
>I do not, therefore, see him as a "successful public presence" but as a successful visionary writer who publishes
>his best work.
>
>But this may be just a semantic difference between us, since the root of 'to publish" is to
>make public.  
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
>To: Pynchon Mailing List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>Cc:
>Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 12:16 PM
>Subject: Re: Bartleby and Occupy and short hist of sit-ins
>
>Does Pynchon promote privacy as a vision or a personal right. He is widely published, and is a successful public presence as an entertainer and literary voice. He defends his own personal privacy and that is admirable. But what he appears to be resisting is the cult of celebrity and the cult of news as noise, and the culture of image. He refuses to be owned.
>
>OWS protestors are addressing the exclusion from the public awareness of major shared issues of genuine public concern. They have drawn attention to the massive fraud of modern capitalism and away from the endless forgettable celebration of advertising that is all that seems to reman of  public debate. Their voices and issues, which clearly have support from 35% to 55% of citizens and ahave many articulate spokespeople, have been deliberately excluded from major arenas of public discourse. There have been no celebrities or exhibitionists to emerge from or dominate  this movement.  The dominant images are the reaction to them, pundits, politicians, media hacks, and cops with 30 pounds of body armor and pepper spray. 
>
>
>On Jan 4, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Mark Kohut wrote:
>
>> Could be a defense of Pynchon's vision of privacy, yes?
>> Nice.
>>
>> From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
>> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2012 6:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: Bartleby and Occupy and short hist of sit-ins
>>
>> > Maybe not educate as much as expose.
>>
>>
>> Haven't we enough exposure? Is not the Public too much in the public
>> eye; we have become a nation of exhibitionists & voyeurs, a nation of
>> sloganeering revisionists who call themselves historians, a nation of
>> Jersey Shore Yahoos subjected to the analysis of Jerry Springer arm
>> chair psychologists, a nation of Margaret Mead's peeping in on
>> Polynesians life over the trailer park fence, a nation driven by the
>> primitive intinct to reach out and touch and groom clansmen, but a
>> nation that has fallen in love with shadows of narsisisstic
>> communication.  Expose this. Expose what? Expose yourself. It is not
>> capital or the system that makes automatons of free people. It is
>> exposure. The extra ordinary human contact,  that humans need, it's
>> that private investigation. The Inherent Vice, our peeping and
>> exposure, while a natural vice, has evolved at an un-natural speed and
>> has grown to big brother proportions. Look at me. Look at you. Look at
>> what they are doing now. Surely we need to expose bad government, bad
>> history, bad business, bad education... But exposure, the camera is a
>> gun, the mob is a statement, protest is a position, has inherent vices
>> that we must guard against. Exposure is a limited means not an end.
>> And it is hardly the only method people can employ to resist tyranny
>> and corruption and all manner of abuses of power. The sit-in, the
>> staying put at the work station, but stopping or slowing down or
>> sicking-out production, is a form of control. Give it with exposure
>> and new forms of control will relace it. see Zinn PHUS
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120104/053784ca/attachment.html>