BtZ42 Section six. PP 38-42 (miller edition)

[Monte Davis]

Correction: make that "as an unreflective cog in the machine" -- because of
course he still is one.

I haven't read Catch-22 in many years, but ISTR Yossarian also has spells
of "why don't I just fly the damn missions and stop THINKING about it?"...

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Good question. I read these as transient exasperation -- that we're
> intended to come down on the side of "continuing to try makes him brave,"
> albeit with some ambivalence. There's a twist of wry reverse
> self-congratulation ("I care too much for this damn job"). I don't take
> seriously that he'd be more content as a cog in the machine.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Mark Sacha <msacha1121 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry if this has been mentioned already, playing catchup.
>>
>> But does anyone find it strange that Roger would prefer to work "in fire
>> control, or graphing Standardized Kill Rates Per Ton for the bomber
>> groups", all that McNamara-type number crunching to make death more
>> efficient, than the work he does at TWV? "this thankless meddling into the
>> affairs of invulnerable Death." I'm reading it that he maybe objects to the
>> intrusive nature of all the psychic business, concerned not with Death's
>> fact but its nature. Irony aside, it almost seems as if he's saying (and
>> this is what I can't parse) the former would put him outside of death's
>> employ.
>>
>> This is my second read, but I was a much worse reader during my first, so
>> it all feels pretty fresh. Thus my recollection of TWV is hazy at best.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Tracing P's women from Jessica thru the fascist-loving ones would be an
>>> interesting exercise.
>>>
>>> My only perspective here is to say Scorpia and Jessica are what are
>>> often referred to as 'tough" women regarding love. They can fall, be in it
>>> and NOT get hurt )usual meaning of 'tough' in this regard, I think).
>>>
>>> Their lovers are soft as boys. They fall hard. It hurts. They never
>>> forget; they never get over it (at least Roger won't, he sez fer sure)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:44 AM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Even with the Hollywood meet-cute aspects, it's hard not to take the
>>>> romance - They're in love - at face value. Jessica is never developed much
>>>> as a character, which counters the trend in Hollywood rom-coms of the 30s
>>>> and 40s (the skirt-lifting hitchhike is a trope used in It Happened One
>>>> Night. And maybe Sullivan's Travels?) But later in the book she's recast as
>>>> the cold-hearted status-husband-seeking Bitch (it's hinted at in the seance
>>>> scene, but dropped in this and the following Roger-Jessica scenes).
>>>>
>>>> Did Pynchon have it planned all along? Hard to say. Maybe he has her
>>>> turn in the Counterforce section of the book just to emphasize what Roger
>>>> is up against. At any rate, between being undeveloped first, and then
>>>> bitchified, she's one of the least likable of the not strictly villainous
>>>> (Gerda) female characters in the book. It seems, possibly, that she's the
>>>> foremother of all of Pynchon's later fascist-loving women.
>>>>
>>>> Laura
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> >Sent: Apr 20, 2016 9:24 AM
>>>> >To: John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com>
>>>> >Cc: P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>>> >Subject: Re: BtZ42 Section six. PP 38-42 (miller edition)
>>>> >
>>>> >But my romantic reading does have a problem w P's clear Hollywood Rom
>>>> Com text. Where do we come down on this? For me, it is in the context of
>>>> some kind of real lasting love organically happening because of peacetime
>>>> normal courtships but...milages vary.
>>>> >
>>>> >Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >
>>>> >On Apr 20, 2016, at 7:40 AM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> When I first read this part of GR in my 20s I thought Roger and
>>>> >> Jessica were the kind of fictional couple meant to offer hope or at
>>>> >> least some optimism for the reader. "They are in love. Fuck the war."
>>>> >> That now seems to me more ironic. Hollywood love is not an effective
>>>> >> anti-war strategy. Connect with AN ARMY OF LOVERS CAN BE BEATEN,
>>>> >> later. Or how Pirate, who we might figure is our hero at first,
>>>> >> becomes so sexually/politically manipulable so quickly. How so many
>>>> of
>>>> >> these players are sexual marionettes!
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm not arguing that Pynchon is arguing anything, but read in the
>>>> >> light of 1970s free love and the political shit going on and the
>>>> >> uneasy relationships between the sexual revolution and feminism and I
>>>> >> feel this whole thread of the novel records a pulse we have yet to
>>>> >> gauge.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> Not much happens, but a fair amount gets stated (framed). Roger &
>>>> Jessica are driving east to meet Pointsman and be part of his dognapping
>>>> scheme. But they "want to be together, in bed, at rest, in love" ( tied up
>>>> at the end of the section with another scene of being together, "touches
>>>> and looks, smiles together, curses for parting".   This ending with the
>>>> memorable "they are in love. Fuck the war". )
>>>> >>> We get the flashback story of their cute meet. Busted bike, slip
>>>> and thighs showing, rom com initial put downs (P has signaled the Hollywood
>>>> lensing) bike smashed and she's " in his power."
>>>> >>> UTTERLY. (But Roger knows she isn't)
>>>> >>> Then a rocket lands. The War intrudes.
>>>> >>> We learn more about Roger ( which we will get to elsewhere)
>>>> >>> Then we are with First Responders and the bombed.
>>>> >>> "War's state"
>>>> >>> Roger is part of The White Visitation and The Home Front
>>>> is..."fiction and a lie".
>>>> >>> Fuck the war.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone-
>>>> >>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>> >-
>>>> >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/20160427/433afb03/attachment.html>