"Bin Laden May Not Exist" // dfw anent tv

Monte Davis montedavis49 at gmail.com
Thu Jun 26 05:28:17 CDT 2014 

There are few writers (or promoters of writers, musician/lyricists,
cultural observers) I respect as much as Reed, but alarms go off for me in
the second paragraph with "..those are not the reasons people tune in."
>From there on, it's never clear when he's talking about what David Simon &
co. put on/left off the screen, and when he's doing armchair reception
studies: what Ishmael Reed thinks other people thought when they looked at
the screen.

FWIW, while I cop to being white, I lived in NYC for thirty years, and for
the last ten of those was actively -- often daily -- involved with Brooklyn
waterfront politics and development, with African-American and
Polish-American and Latino as well as white community organizations, with
unions and with police. I can't say what "suburban WASP Republicans" made
of The Wire, but for me nothing on television has ever hit as many notes
true to my own urban atheist Democrat experience of how cities work and
don't. Also, I remember a number of scenes making it clear that white
suburbanites coming into the city to buy drugs were a big part of market
demand; where was Reed looking when they went past?

Crossthread: Glad you liked AtD aurally as much as I did. I've not spent
much time with audiobooks until quite recently -- and like to think that my
ear is engaged whenever I read good prose -- but there were many P-rhythms
and P-riffs and P-taradiddles that were even better this way.


On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Michael Bailey <mikebailey at gmx.us> wrote:

