Dan references

[Fiona Shnapple]

But is the ten year anachronism owed to Pynchon's lack of sufficient
interest? I don't think this is true. In fact, as the novels that followed
GR prove, anachrosnism are carefully and deliberately used by the author.




On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Lemuel Underwing <luunderwing at gmail.com>wrote:

> P.'s apparent errors when it comes to pop culture references have been
> remarked on often on this List, but my favorite quote concerning them
> belongs to Edward Mendelson from his essay on GR:
> "*Gravity's Rainbow *has on occasion been misunderstood as an endorsement
> of popular culture in preference to "high" culture, but Pynchon is equally
> insistent on the potential dangers that lie in absorption at either
> extreme. The popular modes that Pynchon assimilates into his encyclopedia
> of styles are never modes of liberation from the systems of oppression but
> are instead a *means* of oppression and extinguishing. In his references
> to popular forms, Pynchon incidentally commits historical errors of a kind
> absent from his allusions to Rossini or Rilke: he is not, for example,
> sufficiently interested in a film like *The Return of Jack Slade* to
> notice that its inclusion in *Gravity's Rainbow* is a ten-year
> anachronism. "
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Fiona Shnapple <fionashnapple at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I guess you know him better than me. I can dig that.
>> I skipped a lot of posts, so....but, and maybe it was just he luck of he
>> draw, but I ended up reading posts that made these observations about how P
>> is old and not that sharp, prone to errors even. Then, I read Richard, and
>> I happen to be a SD fan girl, you know you could find me screaming across
>> the sky, while chasing the dragon, for that sweet long and large Steely
>> Dan, ah, oh, yeah, and I thought he made a point about how We often hum a
>> few bars, down on our knees, not the title, but that bunch that pleases the
>> ear over and over. Yes, yes, yes, Molly, good golly this Bleeding makes me
>> jolly.
>>
>> On Saturday, October 5, 2013, jochen stremmel wrote:
>>
>>> I'm talking about what you are talking about. And how.
>>>
>>> You are talking about Thomas Pynchon, right? The man who perhaps wrote
>>> one of the 3 best novels of the 20th century. And you don't think to
>>> speak of his "huge talent" (he is 76 years old by now), that "we"
>>> appreciate, could sound a bit condescendingly? You give him the
>>> benefit of poetic licence? I'm sure he will be grateful. You thank
>>> Richard who means Pynchon got Steely Dan's titles wrong, in both
>>> cases? That's ridiculous in my eyes.
>>>
>>> In case you don't know it, may I quote the first three paragraphs of
>>> Diebold's and Goodwin's "starter kit" to Vineland for you?
>>>
>>> People read Thomas Pynchon because he's fun. That's why one reads any
>>> good novelist, of course, no matter how "literary" or "difficult."
>>> Melville is fun, Dickens is fun, Joyce is surely fun.
>>>
>>> Pynchon, who we rate as one of the greatest novelists of the 20th
>>> century, is big fun. For one thing, like all great novelists, he
>>> reveals fascinating, underlying truths about the culture, society, and
>>> characters in his books -- and his keen intelligence lends weight to
>>> these insights. For another, the beauty and grace of Pynchon's writing
>>> is fun -- from his gorgeous turns of phrase and extended metaphors to
>>> the artfully complicated plots he loves to weave. Also, he's
>>> incredibly, shamelessly comical -- "goofy" might be an even better
>>> word -- building in terrible/wonderful puns, silly names, and broad
>>> slapstick at every possible turn. In addition, he includes an amusing
>>> array of elements from popular culture -- comics, horror movies, rock
>>> 'n' roll, TV. Finally, Pynchon is fun because he knows so much
>>> interesting stuff -- scientific, literary, historical -- and puts so
>>> much of it into his books. As a result, reading his novels can be
>>> every bit as challenging (and rewarding) as solving a difficult
>>> puzzle.
>>>
>>> There's a down-side to this, of course. Like Joyce, Pynchon can be
>>> tough to get into. His plots tend toward the labyrinthine, his best
>>> gags often turn on obscure biochemical or mathematical references, and
