BtZ42 the Oven chapter

[David Morris]

Without reaction to other's words, we are just making statements, not
conversing.  Unless I bounce back what I understand you to say, with my
reactions, your words don't grow into a bigger context of conversation, and
are thus still born.  Nothing I can say, even if insults, controls your
expression.  So lighten up.  I'm surprised that this needs being said.

David Morris

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> >  Calling such characterizations "signifiers" doesn't excuse their
> insults to those being portrayed thus.
> I never intended to excuse anything, and I didn’t excuse anything. That is
> in your head.  And decadence is just another inadequate word, not
> particularly better or worse than my similarly inadequate phrase. It is
> actually one I considered, but rejected as not what I wanted to say.
>
> I would appreciate if you would just say what you have to say and let me
> say what I have to say and refrain from putting words in my mouth.
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 2016, at 9:12 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > GR and V both play with the concept of decadence, which is I guess what
> you mean by "degradation of spirit."  He is portraying what he saw as
> societal root flaws in these examples of decadence.  In V. his morality is
> aghast at Esther's abortion.  Such nearly fundamentalist judgements are
> surprising for one so obviously nimble of mind.  Calling such
> characterizations "signifiers" doesn't excuse their insults to those being
> portrayed thus.  If he had portrayed blacks in a bad light, as dumb or
> callous except for their appetites, would he be excused?  His only excuse
> is immaturity of perspective for a probable myriad of reasons.  He is
> forgiven because of all the beautiful things that overshadow his errors.
> >
> > He was amazing, but not perfect.
> >
> > David Morris
> >
> > On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > In GR homosexuality serves as a signifier of degradation of spirit. The
> focus is on extremes of submission and dominance as though that were
> defining attributes of same gender male love. This  oversimplification has
> obviously changed by the tme he writes ATD. In V one could easily see
> implications of mysogyny.  It seems by the later writing gays and women can
> be heroic or they can be criminal jerks.  Gender or Sexual preference is no
> longer the same kind of indicator.
> >
> > > On Jun 21, 2016, at 8:00 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, his take on gays back then was badly flawed. So what? He ain't
> perfect, then nor now. Who is?
> > >
> > > David Morris
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016, Smoke Teff <smoketeff at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > Copying and pasting Mark's question in case anybody didn't make it to
> the bottom of his message. I don't necessarily think the answer to the
> enveloping question is yes, but I think it's important to think with
> clarity, caution, courage about what the answer might be.
> > >
> > > MK: What's with TRP and gays? Does this 'attitude'--is it part of his
> vision and how?---date (and weaken)
> > > GR?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jun 21, 2016, at 6:07 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What's with TRP and gays? Does this 'attitude'--is it part of his
> vision and how?---date (and weaken)
> > > > GR?
> > > -
> > > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
> >
> > -
> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-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/20160622/bf3ead4c/attachment.html>