We were all right....Mason & Dixon

[John Bailey]

Hope my sarcasm was obvious. I'm glad the list exists pretty much
outside of the digital economy (as far as we know).

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
<lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>
>> Seriously, why isn't someone selling our data
>
> here? We're nothing! <
>
> "We are ugly but we have the music" (Leonard Cohen)
>
> I do not want our data to be sold.
>
> And I don't want to be 'someone' in terms of the digital economy.
>
> Group reads are overrated. You don't need them to post something substantial
> on Pynchon. The most interesting threads are those evolving spontaneously.
>
> And it's always "Now!" and you can start from where you are ...
>
> On 21.07.2015 01:04, John Bailey 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