> My mileage varied w/r/t Wire which though i did watch 4 seasons of it with
> relish, still seems like a beautifully rendered dramatization of every
> suburban wasp republican stereotype of cities, politicians, African
> Americans, labor unions and cops...I don't think it was done in the
> ironical mode mr wallace lamented, but neither did it embody the earnest
> values dfw missed.
>
> I concur with Ishmael Reed's comments on The Wire, which I've linked to
> before:
>
> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/09/30/no_it_relies_on_clichs_about_blacks_and_drugs
> /
>
> But the essay's main thrust (i think) was "what should writers do in their
> writing to acknowledge and react to tubal pervasiveness and its replacement
> of other activities" - he posited a shift in TV's approach from sincere
> (anaclitic, he sez @ 1 pt...had to look that up (also I think he misused
> "uxorious" or at least did that metaphysical thing of linking it
> heterogeneously by violence)) propagation of traditional values, to
> cleverly and hyper-self-refererentially inculcating an ironic distance ---
> coinciding with its growth and amounting to a change from transmitting
> values to being a (or perhaps "the") source of values.
>
> He grappled with George Gilder's vision of more end-user control and wider
> variety (and caught himself snarking at GG) but saw - I think very
> germanely - this didn't change the passive, mediated, virtual nature of the
> experience.
>
> While it's certainly easier on the environment for millions to get a taste
> of many places virtually than to expend the fuels and leave the footprints
> of an actual visit; and a significant fraction of the human interactions it
> (Tube-watching) replaces might not be all that desirable anyhoo...
> A-and the reading of the writing that these writers are going to do is
> itself a mediated, virtual activity...
>
> Nonetheless...the comparison with alcoholism is very interesting (and
> reminds me of Hector in _Vineland_, the essay dates from 1990, when
> _Vineland_ appeared - maybe he was inspired by it)
>
> His remonstrances also remind me of some of the inveighing against novels
> down through the years, from Don Quixote through this guy
> http://juicyecumenism.com/2014/04/05/why-i-dont-read-fiction/ this past
> April.
>
> I found his extensive quotations from _My Cousin, My Gastroenterologist_
> entertaining, to the point of sort of wanting to read it, though he seemed
> as if he disapproved of it a bit and was looking for a different approach.
> IJ was different, I guess, but he used a whole lot of pop culture in it as
> well. The essay gave me a notion that I might sort of look at IJ
> differently: that scene in the Eschaton game (which I mostly read thinking
> geez beez that game would be no fun at all to play) where the kid's head
> goes thru the TV monitor became more poignant.
>
> In sum, like much of his writing, I think it's great, but not as congenial
> as Pynchon (I'm a spoiled consumer) and I'm always tempted to be
> prematurely dismissive ("contempt prior to investigation ") so that I have
> been rolling the phrase "he makes great points, good sense, comes across
> amiable, maybe even wise, but somehow the thing sort of 'bounces off'"
> around in my mind.
>
> If he were still alive, I'd say it, maybe even on the (now, sadly,
> defunct) waste dfw list, and hope somebody would engage and demolish my
> points...
> (Although such tactics often draw flames)
>
> But some of the self deprecation in the essay now sounds like a cri de
> coeur, and (like Pynchon's essays) the thing reads best as "an essay by a
> novelist" making my hopes for a more polemical piece (a smoother ride, a
> more conclusive wrapping up, a definitive statement of what i believe
> rather than what he thought (saving me the trouble of thinking!)) and my
> (tentative) disappointment at the actual thing rather churlish.
>
> So I won't say that. Maybe my hatin' on the wire is churlish too...it's
> Pulp Fiction without any of the happy bits but damn watchable anyway
> (though I still think Reed's got a point)
>
>
>
> rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  I wonder if such criticisms still hold for TV. Since 1993, much of cable
>> TV long form series has gotten past the irony, no? are generally expertly
>> written, shot with high production values, are in essence, much better than
>> ever. The Wire, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc. Of course, network TV is still
>> lousy
>>
>>
>>  On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 3:37 AM, Michael Bailey <mikebailey at gmx.us>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  Despite my complaints of anhedonia in infinite jest (my posts on the
>>> matter back in ought-something seguing into the notion that that's a
>>> feature rather than a bug, of course, but eventually taking gentle
>>> exception to the feature, which I felt really bad about after his demise,
>>> wondering what if he was as sad as his characters? What if he read the
>>> P-list and felt unloved? What if he worried about stuff like that or the
>>> solecism on page 693 that I took the liberty of mentioning? I figured he
>>> was more sanguine and self confident than that, more of a John Nguyen than
>>> a Gately or heaven forfend a Hal Incandenza...actually thought of him more
>>> as that locker room guru floating above the towels...which come to think of
>>> it was a pretty fun moment in the novel, though that diminishes my thesis
>>> (& not a moment too soon, I was about to complain about the p-goat
>>> concept)) the guy was a great writer, I don't mind saying. Had a narrative
>>> flow quite admirable! So, w/r/t television...
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.thefreelibrary.com/E+unibus+pluram:+television+and+U.S.+fiction.-a013952319
>>>
>>>
>>>  Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Televisual mediated reality has won; yet,says BE, that IS (almost)
>>>> nothing but entertainment as you say compared to the virtual dissolution of
>>>> self. Made real in BE.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps a kind of transubstantiation unto death.
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 24, 2014, at 6:05 AM, alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > So, Mark, is BE another "jeremiad against TV's corrosively negative
>>>> > influence on American public life" (McHale, Zapping on Vineland, in
>>>> > Constructing Postmodernism p.123)?
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't think it is.
>>>> >
>>>> > The irony is the thing. And the ontological plumbing, the
>>>> > pluralization of mediated family life. This critique is not focused on
>>>> > the corrupting power of the Tube, though we all seem in need of
>>>> > Tubal-detox, now mobile devices etc. Feed, but on the community and
>>>> > family, the core or heart of resistance, and how it fails against such
>>>> > overwhelming odds and how it might, perhaps, not succeed, but have
>>>> > moments of Grace.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> I see Ernie as correct in his Internet history and early
>>>> Pynchon-paranoid in
>>>> >> his prognosis. That prognosis may be right on--as he might have
>>>> said--as
>>>> >> well. Within it, I see P's lifelong vision that the more complex,
