Gravity's Rainbow in depth on Studio 360

[Paul Mackin]

On 3/10/2012 11:54 AM, Bled Welder wrote:
> Perhaps a new term or terms, or reterming is in order.
>
> According to my distinction below, you have:
>
> 1. paranoia
> 2. runaway paranoia
>
> Two is close to clinical paranoia. Maybe rather a new term for number
> one paranoia. Besides positive, threatening. Something not so obvious.
> Intuitive? No, god no, wrong, wrong.
>
> It could be rational paranoia; then you's have runaway rational
> paranoia. Because the aboslutely fascinating thing about runaway
> paranoia is that it is often the product of high intelligence, and
> Nothing can convince a runaway paranoid (paranoiac is bad term) away
> from their delusional conclusions. In fact, any contrary opinion only
> serves to further prove their views.
>
> Grandiose paranoids are the most fascinating, and grandiose runaway
> paranoids the most fascinating of all. My contribution to the history of
> literary criticism happens to be that Don Quixote is a grandiose runaway
> paranoid. They are very dangerous people, because nothing they do in
> light of their delusions can ever be wrong, because their delusions are
> absolute fact and they act according to the dictates of their delusions.
> In Quixote's case, brutalizing innocent people in the name of the rules
> of knight errancy.
>
> In a more classic case, highly intelligent people who are
> arch-rationalists believe any contradiction of their statements and
> beliefs and actions are necessarily irrational, by definition, and are
> thus evil, and irrational people--which becomes everybody--are out to
> destroy him...
>

I see two kinds of paranoia

Real world paranoia (sometimes requiring medical treatment, sometimes 
better left alone.

Pynchon world paranoia--in the face of indisputable evidence, there is 
the realization that someone or something is out to get us, or, for 
many, in some little-understood way, out to help us as well.

Pynchon world paranoia is a complete way of life. It provides for all 
our needs--religious, social, sexual, financial, everything.

Oh yes, for folks with a condition termed delusion-insufficiency there 
is the drug oneirene.

It's all there for us, and of course officially defined, so that there 
will be no confusion.

P






> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:17:08 -0600
> Subject: Re: Gravity's Rainbow in depth on Studio 360
> From: bledWelder at hotmail.com
> To: kbob42 at gmail.com; fqmorris at gmail.com
> CC: brook7 at sover.net; pynchon-l at waste.org
>
> I didnt want to be the person to point this out because moderacy is not
> much a part of me, to date anyway, but paranoia in moderation is a very
> positive and valuable thing.
>
> Unless it is deFined by its excesses, ie delusions. But I put it to you,
> Who or What is the Force that so defines it, if not those who may be
> revealed, unfolded by the positive paranoia...?
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Keith Davis
> Sent: 10 Mar 2012 15:19:37 GMT
> To: David Morris
> Cc: Joseph Tracy,P-list
> Subject: Re: Gravity's Rainbow in depth on Studio 360
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:22 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <mailto:fqmorris at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Read the whole post.
>
>     http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0006&msg=46451&keywords=Dali%20Morris
>     <http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0006&msg=46451&keywords=Dali%20Morris>
>
>
> This is sort of where it started? Good post. Agreed P's writing's seem
> primarily related to our search for meaning and a sense of our place in
> relation to the Cosmos. Not sure if I'd call that "religious", but I
> understood what you meant by it. I think that's the main attraction,
> aside from the beauty of the writing itself.
> If paranoia or pornography are seen as possible windows through which to
> get a glimpse of or to find the beginning of a path towards a sense of
> meaning, then that might be seen as positive. To include them both in
> the same category doesn't seem quite right, though. Paranoia seems by
> definition to be a negative. Pornography, as something that stimulates
> sexual desire, relies on a personal context to define it as positive or
> negative.
> The issue again is definition, and how definitions shift according to
> social conventions.
>
> --
> www.innergroovemusic.com <http://www.innergroovemusic.com>