Another Greif review

[Jerome Park]

Pynchon ain't March, but that's another point; the point is, he was no
Lefty when he wrote V., and this is easy enough to get from the novel, but
P published several essays about his formative years, including the most
revealing Intro to the SL collection, but also BDSL Intro, and others, plus
the letters that have been made public, and these are proof that P was a
conservative white boy, catholic boy who was a-political, and then, like so
many of his generation, radicalized artistically and philosophically, and
politically and this shift, a California shift, if you will, was not
complete in GR, and even took on ironic, ambiguities (if you must) in VL,
then moved Left in his major works about workers in Amerika.

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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 others, it must be withdrawn from the author's works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 withdrawn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 if written in a different style, it must be withdrawn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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150521/52977e82/attachment.html>