Mo Mo Mo P Scholarship (this Dis is on Film)

Markekohut markekohut at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 22 17:59:19 CDT 2013


LIKE. 

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 21, 2013, at 8:39 PM, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.neh.gov/humanities/2009/julyaugust/feature/swimming-through-libraries
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/21/13, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Someone in the P-Industry is keeping track, if not perusing these
>> dissertations. I've read lotz and I think many are not worth the time
>> it takes to figure out what the author is trying to convey. Jargon and
>> have digested regurgitation...blah blah, but I like this one. I like
>> it  a lot, actually.
>> 
>> 
>> The unfortunate hyperbole in the passage quoted may be owed to
>> inexperience, the audacity of ignorance, of youthful arrogance, or to
>> what has become a tradition, a habit in the academy. I suspect the
>> last. Take it out and you have a better paper. The author never
>> defends this claim. In fact, a lot of claims are not well supported,
>> some are better addressed by the works cited, some are simply driven
>> into the fog of abstractions and theory. What I like is the discussion
>> of MASH and  GR. And the stuff on Joyce. Nice!
>> 
>> Again, I don't think the Dis argues that there is a correct approach,
>> although it does take advantage of "mis-readings" (e.g.,
>> Weisenburger), or "what is missed" by other approaches. This is,
>> again, a stupid academic habit that this Dis doesn't surrender to
>> often.
>> 
>> 
>> I don't recall a technical discussion of windmills in DQ. But another
>> example will make your point: Moby-Dick. Melville does not expect the
>> reader to know the technology of saling or whaling. Indeed, his
>> narrator, and his readers are overwhelmed by the complexity of both
>> and this is the point. It is, as the Dis here implies by citing
>> Bakhtin, and by discussing this idea, an essential element of the
>> Romance/Anatomy M-satire. Or, the Physics in AGTD. The Dis advocates
>> cloe reading to discover themes and tecniques, but at the same time,
>> calls attention to the self-conscious auteur who, in his encyclopedic
>> details, admits that he is lifting, mapping intertextually, and is
>> only an expert at fiction making, not at explaining the brow of the
>> sperm whale or entropy. This modern narrative strategy, though in use
>> by Melville, is lost on some readers of P, who assume he is not, like
>> his questers, also only searching the book(s), wondering  and
>> wandering  in the wonderful land of the library.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 7/21/13, Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es> wrote:
>>> Doesn't that imply that there is a correct way to read it? Don Quixote
>>> uses
>>> special terms related to the technology of windmills, if you don't know
>>> this
>>> will you be unable to "know" the book? What happens when centuries and
>>> technological changes separate readers from the context of the writing?
>>> Are
>>> we the clerics of the bon mot that will illuminate the uniniciated?
>>> Couldn't
>>> one have a fruitful reading experience without these oh so important
>>> connections?
>>> 
>>> Jes sayin'.
>>> ciao
>>> mc
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
>>> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 7:47 PM
>>> Subject: Mo Mo Mo P Scholarship (this Dis is on Film)
>>> 
>>> If you don’t know movies you will never know Gravity’s Rainbow and you
>>> will find no soft landing nor parachuted phallus banana into The Zone
>>> (The Oz) of the novel’s “paracinematic” (388), oneiric narrative. His
>>> referential obsession with cinema—sometimes direct, sometimes obtuse,
>>> sometimes anachronistic, sometimes fictitious—speaks not only to the
>>> dilemmatic theme of interpreting and reconciling appearance versus
>>> reality, fact versus fiction, in the context of war, but to the
>>> difficulty in literarily categorizing his novel’s style and its place
>>> in twentieth century literature. Therefore, as a means of actively
>>> alternating from literary history and its exhausted categorical
>>> rubrics of modernism and postmodernism when working with Gravity’s
>>> Rainbow, I suggest that the novel is better mapped onto a film
>>> historical timeline as a means of best understanding its literary
>>> design.31
>>> 
>>> https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/33115/research.pdf?sequence=2
>> 



More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list