Bleeding Edge takes place in 2001

[David Morris]

No lawsuits or zootsuits ensued.

On Saturday, March 9, 2013, Joseph Tracy wrote:

> The article sounds awkward and unfunny, without the normal wit or
> playfulness or  much telling historical reference.  "I deprecate this way
> of expression." for example  just doesn't sound like Pynchon to my ear.
> On Feb 27, 2013, at 5:56 PM, David Morris wrote:
>
> > I do remember this:
> >
> >
> http://against-the-day.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Pynchon_playboy
> >
> > A supposed "interview" was published in an issue of Playboy Japan,
> entitled "Most News is Propaganda. Bin Laden May Not Exist." It purported
> to be a talk with Pynchon on the events of 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden. Its
> authenticity has been disputed, and few facts exist to prove one way or
> another whether Pynchon actually said or wrote the opinions printed. Got
> info? Add it!
> > Talk by Thomas Pynchon
> > Rough translation by Naoki on the Pynchon-L list
> > Most News Is Propaganda. Bin Laden May Not Exist.
> > All people who live in New York today have been talking about recently
> is whether they have been to the site of the World Trade Center. This is
> because it has become a "trendy" topic. Personally, I still cannot find
> myself wanting to go see the site.
> > The main thing that has changed in my life-style recently is the fact
> that I do not ride the subway anymore. Before, I got on the subway wherever
> I went but today, I never ride the subway in fear of biological weapons.
> After all, there was the case with the Tokyo Sarin Gas. I believe that the
> damage that can be caused by the biological weapon called antrax is
> increasing and we are in a situation where someone could use biological
> weapons at any time.
> > The media station that is consistently giving reports on this terrorist
> case is CNN. Because everybody watches CNN, it would be safe to say that
> the news being watched by all of the citizens is the same. However, it is
> dangerous when people start to believe that what they see is real news.
> > For the television stations this kind of situation should be a great
> chance to express their individuality. However, the only thing the
> newscasters do is read the news in a monotonous voice or when the news
> comes on during the report, all they do is spit out the words they receive.
> In any case, they talk with the mere intention of filling up the time they
> have on air.
> > The adjective "affect less" best fits the way the newscasters talk. It
> is a way of expression that has no connection to the human being and no
> emotional power at all. I deprecate this way of expression. If you listen
> closely to those words, it doesn't sound like real news. It sounds more
> like propaganda.
> > Talking of propaganda, what changed the most due to the terrorist
> incident is The New York Times. Until recently, I would wake up an hour
> early to go buy this newspaper but now, there it isn't even worth the time
> to sit down and read it. Even before I place my hips in the seat, I am
> already finished reading it by flipping through the pages. It wouldn't be
> wrong to say that there is hardly any useful news. It is mostly propaganda.
> > The news on how there are more antibiotics to antrax other than cipro
> was a little useful, but that kind of useful news has become a rarity. The
> New York Times is usually known to be the most reliable source of media
> when doing research on something that happened twenty to thirty years ago.
> However, that is no longer the case. The most reliable newspaper that is
> read by educated people today is probably England's The Guardian. Everyone
> is reading it on the internet. I also believe that a lot of the information
> coming out of the White House is also propaganda.
> > The problem is that common people cannot make a distinction between news
> and propaganda. On the contrary, the news sent out from Isreal is extremely
> reliable.
> > In any case, once a war happens, the war for media becomes a great
> significance and even the newspapers that look decent at first glance, you
> can no longer trust. About a hundred years ago, the man who started
> publishing the Daily Mile said the following: "News is something somebody
> wants to suppress. Everything else is propaganda."
> > Therefore, all information that can be obtained without difficult
> coverage, even though it may be from the White House, you can think of as
> propaganda.
> > Bin Laden should be looked upon as a symbol
> > The United States has always had a tendancy to look for an enemy. It is
> a country that cannot stand not having one. Even for this terrorist
> incident, it is already determined that the villain behind all of this is
> bin Laden, but in reality they are saying that because they cannot stand
> not doing so. I believe that bin Laden is someone's clown for a rodeo.
> > Although my thoughts are always paranoid, I believe that I'm the only
> one who feels this way. It is said that NSA is on a lookout for him but I
> think that like an onion, new layers will be discovered. No matter how I
> look at the situation, it doesn't seem like bin Laden is doing this
> independently. The only impression that I get is that he is some kind of
> star actor.
> > Honestly speaking, we cannot even tell if the face that comes out on
> television and on the newspapers is his real face. I remember someone
> saying right after the terrorist incident, "Come on, you want bin Laden?
> We'll give you 20 of him." Even if the United States succeeds in killing
> him that would mean that there are still 19 bin Ladens left. Even if there
> is only one, there are probably many people who would take his place once
> they kill bin Laden.
> > If we look at this from a different point-of-view, we should look at bin
> Laden as a symbol rather than a man. Bin Laden may not even exist.
> > The other day when I was surfing the net, it said that the punishmen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130309/df75df5a/attachment.html>