Bleeding Edge: "The Trade Center towers were religious too" (p. 338)

rich richard.romeo at gmail.com
Thu Apr 17 13:15:57 CDT 2014 

yes, i would agree with that in the sense that one has to take the base
worldview of any novel at face value. whatever my personal views, it still
nags me that Pynchon doesnt seem all that original in BE. I miss the
poetics. maybe hes got some final statement up his sleeve after getting all
the personal shit out of the way the last decade. but i doubt it

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:

>
> Looking through the aborted group read, I stumbled across this. It's cool
> that you share your personal experience with the towers, but does it say
> anything about their meaning in Bleeding Edge? Hardly. The parallel between
> the WTC attacks and the blowing up of the "two colossal" Buddha statues in
> Afghanistan is anticipated early on in the novel (p. 31): "'Fucking
> rugriders,' as Shawn expresses it, ''offensive to Islam' so blow it up,
> that's their solution to everything.'" If Pynchon would have wanted to keep
> religious associations away from his version of 11 Sep, he simply could
> have left out the Buddha statues completely. Instead he writes about them
> twice. You really think there's no significance in this?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ-oaUqvAS8
>
>
> On 19.11.2013 23:42, Rich wrote:
>
>> Doubt anyone would claim religiosity if they worked in the damn
>> buildings. I found it a most depressing experience. People think the place
>> was filled with high finance people; it wasn't.
>> And let's not forget the mini mall on the concourse some of whose steps
>> survived the day.
>>
>> rich
>>
>>
>>  On Nov 19, 2013, at 4:08 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Homoerotic phalli, I still maintain. Replaced with a good ol' hetero one
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>>> From: Heikki Raudaskoski <hraudask at sun3.oulu.fi>
>>>> Sent: Nov 19, 2013 3:33 PM
>>>> To: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: Bleeding Edge: "The Trade Center towers were religious
>>>> too"    (p. 338)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the well-deserved lesson David.
>>>>
>>>> Still, regardless of how they stood in relation to each other and
>>>> their surroundings, I'm inclined to think that the twinness of the WTC
>>>> buildings had something to do with their symbolic power. But I clearly
>>>> will have to come up with something better.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heikki
>>>>
>>>> David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>  So many things in this brief analysis of WTC towers is incorrect and
>>>>> exposing his ignorance of architecture:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.  The towers didn't turn their backs on anything.  They had no
>>>>> backs. All
>>>>> their faces were identical.  And they were no more faceless than any
>>>>> other
>>>>> of their contemporaries.  Most modernist towers of that era and before
>>>>> were
>>>>> grids, by nature uniform and and faceless.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Neither did they face each other.  They were offset from each other
>>>>> on a
>>>>> diagonal.  Thus they maximized the number of faces sent outward, not at
>>>>> each other.  In other words they didn't block each other's views.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3.  He is correct to point out that they did all they could to stand
>>>>> out
>>>>> and dominate.  That is one of the central features of early and later
>>>>> (pre-Pomo) modernist architecture, which was notoriously anti-urban and
>>>>> ant-street.  Modernism hated facades lining streets or plazas or
>>>>> squares,
>>>>> all the devices of pre-modern architecture to define urban SPACE.  Pre
>>>>> modern urban architecture worked in a collective manner to define
>>>>> public
>>>>> spaces.  Modern architecture hated urbanism, seeking to demolish vast
>>>>> areas
>>>>> of urban fabric in order to provide an open limitless field in which to
>>>>> display mega objects.  The WTC did its best to do just that in lower
>>>>> Manhattan.  This is just plain vanilla modern architecture at a scale
>>>>> that
>>>>> allowed it to achieve standard modernist goals.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, most architects thought they were crappy architecture.
>>>>>
>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>
>>>>>  On Monday, November 18, 2013, Heikki Raudaskoski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I never appreciated Baudrillard much to begin with, and his writings
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> 9/11 made me appreciate him less, but some parts of his analysis may
>>>>>> hold
>>>>>> true, like the following points paraphrased by Margaret McNally:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The aesthetic twinness and symmetry of the Twin Towers, and their
>>>>>> dominant height above other skyscrapers in the New York City skyline,
>>>>>> signified that the WTC no longer represented competition of corporate
>>>>>> capital among these modern symbols of capitalism in New York City or,
>>>>>> indeed, the world. Rather, it represented western global capital
>>>>>> dominance (Baudrillard, Spirit 38-39). The Towers' faceless facades
>>>>>> stood
>>>>>> isolated, turning their back on other skyscrapers, and facing one
>>>>>> another
>>>>>> in a playful, yet somewhat arrogant gesture that both defied
>>>>>> modernism,
>>>>>> and signified their self-contained supremacy of global power (40)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/p9hghuz (Please note that clicking this link will
>>>>>> prompt a download of a Word document to your computer.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heikki
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On Mon, 18 Nov 2013, Paul Mackin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, it's the media--TV, radio, and print--that creates that
>>>>>>> "instant
