Tangentially Pynchon. see today's Google Doodle

[John Bailey]

Oh! I finally got the joke!
Wherein the P-list debates the definition of anarchy.
I'm with Joseph.
But what we really need is a someone who can authorise which
definition is correct.


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> To my thinking this is semantic. If by anarchic we mean mean an organizational tendency from less to no central authority or command, then Mark and other writers are using the term reasonably. If one means a political ideology with no executive decision makers and a committment to  removing those in authority, then you win...
>> On May 4, 2016, at 5:13 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> To champion grass-roots  social-based urbanism (championing "urban villages," essentially) as opposed to the modernist urban renewal ideals of her time, doesn't make her in any way anarchistic.  She was opposed to Modernism's ideals for urbanism.  It has now long been recognized that her concepts of an organic people-oriented urbanism is much more livable than what she opposed.  Essentially she was pointing out that the ghettos that were being torn down were much more livable that the Pruitt-Igoe style urbanism that was being proposed to replace it.  She was right.  Labeling that stance as "anarchism" is silly and misses the main ideas she promoted.
>>
>> This (Pruitt-Igoe) is what she opposed:
>>
>>  http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/22/pruitt-igoe-high-rise-urban-america-history-cities
>>
>> And the earlier city which surrounds the project (which was not the product of anarchy in any meaningful sense - except as opposed to Pruitt-Igoe)  in the photo is what she championed.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> There is a deep strain of human-sized, freedom-embracing, non-top-down, self-organizing activities which
>> have been written about even here as 'anarchism'. See the anarchist dance in Lot 49.
>>
>> Jacob's vision of city life has been seen under these concepts by many for a long time: Here is the estimable
>> Richard Sennet for one: As Jane Jacobs points out, high concentration of dwelling units per acre and high land coverage are essential to the ... 1969), and the appreciative review by Richard Sennett, “The Anarchism of Jane Jacobs,” New York Review of Books ...
>>
>> There are scores more which I am not hunting down. it is her vision of urban living, and parts of mumford's which might relate
>> them to Pynchon and are what I was referring to.
>>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 4:12 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jane Jacobs was in no way connected to anarchism, but, like Mumford, she was a proponent of urban living, as are most architects just about anywhere...
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> about urban theorist Jane Jacobs. Read up and see that
>> she shared many notions with Lewis Mumford, discussed a lot
>> here on the List. Her ideas of a vibrant diverse 'anarchic' street
>> and storefront life might dovetail with many of P's meanings of anarchic goodness.
>>
>> Remember that she lived in Greenwich Village, near Barthelme (therefore
>> Pynchon) I believe and Grace Paley and her husband
>> most of the time TRP was supposed to have
>> lived there. I think.
>>
>> Everything connects.
>>
>>
>>
>
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l