Today's debate question

Tue Dec 22 17:43:40 CST 2015

My Sister.

P

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 6:29 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:

> I totally identify with the paranoia!
>
> LK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com>
> >Sent: Dec 22, 2015 6:20 PM
> >To: Perry Noid <coolwithdoc at gmail.com>
> >Cc: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>,
> pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> >Subject: Re: Today's debate question
> >
> >I don't tend to read much fiction where identification is that
> >important, although I place a high value on empathy. Pynchon's books
> >don't seem to require *any* identification with his characters, I
> >reckon, but I love that their ambition is so much broader than that.
> >They invoke a compassion for humanity and existence and the
> >complicated world without confusing that with caring for a handful of
> >fictional puppets. That seems a harder task than throwing up a bunch
> >of interesting and flawed individuals who eventually have something
> >bad happen to them and we go "ohhhh nooooo" and somehow that makes us
> >better people. Which is 99.9% of the 'literary fiction' read and
> >discussed in my country...
> >
> >Although that kind of fiction absolutely has its place, just not in my
> >cold heart.
> >
> >On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Perry Noid <coolwithdoc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Well I'm not sure I know how to debate this. But I've noticed some
> >> resonances with the beginning of 2666 by Roberto Bolaño; the
> motivations of
> >> the four readers of the same author.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tuesday, December 22, 2015, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Sort of reminds me of computer assisted text analysis.
> >>>
> >>> Apropos of nothing but  had to post it.
> >>>
> >>> I think the "autistic analyst" is a good figure of speech.
> >>>
> >>> The computer's the idiot savant.
> >>>
> >>> Without the empathizing reader, it's a pretty bleak proposition all
> >>> around.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not saying don't do it, but it's way secondary.
> >>>
> >>> Dispassionate analysis, I'm talking about.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeahp, nice response. I called it a debate question for this reason.
> >>>> Let me try to frame 'the other perspective".
> >>>>
> >>>> Literature, including drama and (most) poetry is about Life, "life and
> >>>> life only--Dylan" in ways most disciplines are not. The distancing of
> >>>> Logic; science, even the objectivity of the scientific method are not
> >>>> necessary to it. Our common--and uncommon humanity IS. That humanity
> >>>> remains abstract and distant unless we can feel it just as our own
> >>>> emotions---some say our own thoughts even (!)--are reguired to
> >>>> understand our human feelings, our humanity.
> >>>> Without being able to identify with the words, scenes and characters
> >>>> in any work of literature we are as good as autistic. Perhaps a savant
> >>>> but ultimately clueless to what matters in Literature.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Becky Lindroos <bekker2 at icloud.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> > I see what you’re saying Mark but I still have to disagree with the
> >>>> > broadness of your statement.    Whether or not a reader’s
> identification
> >>>> > with the characters is a good thing or not depends on what
> she/he’s  reading
> >>>> > - furthermore,  reading on one level does not eliminate other
> levels.  -
> >>>> > Also,  what does “identify” mean in this case?  As far as I can
> think,
> >>>> > identification is a range with “knowing someone like that” on one
> end  ->
> >>>> > “caring about”  a character being in the middle range -  and
> becoming
> >>>> > "psychologically enmeshed with a character” on the rather intense
> end.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > This is good about the more intense identification:
> >>>> > http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/can_you_identify/
> >>>> > Includes books like On the Road (Kerouac) and The Sorrows of Young
> >>>> > Werther (von Goethe) goes on to contemporary homosexual and racial
> stuff.
> >>>> > **
> >>>> > Also from today in Nebraska re Snoopy the comic strip - the lighter
> >>>> > "knowing someone like that” -:
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> http://www.kearneyhub.com/opinions/hubcolumns/lori_potter/we-identify-with-characters-in-peanuts/article_6b6891c0-9a9e-11e5-a9e8-a79105d8c36f.html
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Charles Schulz and his “Peanuts” comic strip kids had been fixtures
> in
> >>>> > daily newspapers since 1952, but their popularity soared after
> people saw “A
> >>>> > Charlie Brown Christmas.”
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I was age 9 in 1965, so my friends and I were pretty much like
> Charlie
> >>>> > Brown and his friends. Or at least we knew other kids who seemed
> like them.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Some identified with the inept Charlie Brown, who couldn’t fly a
> kite,
> >>>> > kick a football or win a baseball game. Others may have thought our
> teachers
> >>>> > and other adults sounded like “wah-wah-wah.”
> >>>> >
> >>>> > We knew bossy girls like Lucy. For any Wilcox classmates who
> thought I
> >>>> > was one of them, let me set the record straight. I’ve always been
> >>>> > judgmental, not bossy.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I was a Peppermint Patty tomboy who played sports with the boys at
> >>>> > recess decades before most Americans thought it was OK for girls to
> do “boy
> >>>> > things” and vice versa.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I salute the boys who let me play and risked the shame of losing to
> a
> >>>> > girl.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > We loved Linus’ innocence and understood why it was so hard for him
> to
> >>>> > give up his security blanket. We admired the talents of Schroeder,
> the piano
> >>>> > prodigy, and thought it would be cool to have a happy-go-lucky,
> dream-big,
> >>>> > drama-loving dog like Snoopy.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > ****
> >>>> > ME >  I personally identified with Charlie Brown and that’s kind of
> >>>> > cool because he’s a boy. (I’ve identified with other males though
> so it’s
> >>>> > not that big a deal.) Know any males like Lucy?  That’s called “Men
> Explain
> >>>> > Things to Me.”  - lol -  My big identification thing was Jo in
> Little Women
> >>>> > and Nancy Drew -  (good role model stuff there, imo.)
> >>>> >
> >>>> > We identify because we know folks like that - and it works well for
> >>>> > adult readers in satire and tear-jerkers and anti-war movies and so
> on.
> >>>> > Some folks identify to the extent of losing themselves in the
> emotions of
> >>>> > the character (escape romances?)  ->   After many years of reading
> many
> >>>> > books in many groups with many people,  I think some women tend to
> enjoy
> >>>> > identifying with characters more than other folks (both sexes) do.
> And
> >>>> > those women who do place importance on the identification factor
> enjoy
> >>>> > reading books that are aimed at that.   Do men identify with the
> guys in war
> >>>> > novels?  (I have no idea.)  These books aren’t that great imo but
> they sell
> >>>> > well.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > In Pynchon’s books I’ve identified with some of the women
> characters -
> >>>> > a couple in AtD,  CoL49 a little bit,
> >>>> > Bek
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >> On Dec 22, 2015, at 1:57 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> Proposition: That reading by identification with a character
> condemns
> >>>> >> the reading to be second-rate most of the time. The major reason:
> it reduces
> >>>> >> the sensibility of the writer, whose sensibility is supposed to be
> richer
> >>>> >> than ours ( most of the time) but which at least is Other than
> ours....
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> To ours. The vaunted empathy is crippled; the genius of observation
> >>>> >> and imagination is lost. The reading is ultimately solipsistic.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> Sent from my iPad-
> >>>> >> 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/?list=pynchon-l
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20151222/11e29336/attachment.html>