>>>>>>> history," telling us what we now think even before we think it, or
>>>>>>> might never have thought it. It sells newspapers, as the saying goes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In a similar case, there's a story-heading this morning in either the
>>>>>>> Times or the Post that reads "America still haunted by JFK
>>>>>>> assassination."  Well, speaking for myself, the things haunting me
>>>>>>> have nothing to do with that 50 year ago sad event.  I suspect it's
>>>>>>> the same for many of the rest of you as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with both of you. As a matter of prosaic fact, most of the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> corporate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tenants of the WTC were insurance companies (the largest by square
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> footage a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Blue Cross HMO) and a slew of import/export firms and financial
>>>>>>>> intermediaries few of us had ever heard of. They were landmarks and
>>>>>>>> sightseeing attractions, but certainly hadn't replaced the literal
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> synecdochal Wall Street, or the Chase Manhattan or Citibank towers,
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Federal Reserve bank, as first-to-mind symbols of finance or US
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> economic
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hegemony.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> UNTIL the week after September 11, 2001. It was the spectacle of
>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>> destruction, *in combination* with the attack on the Pentagon and
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> aborted attack on the White House (both unquestionably first-to-mind
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> symbols
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in their own domains), that retroactively made them "the symbolic
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> center of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Western capitalism."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IOW: if our enemies had chosen them (twice!) as symbolic targets, by
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> god
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> they'd better have been important symbols. FWIW, I think the hasty
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> neatness
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of that "instant history" in the wake of the attack is a significant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of TRP's animus that's been discussed in another thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
>>>>>>>> <lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree with you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But as representative building - and here the W in WTC is of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> relevance -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the Twin Towers were  functioning as the master icon of Western
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> capitalism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  On 18.11.2013 16:49, Paul Mackin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I always thought 11 Wall street (NYSE) was the symbolic and
>>>>>>>>>> religious
>>>>>>>>>> center of American (Western) capitalism,  with its opening and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> closing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (church) bells ringing away.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
>>>>>>>>>> <lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn, as a fake Zen therapist, might not be the novel's most
>>>>>>>>>>> trustworthy
>>>>>>>>>>> voice, but here he is on to something. Discussions about the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> symbolic
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dimension of the Twin Towers tend, also on this list, to reduce it
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>> phallic element. This is there, no doubt, but if this was all
>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> is,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> could have been just any skyscraper. Yet the Trade Center Towers
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> just any skyscraper. Artists like Philippe Petit or Wim Wenders
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ("Der
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Amerikanische Freund", 1977) realized this right away. The Twin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Towers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>>> the symbolic center of Western capitalism. And when they were
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> destroyed,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Western people in general and US people in particular perceived
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> this as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> attack on "our way of life", as chancellor Schröder put it back
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shawn's comparison of the WTC attacks to the blowing up of the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Buddha
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> statues in Afghanistan makes this symbolic dimension clear.
>>>>>>>>>>> The shock and the confusion afterwards (including the belittling
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> terrorists' courage) have to do with the -
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>
>> -
>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=nchon-l
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20140417/d4942df2/attachment.html>

More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list