Another Greif review

Dave Monroe against.the.dave at gmail.com
Mon May 25 15:14:52 CDT 2015 

To quote some marginalia from, as I recall, Sir Francis Bacon (in
what, I can't remember, but ...), "A Good One."

On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm appreciating the Greif quotation at the top of this thread more all the
> time. Thanks to all.
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I hope that those who like criticism have gotten round to Pynchon and the
>> Political
>> by Samuel Thomas and specifically to the essay or chapter on Resistance
>> vs. Withdrawal. Maybe these terms are better than the charged Left and
>> Right. Again, in SL Pynchon says the criminally insane since 1945, and that
>> would include maniacs from the Left and the Right, so, while Reagan and Bush
>> are obviously insane, Brock Vond insanity, Bush's threat to use the bomb or
>> tactical nukes ...etc....the insanity is not monopolized by the Right, for
>> the Left does more or less the same. So, while the lesser of two inanities,
>> the Left is still a position one must withdraw from. But is withdrawal
>> possible? Worth it?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, I remember. But what of his equally, no tougher critique of
>>> Organized Labor, of the New Left culture in NYC, of Marx in that same work?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Agreeing with the Left on most things ought to be a definition of being
>>>> a Lefty, in our discussion, unless one was so....all-inclusive as to also
>>>> agree with the Right on most things. Yes?
>>>> He does score on the political Right against the Bircherite and the Ayn
>>>> Rander in the early works, remember?
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On May 23, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A lot can change in 10 years, that is between V. and GR, and we can see
>>>> a shift begin during V. then with TSI, then in Watts, Lot49, so, but I
>>>> wouldn't say Pynchon was even then a Lefty, old or new. Agreeing with the
>>>> Left on most things doesn't make one a Lefty.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am ambivalent about my own arguments. You may be more Right than I
>>>>> tried to argue. I was attempting to define what might be Left or Liberal but
>>>>> nothing may really apply. ....the anti-Bomb ( d'uh) and anti-NIXON and
>>>>> anti-WW2 Gravity's Rainbow may have made us--me--overthink the political
>>>>> Left.
>>>>>
>>>>> My only question now is would any cultural or political conservative
>>>>> have embraced the human opening up of the sixties as possibility as he seems
>>>>> to? I remember many dim but famous bulbs excoriating them almost
>>>>> mercilessly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 23, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Agree on deeper conservatives. Smith, Burke, Eliot and others I
>>>>> mentioned. As well as some politicians.
>>>>> And, since modernism, being a visionary reactionary has changed, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 23, 2015, at 11:08 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We do have to acknowledge that many conservatives not the 1 percent
>>>>> mind you Aren't concerned with free markets. There's something deeper. Not
>>>>> the Michigan militia types either. The racists nope not them either.
>>>>> Who isn't afraid of "the people"? A natural distrust of mass movements
>>>>> and institutions. Been that way since the revolution.
>>>>> Modern politics has been hacked by modern finance most glaringly in the
>>>>> U.S and UK. Everyone rails against the abuses of Wall St and the City, left
>>>>> and right.
>>>>> I consider myself left of center but I no more believe government than
>>>>> most conservatives do.
>>>>> I see Pynch as a lifelong distrusted of institutions going back to the
>>>>> SI. Hard to think his anarchist leanings haven't grown stronger. What other
>>>>> viable choice is left?
>>>>>
>>>>> rich
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, May 23, 2015, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest he was Left, or Liberal, in this way: his critique of
>>>>>> History was that it had moved
>>>>>> Toward the anti-human. A left liberal believed THAT could have gone
>>>>>> differently, and in incremental ways, still could.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Conservatives, the Right, generally argue that the natural movement of
>>>>>> History is the way of the (free) world, masking Power---that Pynchon bad
>>>>>> shit--over the people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree that Pynchon transcends prosaic political ( as party, as
>>>>>> policy) literalisms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 23, 2015, at 6:44 AM, Jerome Park <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what a liberal is, or rather, what was meant when the
>>>>>> statement was made, and how we might equate that with the terms Left, Old
>>>>>> Left, New Left, but it seems obvious to me, anyway, that young Pynchon, the
>>>>>> subject of his SL Introduction, was no kind of Lefty, and that after V., as
>>>>>> the author notes on pages 22 and 23, as the author matures and shifts more
>>>>>> toward Beat and specifically White Negro to California phase, with the
>>>>>> publication of  "The Secret Integration" and the Watts Essay, Liberal, as in
>>>>>> Post-JFK/James Bond phase and toward LBJ Great Society phase may be an
>>>>>> appropriate description of the author, though with obvious latent issues of
>>>>>> Archie Bunkerisms, but not Lefty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Dave Monroe
>>>>>> <against.the.dave at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... the point having yet to have been  made.  I personally don't read
>>>>>>> V. as leaning much either way, but the Watts essay + Lot 49 I believe
>>>>>>> def. lean left(y), albeit not uncomplicatedly/uncritically so.  @ any
>>>>>>> rate, Pynchon doesn't lend himself easily to any political position.
>>>>>>> However ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "We'd sit and talk for hours," she said. "We'd argue all the time. He
>>>>>>> was a liberal and I was a conservative. Of course, he was always
>>>>>>> smarter than I was."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.theaesthetic.com/NewFiles/pynchon.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + thanks to Doug Millison for preserving the "on the other hand"
>>>>>>> quote
>>>>>>> I was looking for (+, as I recall, I 1st posted here, to no reaction
>>>>>>> [no puns where none intended, to paraphrase S. Beckett] otherwise
>>>>>>> whatsoever [?!]) ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Referring to conservative Cornellians (Wolfowitz is a 1965 Cornell
>>>>>>> graduate in mathematics), Corn showed his familiarity with university
>>>>>>> alumni when he said: 'I was accepted at Cornell and nearly attended.
>>>>>>> Thank you for giving us both Thomas Pynchon and Ann Coulter.'"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://pynchonoid.blogspot.com/2004/09/pynchon-coulter.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/04/9.23.04/Corn-Lowry_debate.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Meanwhile, here's an unexpected namedrop I found while poking around
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Among the graduates of the Ivy League Cornell are Ruth Bader
>>>>>>> Ginsburg, Thomas Pynchon, Paul Wolfowitz, E.B. White, Sanford I.
>>>>>>> Weill, Floyd Abrams, Kurt Vonnegut, Douglas Ginsburg, Janet Reno,
>>>>>>> Henry Heimlich and Harold Bloom."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2009-03-04.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:14 AM, Jerome Park
>>>>>>> <jeromepark3141 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Did someone say a collection of Pynchon's essays and letters, in
>>>>>>> > chronological order had been collected and published?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > In 66, that is, three years after V., Pynchon groping through white
>>>>>>> > negro
>>>>>>> > phase. Lot49, Watts.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > In the SL Introduction (1984) and Luddite (1984), we see a shift
>>>>>>> > emerging as
>>>>>>> > Pynchon says, "It may yet turn out that racial differences are not
>>>>>>> > as basic
>>>>>>> > as questions of money and power (page 11 top), and in that same
>>>>>>> > Intro he
>>>>>>> > reads his own stories noting and taking interest in class struggle,
>>>>>>> > but he's
>>>>>>> > not there yet.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'm not gonna dig into V. again to make the point.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:28 AM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I don't remember any evidence of this either. I'm not disputing
>>>>>>> >> you,
>>>>>>> >> just never thought to ask the question.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Dave Monroe
>>>>>>> >> <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >> > "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
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l

More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list