Pynchons Problem

[Paul Mackin]

On 3/12/2012 11:40 AM, rich wrote:
> the review is by Elaine Bell from the NY Review of Books about the
> latest novel by Houellbec. there is no relation to Pynchon in the review
> except my own feeling that Pynchon's work, in particular AtD, exhibited
> similar tendencies about some perceived (on my part) overcompensation by
> Pynchon in the portrayal of his women in that book thereby in my opinion
> making them even blander non-entities.


Thanks, Rich

One thing in the review struck me as going contrary to the stereotypical 
view of what women and men like--the reviewer's being a woman and giving 
praise to H's "sexist" portrayal of true love:

"The reduction of female characters to their sexual function is normally 
considered the paramount example of literary misogyny. I wouldn’t try to 
clear Houellebecq on all counts of this charge, but I think that his 
insistence solely on animal satisfactions when representing love is one 
of his brilliant impieties. He has found, with admirable precision, a 
node of prudish sentimentality: in spite of the importance we place on 
the pursuit of sex in life and its graphic depiction in entertainment 
and art, we continue to suspect that sex acts reduce us to anonymity, 
annihilate whatever it is that makes us “individual,” and therefore 
can’t stand in for what we love about a person. The novelist can write 
about hand jobs, sure, but if he’s going to write about love, he’d 
better talk about the elegant slope of her shoulders or her quick wit."

Supports my view that difference in what women and men like is delusion.

Maybe, run away delusion, or rampaging delusion. Bled's definitions.

P



>
> rich
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net
> <mailto:mackin.paul at verizon.net>> wrote:
>
>     On 3/12/2012 10:03 AM, Mark Kohut wrote:
>
>         I think, and I've said it before, that Pynchon's whole oeuvre values
>         women, as idea, as their qualities [of Womanhood] [largely
>         missing] in
>         society, history
>         as without which we don't get real tenderness, family picnics,
>         family
>         values and children.......
>         In AtD he gives us defiantly "liberated" Lake....[so much more
>         to say
>         here] and.....
>         aggressively 'advanced'--within her male maths world---Yashmeen.
>         Remember Kit shrinking
>         under her verbal retorts?........
>
>
>     Wow, a whole bunch of responses to this thread.
>
>     But I missed something: what is the origin of Rich's quote? I just
>     read the  review of Houellebecq's novel and received no clues.
>       Maybe I hurried through it too fast. Who was Rich quoting and what
>     has it to do the the NYRB piece? Or, Pynchon? My bad, no doubt.
>
>     P
>
>
>
>         *From:* Bled Welder <bledwelder at hotmail.com
>         <mailto:bledwelder at hotmail.com>>
>         *To:* markekohut at yahoo.com <mailto:markekohut at yahoo.com>;
>         alicewellintown at gmail.com <mailto:alicewellintown at gmail.com>;
>         pynchon-l at waste.org <mailto:pynchon-l at waste.org>
>         *Sent:* Monday, March 12, 2012 8:38 AM
>         *Subject:* RE: Pynchons Problem
>
>         There are feminist interpretations of Gravity's? Huh! Now I must
>         rreally
>         be missing something.
>
>         Feminist, as in, what is a feminist interpretation of a novel,
>         showing
>         how the characters and viewpoints are enlightened about female
>         equality?
>         That's it basically?
>
>         Gravity's Rainbow? Gosh that's sad. What's the opposite of feminist?
>         Misogynist? That would be closer. From concept to detail--
>
>         This will be fun. What are some like professional essays on the
>         feminism
>         of Gravity's that I might link to?
>
>
>         Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 05:14:19 -0700
>         From: markekohut at yahoo.com <mailto:markekohut at yahoo.com>
>         Subject: Re: Pynchons Problem
>         To: alicewellintown at gmail.com
>         <mailto:alicewellintown at gmail.com>; pynchon-l at waste.org
>         <mailto:pynchon-l at waste.org>
>
>         Alice,
>         stuff to argue with here but I will choose to say that AtD has P's
>         fullest presenation
>         of his ideas about women. And womanhood.
>         And, one can't forget The White Goddess.
>
>         *From:* alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com
>         <mailto:alicewellintown at gmail.com>>
>         *To:* pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org <mailto:pynchon-l at waste.org>>
>         *Sent:* Monday, March 12, 2012 6:26 AM
>         *Subject:* Re: Pynchons Problem
>
>         In its self-deprecating humorous reflections, the Slow Learner
>         Introduction admits that Pynchon was, like most American males (so
>         Pynchon sez), an immature jackass and that his characters were
>         invested with his chauvinistic attitudes. While I admire the
>         feminist
>         readings of GR, the feminism found there belongs to the critics and
>         not the author. The author turns with VL. And his turn is awkward.
>         Inherent Vice seems a novel written to appease Pynchon's wife
>         and her
>         feminist friends. AGtD, however, is a parody of his earlier turn and
>         takes some revenge on his foolish surrender to the feminists.
>
>
>
>
>
>