Another Greif review

[Mark Kohut]

My quick 'take'.
 V shows Pynchon was never an (old) Lefty. From the beginning we
have a world-historical vision of enslavement in history and what we
used to call back in the V. day: alienation.

Five decades later comes old Lefty, March.

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 6:53 AM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
> JP, I'm interested in this: "It's difficult to argue that V., for
> example, was written by a Lefty"
>
> Can you elaborate? I've never thought about this and am genuinely intrigued.
>
> And FWIW I find Pynchon's later writing to be much more ambiguous,
> politically speaking. Let's talk Small vs Big Government, anarchy,
> collectivism, communitarian societies, individualism, corporation
> politics, taxes, etc. My views on all of these are not the views I had
> when I first read (and loved) V. so, yeah, there's that.
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I take issue. Major shifts in his work, get sure. But lotsa deep
>> continuities, ESP re work, power in history and good shit on life.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 17, 2015, at 9:53 AM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Rules in Saint Jerome's theory of literary criticism, outlined by Foucalt in
>> his famous "What is an author?":
>>
>> 1. if among several books attributed to an author one is inferior to the
>> others, it must be withdrawn from the author's works
>>
>> 2. if one book contradicts the doctrine expounded in the others it must be
>> withdrawn
>>
>> 3. if written in a different style, it must be withdrawn
>>
>> Foucault argues that modern criticism still defines authors in the same way.
>>
>> Of course, lots of critics have noted major shifts in Pynchon "doctrine" and
>> in quality and style.
>>
>> It's difficult to argue that V., for example, was written by a Lefty, and
>> surely not by the same Left shifting Pynchon who wrote the SL Introduction
>> where he says that he finds a substrate of economic forces that undermine,
>> then, co-opt the qualities of the working class. In any event, there are
>> clear and major shifts in Pynchon "doctrine", in how he sees work, the
>> workers, the forces that weaken the workers and their champions. Rather than
>> repeat the mantra that the red baiting government dismembered labor, Pynchon
>> shows that forces more powerful than government, labor itself, and the
>> tragic ironies of human relations were largely responsible. The rich and
>> powerful Vibe is no match for the forces of Nature, ours and Hers, but the
>> battle has left the planet bleeding on the edge.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Heikki R
>> <situations.journeys.comedy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Already "Vineland"?
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 7:10 PM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think that's generally true but in his recent offerings the ambiguity
>>>> pro-offered is less ambiguous
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> or, since one of his 'values' seems to be anti-Either-Orness, one
>>>>> might reject the dichotomy in the choice as so presented and  embrace
>>>>> the poised ambiguities of meanings.
>>>>> As a value.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > "It becomes impossible to declare Pynchon's ultimate 'values' without
>>>>> > exposing yourself to the embarrassing admission that you may just want
>>>>> > Pynchon to share your values, and thus settle for one or another of
>>>>> > his
>>>>> > alternatives on that basis." (Mark Greif)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > http://www.publicbooks.org/nonfiction/the-trouble-with-modernity
>>>>> >
>>>>> -
>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l