M ampersand D Duck Read

[Mark Kohut]

yeah, their own Almost-Trinity (to blaspheme from TRP's growing-up
religion). They are One,
in very important American ways, yes?

A--and, to save another posting, the book is also a buddy book, a
buddy 'movie', too, right?
>From Don Quixote thru Kerouac (and beyond), we got books full of duos.
Having meaningful
adventures.

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 1:06 PM, M Thomas Stevenson
<m.thomas.stevenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> A-and the way I read it though was how the ampersand originated formerly from "and per se and", when & was tagged-on at the end of the alphabet, becoming a blurred andperseand, anpersand, etc., so: borders of words becoming blurred, Mason & Dixon no longer singular entities with individuated selves, but like "Smith's & Sons", a body, a corpus. Much is made of their differences so far, as I've seen.
>
> On 4 January 2015, at 16:15, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here's something to think on (maybe): the Ampersand symbol has been largely lost
> to history as the future has unfolded from 1789,  in title use, book
> cataloguing, title copyrighting, etc.
>
> Gone. Not yet but soon a Dodo?
>
> A small but meaningful loss in History? Another one?
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:03 AM, alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mike wrote:
>>> For me, aesthetics. Pure and simple. Sometimes an ampersand is just an
>>> ampersand. Unsatisfying to you close readers, but there you have it.
>>
>> The symbol is pretty. And it suggests a story set long ago if not so
>> very far away.
>> So a good argument for the aesthetic use of the symbol.
>>
>> With the handheld communication device, now a tool in the hands of our
>> young as they learn to write, the symbol is in common use when
>> texting. Symbols, letters of alphabets and so forth do not correspond
>> with sounds. Nor would we want this to be the case. They approximate
>> the mental lexicon of phonemes and with other stuff, call this other
>> stuff " rules", to avoid linguistic jargon, and given a particular
>> context, the writer provides a symbolic framework upon with the reader
>> builds meaning. So, what you made up here (below) is wrong.
>>
>>
>>> Here, I will make something up.
>>> When reading there is a certain tendency to translate the text into
>>> language. In a way,  our brains hear the words that we are reading. You see
>>> 'and' and hear 'and'. Which might indicate a definite distinction between
>>> the linked terms. But with a symbol, you first have to translate the symbol
>>> into a word, then hear it. I would suggest that the ampersand is heard more
>>> of an 'n' than a 'and'. This elision blurs the distinction between the two
>>> terms. Mark hinted at that by suggesting that Melanie and Jackson are two
>>> separate entities. The 'and' in the dedication. If, as I suggest, the
>>> ampersand is heard as 'n', it connects the terms in a more intimate way, not
>>> so distinct.
>>> To summarize, Mason and Dixon are two distinct individuals, while Mason &
>>> Dixon are much closer and linked in more permanent way. There is not one
>>> without the other.
>>> Hey, there is a graduate thesis here. "The Ampersand and the Dissolution of
>>> Interpersonal Boundaries in the Writings of TRP". Or not.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On 1/4/2015 6:30 AM, Mark Kohut wrote:
>>>
>>> Mike, any notions re 'What gives?'
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 6:00 AM, Mike <beider19 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Also it is not "For Melanie & For Jackson".
>>> What gives?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/4/2015 4:44 AM, Mark Kohut wrote:
>>>
>>> What meaningful differences exist if not "Mason and Dixon"?
>>>
>>> Dedication: " For Melanie and for Jackson" ...not " for Melanie and
>>> Jackson".....Pynchon's precision singles each out, the separate individuals
>>> that they are.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *********************************
>>>            Just for fun
>>> http://beider19.home.comcast.net
>>> *********************************
>> -
>> 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