Misc. : if all knowledge degenerates into probability---David Hume

[Mark Kohut]

Becky writes: Maybe the 20th century is moving across the 18th like
Venus across the sun - although obviously not in a line.

Yes...




On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> bestest stuff going down...Becky.....parallax as an 'historical novel'
> perspective, now THAT seems a perfect TRP way....
>
> I am thinking, a metahistorical novel about history i.e. without
> jargon, non-linear but real 'patterns' and ideas embodied in
> a near reality of events....(that are very irreal as magical realism is)
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Becky Lindroos <bekker2 at icloud.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 18, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> then this from an historian [Jurgen Osterhammel] about his world
>>> history book: "a certain weakness of
>>> explanatory power may rest at the heart of the project, although in principle I
>>> disagree with a postmodernist aversion to causality"
>>>
>>> "you're going to want cause & effect"----GR
>>>
>>> So, IS M & D sorta above 'explanatory power' as a world historical
>>> novel and full
>>> of dramatized ongoing possibilities/patterns of world history focused
>>> through the
>>> soon-to-be United States experiment?]
>>
>> Yep - you betcha - Pynchon is way beyond the "cause and effect" method of history - it's way too linear - the calendar is off (as we'll see later),  the instruments are off (in chapter 12, I think).     I think to TRP the idea of putting these lines (time, space, mapping, etc.)  on events or phenomenon is bizarre.   Besides that,  there are just too many threads involved to be able to track any kind of simple "cause and effect" relationship - can't even do that with one person, much less a whole history.
>>
>> Time in the hands of historians is just their own peculiar device to create linear measurement on  non-linear phenomena - like a grid on a globe  - at the ends,  the straight lines do not stay parallel but get closer - at the middle they get further.  You can't keep a grid flat on a globe and you can't put a 24-hour daily calendar on history.
>>
>> His may be an "Other Worldly" method of history - a parallax of various times and points of view, perhaps - past, present, future - no problem.  Time may not be linear - (although once an egg is broken it's not going back together - once a bell is rung, etc.  -  still- there are arguments for time being curved - even a bunch of times and ways.
>>
>> It becomes a matter of time and the flow of history (do time and history have directions  - like forward? - yes of course they do in the world of entropy, but ... )  And whether or not something is an anachronism  is directly related to that.  Time is a huge theme in Mason & Dixon - on page 106 (Chapter 11) - in a day or two:
>>
>> Ethelmer says "Didn't Days take twenty-four hours to pass,  as they do now?"   (sounds rhetorical but ...)
>>
>> I think reading this closely,  we're going to have to view M&D as both an 18th century and as a 20th century novel - with feet in both centuries at the same time - overlapping - Maybe the 20th century is moving across the 18th like Venus across the sun - although obviously not in a line.  And this is going to be more and more apparent as we move along because  I've found all sorts of good articles about this referencing pages in the 300 and 400 range - some in the 500 range.  We'll just recognize that element when we see it pop up again - and again.
>>
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=Ngv97RCuFrEC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=%22Mason+%26+Dixon%22+anachronisms&source=bl&ots=SIyTRplVDA&sig=aNO38nBQ9wO57R8ApLmY6V1kk_o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tyTlVLXaCcS_ggTCqYP4Cw&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22Mason%20%26%20Dixon%22%20anachronisms&f=false
>>
>> Becky
>>
>>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l