"Fun Was Actually Becoming Quite Subversive" (Molly Hite)
Ray Easton
raymond.lee.easton at gmail.com
Mon Mar 28 15:29:27 CDT 2016
Even though I completely agree with the bigger point Monte is making, I too
tend to read this particular scene in Debbie Downer fashion. I find, as
Laura said, an air of desperation about it all.
Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
On March 28, 2016 3:19:47 PM <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
> I'm sympathetic to anyone who's able to read this as a fun comfort-food
> fest. No demands that anyone adhere to my glummer view. Won't be the first
> time I've been accused of being a party-pooper. Guilty as charged!
>
> Debbie Downer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Kohut
> Sent: Mar 28, 2016 3:47 PM
> To: kelber
> Cc: Monte Davis , Kai Frederik Lorentzen , pynchon -l
> Subject: Re: "Fun Was Actually Becoming Quite Subversive" (Molly Hite)
>
> My vote is for Monte and Kai on this one. Life Against Death. The Buddha
> and the Tiger parable.
> That breakfast is presented as a wonderful embodiment of 'organic',
> earth-bound--a good word for our naturalness in life---
> enjoyment. .......of plenitude beyond reality out of rich soil amidst the
> bureaucratic death-wishing surroundings.......
> ....like the rich 'fish and plants' ending of M & D.....
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:27 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> I don't see much fun in the description of the Banana breakfast - the tone
> is more of a surreal, desperate attempt to forget what's happening outside.
> It's not Pynchon who's saying fuck off, but "the high intricacy of the
> weaving of its [the musaceous odor] molecules.
>
> Earlier, on the roof: "Pirate has become famous for his Banana Breakfasts …
> the politics of bacteria, the soils stringing of rings and chains in nets
> only God can tell the meshes of, having seen the fruit thrive to lengths of
> a foot and a half, yes, amazing but true." These are unnatural bananas,
> grown in the shadow of the power station and the gasworks.
>
> Why the references to molecules here? They're the first of many references
> to organic (i.e. unnatural) chemistry. Similarly, I don't think the Adenoid
> appears as a random, comic incident. Pynchon isn't going to write about the
> holocaust directly, but it hovers in the background. At least that's how I
> read it.
>
> LK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Monte Davis
> Sent: Mar 28, 2016 11:11 AM
> To: Mark Kohut
> Cc: Kai Frederik Lorentzen , pynchon -l , kelber
> Subject: Re: "Fun Was Actually Becoming Quite Subversive" (Molly Hite)
>
> "...a wonderful breakfast... the scent alone is enough to ward of[f] death,
> Pynchon famously says “Fuck Death.” So by indulging in this pleasure, they
> are able to escape death, they are able to escape the trajectory of human
> nature even if just for a morning.. maybe by not denying these pleasures we
> might be able to get out of the arc of human nature..."
>
> This is more or less how I read the banana breakfast, too: Bakhtin's
> carnival, Brueghel's land of Cockaigne, a celebration of excess mocking
> wartime austerity. Yes, it's anomalous in the novel's larger world: an
> island or oasis or refuge, just as the rooftop bananery is an artificial
> enclosure against December chill, just as its bananas are luxuries
> available only to these officers with connections. Still, "a spell, against
> falling objects" seems to me as good as it gets in that world.
>
> Which is why I respectfully disagree with part of Laura's discussion last week:
>
> LK> The musaceous odor. Anyone who's ever taken organic chemistry (did
> Pynchon? Anyone know?) has probably synthesized banana ester in the lab.
> it's a standard lab exercise, and it's easy to know if you've got it right,
> by that musaceous odor ... So even when Pynchon is talking about Nature (in
> this case, unnaturally growing bananas), he's reminding us how easy it is
> for science to mimic it, or to tear apart and exploit the delicate molecules.
>
> There are certainly many places in GR where industrial organic (and
> inorganic) chemical technology has an unmistakably evil, negative,
> anti-human or even "anti-life" context and emotional affect. BUT NOT, I
> mildly demur, HERE!
>
> Pynchon gives us "peculiar alkaloids" in the bananery's long-composted
> soil... "the politics of bacteria, the soil’s stringing of rings and chains
> in nets only God can tell the meshes of"... "musaceous odor..."
> "taking over not so much through any brute pungency or volume as by the
> high intricacy to the weaving of its molecules"... "genetic chains...
> labyrinthine enough to preserve some human face down ten or twenty generations"
>
> But does he, HERE, say or imply anything about artificial synthesis (as
> contrasted with life's proliferating variety)? Does he say anything about a
> "mimicked" smell as distinct from the real smell of real yummy 'nanas? Are
> there any "delicate" molecules being "torn apart" and "exploited" here --
> other than as life has routinely, "by its nature" done so 24/7 for a few
> billion years before IG Farben came along? No.
>
> I'm fine with Laura writing about her associations, which I believe were
> brought on by Pynchon's uses (above) of chemical and biological vocabulary
> and concepts. In fact, I share them: I've made isoamyl acetate and
> isopentyl acetate, too. But that's quite different from "Pynchon is
> reminding us" of "science" doing any such thing. In fact, I read those
> phrases above as integral to the unmistakably positive, celebratory
> "flavor" of the banana breakfast -- not as a coded warning that exploitive
> synthetic technology is lurking beneath. The weaving and unweaving of
> molecules *is*, explicitly, "a charm, against falling objects."
