vector

[Alex Colter]

Ah, good point Jochen, I rush'd to explain the definitions without first
consulting the Context... terrible fallacy, ever recurring here in the
American South

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:01 PM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com>wrote:

> I don't see Desire as an object/target. (What would that make of
> l'objet du désir, meaning the object where Desire is headed?)
>
> I wrote: Cherrycoke is speaking of the "Object we wish to examine".
> And DePugh, home from Cambridge, answers with the words Keith was
> asking about "A Vector of Desire". And "of Desire", in that case, is a
> genitivus subjectivus, in other words: the Vector.
>
>
> 2012/5/25 David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>:
> > LED's then? Mason surely knew of them. Did Mason write MD?
> >
> > The basic difference between your interpretation and mine is that you
> > see Desire as an object/target.  I see Desire as an acting, moving
> > force.
> >
> > David Morris
> >
> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Don't mention it, Keith. But reviewing my mail I see that I should've
> >> written: l'objet du désir. Computer graphics obviously made no sense
> for Mason&Dixon and DePugh but "a quantity having direction as well as
> magnitude" did.
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >>
> >> Jochen
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120525/8811c7b1/attachment.html>