Gravity's Rainbow in depth on Studio 360

[David Morris]

I thoght you were being facetious because your rebuttal was so
rock-headed (which is why I refrained from responding).

Your logic:  Dali called it "critical" not "creative" paranioa.

A dim-witted (nothing personal) response, latching on to one word so
as to refute the whole.

Try reading my original post from 2000 again:

http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0006&msg=46449&sort=author

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> My thoughts are not facetious in the sense of any personal derision, I am trying to be intellectually feisty and to point out what I disagree with and why without intending any personal affront. I also hope for thoughtful rebuttal, because I want to look at the questions from different angles.
>
> What I am trying to express with different formal approaches is a sincere problem with the logic of this line of thought that seems to me to be saying that Pynchon is using GR to challenge any  attempt  to understand comprehensive patterns in history, showing that all such attempts amount to paranoid delusions. Is that the gist of what you or Paul are saying or am I off?