>>>> the more
>>>> >> abstract, the more virtual I.e. not viscerally 'real'
>>>> >> we are, the closer/sooner is the Step-function that is the
>>>> apocalypse of
>>>> >> History.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yet, in P's incredible balance beam of ambiguity, Ernie may be--in
>>>> some
>>>> >> contextual way IS--
>>>> >> An irrelevant old Lefty, even if right---his analogue may be Webb
>>>> Traverse
>>>> >> in some sense---and P's deepest vision of BE is embodied in Maxine (
>>>> of
>>>> >> course) and the kids.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Ernie is prosaic, literal TRP ( and friends like K. Sale?) out of
>>>> their
>>>> >> depths given death & the DEEP WEB and the future where mediated
>>>> reality
>>>> >> turns more and more into game-playing simulation that kills.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sent from my iPad
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Jun 23, 2014, at 5:42 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
>>>> lorentzen at hotmail.de>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> No, no, no ...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There are two hot issues in Bleeding Edge that never got discussed
>>>> >> adequately. One is the Luddite perspective on the Internet which at
>>>> the
>>>> >> novel's end becomes obvious in Ernie's historical excursion to the
>>>> roots of
>>>> >> the Internet in the Cold War (pp. 417-420) and then in Eric's related
>>>> >> diagnosis:"We're being played, Maxi, and the game is fixed, and it
>>>> won't end
>>>> >> till the Internet - the real one, the dream, the promise - is
>>>> destroyed" (p.
>>>> >> 432). Do note that these utterances are not downplayed with irony.
>>>> Actually
>>>> >> the opposite is the case. But nobody looks at them. This central
>>>> aspect is
>>>> >> neglected with the same sense of embarrassment as the novel's
>>>> construction
>>>> >> of 11 Sep ... "Foolish Pynchon, was this really necessary?!" Michiko
>>>> >> Kakutani has occupied your brains, folks. And you don't even realize
>>>> it.
>>>> >> Bleeding Edge is not an anti-truther-satire. Not even in the case of
>>>> March,
>>>> >> who is not a ridiculous yet a tragic character. And the arguments
>>>> which
>>>> >> question the official version of the event come from a number of
>>>> characters
>>>> >> in the book. Horst for example is neither hysteric nor an idiot. He
>>>> >> recognizes insider trade when he sees it because this competence is
>>>> part of
>>>> >> his profession. So it is not at all clear - though formulations here
>>>> like
>>>> >> "(t)he use of Conspiracy was examined" seem to suggest this - that
>>>> Pynchon
>>>> >> shares the official version that the attacks came as surprise. The
>>>> fact that
>>>> >> 11 Sep already played a role in Against the Day should make a
>>>> detailed
>>>> >> analysis of its treatment in Bleeding Edge a must. But no, no, here
>>>> this is
>>>> >> read as a merely atmospheric thriller ingredient, as if BE was
>>>> fucking IV.
>>>> >> Same for the Luddite perspective on the Internet. "Uuh, Pynchon
>>>> wants to
>>>> >> take away my toy, I rather ignore this ..." So instead of concretely
>>>> >> examining Pynchon overall major theme --- TECHNOLOGY & CONTROL - in
>>>> this new
>>>> >> novel where we learn about the genesis of Cold War 2.0, you suckers
>>>> write
>>>> >> about shelf warmers like 'Neo-Liberalism' and even
>>>> 'Late-Capitalism'. Yeah,
>>>> >> how could one not call this a "fine job"?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Rest in Pussyness!
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=1406&msg=180729&sort=date
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 22.06.2014 17:17, Mark Kohut wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Well remembered and stated.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Jun 22, 2014, at 10:03 AM, alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I think we did a fine job with the political themes. Neo-Liberalism
>>>> >> and Late-Capitalism were explored in depth. The use of Conspiracy was
>>>> >> examined. We discussed the family because it's impossible to ignore
>>>> >> the fact that Pynchon's politics are played out in his fictional
>>>> >> families. In Bleeding Edge families have nice boys, good kids, given
>>>> >> a great education...who turn out to be Ice Monsters...families have
>>>> >> daughters they protect from the struggle they wage to keep their
>>>> >> neighborhoods, who, because of cultural and technological forces
>>>> (Tube
>>>> >> & Co.) turn, not completely, but turn to power fascism....and so on.
>>>> >> We discussed this at some length. Unless I dreamed it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> OK, back to the game most Americans don't know is going down.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Peace,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Al
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The interview sounds wrong to me in possibility and from the word '
>>>> trendy'
>>>> >> on. It has been disavowed by Ms. Jackson.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> "Late capitalism" in BLEEDING EDGE has been discussed. And the usual
>>>> >> miscellany of other aspects, many of them 'political'. A key
>>>> cultural (
>>>> >> embodied politics )aspect of BE is what made many plisters dislike
>>>> it: pop
>>>> >> has totally won. Also pretty clear that money took NYC and in the way
>>>> >> novels write themselves larger than their literalness.....
>>>> >>
>>>> >> And the future awaits anyone on the paths less traveled now on the
>>>> plist.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sent from my iPad
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Jun 22, 2014, at 3:01 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
>>>> lorentzen at hotmail.de>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What “Bleakhaus” couldn’t have known when he or she wrote this is
>>>> that,
>>>> >> while Against the Day (2006) may touch on 9/11 symbolically, his
>>>> 2013 book
>>>> >> Bleeding Edge deals with it literally—it’s part of the book’s plot.
>>>> <<
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Very true.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Unfortunately neither reviewers nor plisters seem to be interested in
>>>> >> discussing the novel's construction of 11 Sep ... They discuss
>>>> Bleeding Edge
>>>> >> as family novel and/or NYC novel. The basic political dimension of
>>>> the plot
>>>> >> has not been analyzed by anyone so far.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 21.06.2014 21 <#146d6ea7a9679ebc_>:22, Dave Monroe wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> http://touch.dangerousminds.net/all/bin_laden_may_not_exist_did_thomas_pynchon_give_this_9_11_interview
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -
>>>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -
>>>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=nchon-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/?listpynchon-l
>>
>>
>>  - Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20140626/bbfe352e/attachment.html>

More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list