Literary discussion?

[ish mailian]

A conservative idea: the more things change the more they remain the same.

What is it that does not change?

Is it the basic ingredients? The elements out of which all things spring?

Or is it a design? Some principle that guides all things? To....a good?

The Minister of Trade in the Man in the High Castle with his Book of
Changes?




On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com> wrote:

> Never got to the New Yorker piece, but given the same work, say,
> Submission, the actual effect on the reader may be more a function of
> reader age than of author intent. The Young laugh at the misbehavior
> scornfully, believing human conduct must change. The laughter in the Old is
> more of a chuckle, knowing the more things change the more they are the
> same.
>
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I like the parsing of this distinction. Maybe that is the best way to
>> understand it.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I would think a sincere satirist was one who cared about the effect his
>> work
>> > has on readers.  If he or she wants to change readers' consciousness
>> they're
>> > sincere.  Not sure about which category H fits into. Some call him a
>> > nihilist, not caring about nothin'.  But he's a fine writer.
>> >
>> > Kindle readers like me don't get to see the dust jacket.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Becky Lindroos <bekker2 at icloud.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Submission has been on my wish list for some time - it just got
>> boosted to
>> >> very soon after the new year.   Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> Bek
>> >>
>> >> > On Dec 30, 2015, at 5:39 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > the jacket for SUBMISSION quotes Adam Gopnick ( New Yorker) calling
>> >> > Houellebecq " not only a satire but a sincere ( in italics) satirist,
>> >> > genuinely saddened by the absurdities of history And  madnesses of
>> mankind"
>> >> >
>> >> > My question: how does a sincere satirist differ from an insincere
>> one?
>> >> > Only answer I can think of is that it is Effective, real, artistic
>> >> > satire--contrasted with failed satire, not right, not deep, not
>> original.
>> >> > .....
>> >> > Pynchon's satire is sincere, right? swift's, of course, right?  I
>> >> > thought it was a virtual truism that the best satire springs from
>> idealism (
>> >> > sincere) showing up the real world's failings.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sent from my iPad-
>> >> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>> >>
>> >> -
>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160102/bbe1d2d1/attachment.html>