>
> Here's a reader I respect and admire, and a stock response that runs
> through fifty years of Pynchonology: "Everyone knows that Pynchon mistrusts
> and fears and warns us about science and technology, so wherever their
> vocabulary and concepts crop up, he's on the attack."
>
> This matters to me, as I wrote at length in the exchanges here in June of
> 2013: https://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=1306&msg=174066 ,
> etc etc etc...
>
> It leads, again and again, to systematic ignoring and misreading of
> positive, mixed and ambivalent contexts and associations for P's uses of
> scientific and technical vocabulary, concepts, and perspectives. Fair
> warning: I'll be coming back to this throughout the BtZ42, and throughout
> GR if we continue.
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "having evidently the time, in his travels among places of death, to devote
> to girl-chasing"---p.19 Miller edition
>
> I believe Ms. Hite is the one who also said, when encountering the claim
> that the Whole Sick Crew were 'hysterical' caricatures
> said: "I knew these people' IRL.
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
> <lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>
>> Molly Hite’s critical work with Pynchon published in 2004 has the
>> title “Fun Actually Was Becoming Quite Subversive.” It is an
>> interesting title, because it originated somewhere completely
>> different than Gravity’s Rainbow, in fact it came from the 1969 trial
>> of the Chicago Seven, a group of young men from antiwar and
>> revolutionary groups accused of disrupting the 1968 Democratic
>> Convention. This was considered a very important trial in the
>> counterculture movement, something Pynchon famously embraced in his
>> works. The exact quote originated from the testimony of Abbie Hoffman
>> and reads “fun was very important… it was a direct rebuttal of the
>> kind of ethics and morals that were being put forth in the country to
>> keep people working in a rate race.” Hite uses this to introduce her
>> interpretation of Pynchon. She argues that “the idea of fun could
>> subvert an oppressive capitalist structure is central to this novel
>> of excess.”
> Molly Hite uses Herbert Marcuse’s 1955 culture synthesis Eros and
> Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud to help frame
> her argument, and plainly states that this work must have
> influenced Pynchon. Marcuse claims that the period of time, which
> this book was written in, was a period of great productivity and
> excess, and with the technological advances, it became economically
> feasible to have a “leisure culture.” However with this culture of
> leisure comes a raising of standards and consequently a
> “surplus-repression.” This is repression is the repression of
> Freudian pleasures, conceding or flat out rejecting the
> gratification of many desires which Freud saw as necessary for a
> society to organize and survive. Marcuse argues that by denying
> these pleasures principles that “advanced civilizations are in
> danger from a second group of instinctive impulses striving for
> death.” This, Hite states, is where we get the dramatization of the
> destruction from the rocket, as it becomes global. She argues “The
> V-2 Rocket rises under human guidance..” and this is where we
> understand the “death drive.” This is the natural tendency of
> society, to progress to a certain point, and then fall into the
> death drive; the arc of human civilization not unlike the arc of
> the bomb.
> Hite states that Pynchon understood Marcuse’s possibility of escape
> from postindustrial destruction, and encoded it in his book,
> however slight this chance might be. By not becoming individuals we
> are doomed to, as individuality in Gravity’s Rainbow is
> synonymous with disrupting the productivity and subsequent
> regression of human nature. This is where the overt sexual tones of
> the book come from, especially the more risqué ones. These sexual
> acts are done not in hopes of productivity, or reproducing, but
> simply out of pleasure. By not denying these pleasures and becoming
> individual of the society, we can escape the trajectory of
> destruction. Hite does acknowledge that these chances are
> incredibly small, that betrayal and self-defeating tendencies are
> built into the system, that “every revolution has been a betrayed
> revolution.” So for Hite’s interpretation, humanity is at stake,
> the trajectory is annihilation, and Pynchon offers a way to escape
> that trajectory.
> I would like to agree with Hite in her thinking. In the very
> beginning of the novel, we are introduced with a very dark image of
> the concentration camp, with people being ushered into a bleak
> hotel. At that hotel, they wait quietly for the bomb to drop
> without any hope left. Right after we get that dark image, we are
> given one of the most colorful scenes in the novel, the banana
> breakfast. After a night of indulging in alcohol to excess, Pirate
> wakes up and picks bananas, something that was rationed during the
> time period. He then begins to cook a wonderful breakfast
> consisting of banana everything, and the scent alone is enough to
> ward of death, Pynchon famously says “Fuck Death.” So by indulging
> in this pleasure, they are able to escape death, they are able to
> escape the trajectory of human nature even just for a morning. I
> believe scenes like this are a clear road map that Pynchon gives
> us, that maybe by not denying these pleasures we might be able to
> get out of the arc of human nature, or in Pynchon’s work, the
> literal bomb. The chances are slim however, these people are
> protected only as long as the scent of the banana breakfast wafts
> over them, but the chance does exist.
>
> Hite, Molly, “‘Fun Was Actually Becoming Quite Subversive’: Herbert
> Marcuse, the Yippies, and the Value System of Gravity’s Rainbow,”
> Contemporary Literature 51.4 (Winter 2010): 677-702. <
>
> https://englit0500.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/fun-actually-was-actually-becoming-subversive/
>
> - Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?liston-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160328/1b267516/attachment.html>
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list