Another Greif review

[Dave Monroe]

"he was no Lefty when he wrote V., and this is easy enough to get from
the novel"

How so?

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:22 PM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>
>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l