We were all right....Mason & Dixon

Mon Jul 20 21:44:16 CDT 2015

80s? I thought the list started in the 90s. How old is this thing, really?

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 12:36 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> Flame wars were common, but detracted mostly. Follow the archives from the
> early 80's. The good old days.  Extremely high discourse was not rare. The
> Internet being slower then was a good thing.  I also remember back then all
> these "off list" private recruitment for sides or denouncements.  At first I
> resisted those tugs at my alliegance, but jumped cannonball into the pool
> not long after. It's been about 20 years or more now.  Still fun, and still
> today discussion here can be impressive in its scope and depth and
> diversity.
>
> David Morris
>
> On Monday, July 20, 2015, kelber at mindspring.com <kelber at mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Think a raging flame war would've held people's interest. We erred on the
>> side of civility. And all those competing facebook pages don't help!
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>> John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> There were lots of successful group reads in the past.
>>
>> I blame the changing culture of the internet. Back then there just
>> wasn't that much to do online, so more people could spend an hour or
>> three with a book and a browser and a leisurely mind.
>>
>> Of course I'm romanticising but in the global shopping mall that the
>> Deep Archer and most of the web has become, the P-List is a rag and
>> bone shop. If we had more funny quizzes, lists like the Six Most
>> Amazing Ways Pynchon Will Improve Your Sex Life, ways to tag each
>> other in emails, ability to autogenerate our favourite P characters as
>> avatars, some kind of dedicated app, a gamified reward system that
>> gave us badges for posting more, a font of our own, a Game of Thrones
>> crossover week, a photo feed and sold advertising space that can be
>> blocked so users think that the real product isn't our data, maybe
>> we'd have a chance? Seriously, why isn't someone selling our data
>> here? We're nothing!
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I blame myself.  I was simply in no condition to participate on a
>> > regular basis @ the time.
>> >
>> > Meanwhile, some day, the Inherent Vice group watch?
>> >
>> > http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/awards2014/pdf/iv.pdf
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> When enough are not newly reading and responding, the silence is loud.
>> >> And one needs to be following the bouncing ball
>> >> when one posts who is, otherwise it is not new.
>> >>
>> >> Too many too busy or otherwise out of the Group Read. Life in late
>> >> capitalism ain't easy.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:34 PM, David Ewers <dsewers at comcast.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I believe you're on to something with why the group read fizzled, Mark
>> >>> T.,
>> >>> although I think we had it going pretty good for a while there.  I'm
>> >>> not
>> >>> sure it's impossible to maintain that managed flow-through you
>> >>> describe, but
>> >>> (speaking for myself) it does seem to require some obsessing to do the
>> >>> discussion justice.  It's tough to be obsessed for several months
>> >>> straight.
>> >>> Maybe we should have built some time-outs into the schedule?
>> >>>
>> >>> Out of curiosity, is anyone still giving M-&D- the deep reading
>> >>> treatment?
>> >>> If so, where are you?
>> >>> I've slowed down a lot in my M-&D- reading, lightened up some, picked
>> >>> up
>> >>> other books, etc., but I've got notes up to chapter 35.
>> >>>
>> >>> I hope everyone (in the Northern Hemisphere...) is having a bitchin'
>> >>> summer!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Jul 19, 2015, at 11:44 AM have a nice day, violet wrote this
>> >>> message:),
>> >>> Mark Thibodeau wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I think the reason why group reads of Pynchon tend to break down (and
>> >>> I say
>> >>> this with a guilty conscience at my own part in the unraveling of the
>> >>> last
>> >>> M&D group read attempt) is that his work is SO RICH and full of
>> >>> constant,
>> >>> almost fractal levels of allusion and multi-contextual referencing
>> >>> (moreso
>> >>> perhaps than any writer aside from Joyce) that trying to maintain some
>> >>> kind
>> >>> of managed flow-through is literally impossible to do.
>> >>>
>> >>> Any reader takes from a work of art only that which he or she is
>> >>> capable of
>> >>> taking. We all bring our own personal contexts into some kind of
>> >>> intermeshing with the context of the work that we're approaching.
>> >>> Someone
>> >>> steeped in pre-Revolutionary American history will have a different
>> >>> reading
>> >>> experience from someone who knows a lot about, say, the history of
>> >>> science.
>> >>> Both will find it a masterwork, but for different reasons.
>> >>>
>> >>> For that reason, I think Pynchon slots in with those writers who are
>> >>> both
>> >>> difficult AND rewarding.
>> >>>
>> >>> MT
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Misc.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> just read an interesting essay by Stanley Greenblatt, Shakespeare and
>> >>>> Beyond
>> >>>> Scholar---this essay is on Milton, however---that applies to many a
>> >>>> great
>> >>>> writer
>> >>>> including our writer from Long Island.......
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thesis: The depth of full scholarship analysis of such as Milton, say
>> >>>> another
>> >>>> long book on all the subtleties and breadth and depth of his politics
>> >>>> explored thru
>> >>>> his major poems......tends to kill why he is great.....
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The poetry on the page.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Discuss.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> > is an incredible book....
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Throw out more stuff about....
>> >>>> -
>> >>>> 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=pynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l