>>> critical concepts in one book may have their origin (and explanation)
>>> in another. Even Vineland, his most accessible novel, has confounded
>>> many literate readers.
>>>
>>> But you obviously like Bleeding Edge. I appreciate that.
>>>
>>> 2013/10/5 Fiona Shnapple <fionashnapple at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> > Um, no idea what you are talking about. Sorry.
>>> > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 9:40 AM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >In this example, P does not simply tack on a bunch of words to the
>>> song
>>> >> > titles.<
>>> >>
>>> >> Why not say so up front? Because there obviously are no "apparent
>>> >> errors", and he doesn't get any titles wrong.
>>> >>
>>> >> And, please, who are "we", to "appreciate his research, his humor, his
>>> >> huge talent." Do you aspire to Kakutani's job? I, for my part, am
>>> >> perfectly happy to sit with him at the campfire and let him tell his
>>> >> story.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2013/10/5 Fiona Shnapple <fionashnapple at gmail.com>:
>>> >> > their website, among many other hilarious writings, contains  a ...
>>> When
>>> >> > they were finally voted in, they immediately opened a fake auction
>>> for
>>> >> > the
>>> >> > commemorative trophies awarded by a "self-styled 'official' musical
>>> >> > honorary
>>> >> > organization". Items offered in exchange ranged from cash offers to
>>> >> > "somebody's gold teeth" and something simply described as
>>> "biological
>>> >> > matter".
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Music/SteelyDan?from=Main.SteelyDan
>>> >> > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Fiona Shnapple <
>>> fionashnapple at gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks you.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> It is important to look into these apparent erros.
>>> >> >> P is certainly not infallible.
>>> >> >> And,as you suggest here, Richard, when we give him the benefit of
>>> >> >> poetic
>>> >> >> licence, we appreciate his research, his humor, his huge talent.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I can see so many of scenes read at the 92 Street Y to a typical
>>> crowd
>>> >> >> of
>>> >> >> silver hairs who would be both wild with joy, rolling in the
>>> aisles and
>>> >> >> groaning, then chatting the deeper meanings up hours, and days
>>> later.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> In this example, P does not simply tack on a bunch of words to the
>>> song
>>> >> >> titles. So, what might he be up to here?  The popular song title,
>>> what
>>> >> >> people call the songs? The refrain, the first line, the first few
>>> >> >> notes,
>>> >> >> whatever, jar the memory.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> And the cryptic song title, not to mention the obscure and cryptic
>>> puns
>>> >> >> of
>>> >> >> Steely Dan are ironed out, flatironed here, but uner the street,
>>> well,
>>> >> >> kinda
>>> >> >> like P, where the cult readers and listeners are in on it, there is
>>> >> >> meanings...like Katie Lied's first song is Black Friday and on the
>>> >> >> cover of
>>> >> >> The Royal Scam...etc...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>  Looking at how he's funning and punning away, on names and title,
>>> on
>>> >> >> celebs, and how people use popular song lyrics in conversation,
>>> popular
>>> >> >> phrases from TV, shop-talk from the Websters, Opera lingo from the
>>> >> >> Opera
>>> >> >> fans....the list goes on, I think it is useful to point out the
>>> >> >> "mistakes",
>>> >> >> and then dig into them to find the beauty in the errors.
>>> >> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Rich Clavey <antizoyd at yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> One thing odd that jumped out at me about BE is, so far I noticed
>>> two
>>> >> >>> references to Steely Dan songs: Doctor Wu, and The Fez, and in
>>> both
>>> >> >>> cases
>>> >> >>> Pynchon got the titles wrong by adding a bunch of words to them.
>>> "Are
>>> >> >>> you
>>> >> >>> with me Doctor Wu" and "Aint never gonna do it without the Fez
>>> on".
>>> >> >>> Rich
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> -
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20131005/1e033566/attachment.html>