BtZ42 Section 9 (pp 53-60): at the window while he sleeps

Wed May 18 06:58:22 CDT 2016

'varies' not "verses"....???

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

> We differ it seems. One of those ultimate interpretation possibilities
> that verses to many ....I see the threatening of cause and effect itself to
> point to science as an overdetermined explanation of the world,-- as well
> as a power play by Pointsman and Jamf et al,--if science is all the world
> IS.....I remember the fierce metaphysical satiric slam, if that is the
> correct description of Mondaugen's use of Wittgenstein's positivistic
> remark in V:
> Every third letter spells “GODMEANTNUURK,” which is an anagram for Kurt
> Mondaugen. ... letters read “DIEWELTISALL— ESWASDERFALLIST,” which is the
> opening line of Wittgenstein's Tractatus, “The world is all that the case
> is” (V. 278).
> This was received as a code, remember.
>
> I think P links it intellectually to determinism among other places where
> he has Roger see Spectro/Pointsman as
> Calvinist, in a quote I recently posted.. Calvinist determinism
> is anagogic here and beyond questions of power/control---as I see Roger
> saying it as a blow to scientific determinism, since he wants to believe in
> 'magic'.
>
> Esp when we see Pynchon actually repeat that phrase "you're gonna want
> cause & effect" almost sarcastically further on, *by the narrator,* as he
> then DOES subvert cause and effect in the text. P does allow the world to
> have stuff in it that is NOT "scientifically"--in a narrow logical
> positivism way---determined and he did not need all of this 'metaphysics'
> or "philosophy of science" if he were ONLY showing totalitarian control and
> domination, I suggest.
>
> P scores heavily against that whole positivistic strain of the Vienna
> Circle, from Carnap thru early Wittgenstein--a presence in TRP-- and
> lots in-between ,I think, thinking of the Vienna section of AtD (I have a
> personal reading story here for follow-up).
>
> it reminds me a little of Moby Dick, of course an allegory (and more)
> about a mad Leader of a multicultural Ship of State but
> Melville also adds the religious/metaphysical with some of Ahab's obsessed
> blasphemies. Starbuck knew it was more than personal madness: "Ahab's vow
> to dismember his dismemberer needs further exegesis. In this sinister
> allegorical framework, this sardonic promise to treat God even as God has
> treated Ahab amounts to another Melvillian burlesque of the Golden
> Rule."--one found snippet
>
> I see this GR interpretation as one way of parsing the Pynchon science
> question: Of course he believes in it and "loves' it and
> knows all it has done THAT is not used for power and domination over
> others (unless we see oversubduing nature as a necessary element of science
> gone bad from the beginning).  ONLY when it becomes to some the only
> answer; the controlling tower in a culture [LOt 49]; a technological
> step-function of Western history so high that one can't get back is it
> clearly BAD SHIT in TRP, I suggest.
>
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I submit that the fear, suspicion, and satire are directed not at
>> determinism -- or at science -- but at the ambition for control over other
>> people and over the course of history.
>>
>> On p. 56, Pointsman frets almost hysterically about Roger: "in his play
>> he wrecks the elegant rooms of history*, threatens the idea of cause and
>> effect itself... is it the end of history?" Is that Pynchon's own
>> mini-seminar in the philosophy of science, or science and society? Or is it
>> the voice of someone interested and invested in Slothrop as a step toward
>> predicting or averting the V-2s -- something his government paymasters want
>> very much, even if it means vivisecting Tyrone?
>>
>> The portentous "end of history" is just parodic Henry Adams dressing for
>> "My funding, my career prospects, and maybe even my Nobel Prize depend on
>> showing that there's a meaningful pattern to V-2 impacts, and something
>> that can be done about them... and Mexico is denying it!"
>>
>> * Himmler-Spielsaal, anyone?
>>
>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think that in GR Pynchon 'fears' the too-logical determinism of
>>> science.
>>> Fears (and investigates) that supposed determinism. Allows thru Roger and
>>> in other ways---The Counterforce?---a possible 'escape" while
>>>
>>> Yes, he satirizes everything, everything....esp maybe in GR and AtD.
>>> Fully,
>>> totally, mind-bogglingly, in a hard to find a footing way....
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 6:30 AM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does P fear science? I doubt this is a supportable thesis. He
>>>> certainly doesn't condemn it. Nor do all creative souls. So, Monte is
>>>> making a point with sarcasm. What point? That foxes and dogs.....?
>>>> Science, along with nearly all other institutions of power, of western
>>>> culture and history, is subjected to P's satire. So, BTW, is art,
>>>> religion, philosophy, mathematics, psychology, history, linguistics,
>>>> statistics, Chemistry, economics, physics, biology, philology,
>>>> anthropology....and so on. All are satirized with the conventional
>>>> weapons of the satirist. For example, the obsession with The Book, is
>>>> conventional. So much that P does in GR is not novel. The Book, the
>>>> obsession with the Rocket, the quest...etc. One conventional strategy
>>>> of the satirist is mock erudition. P loves this tool and uses it
>>>> brilliantly. He also makes use of the satirist's cranks and hysterical
>>>> characterization. He loves parodistic encyclopedism.
>>>>
>>>> As Kharpertian says, pp. 108-109, it
>>>>
>>>> exposes all explanatory codes as partial, problematic, or repressive,
>>>> and the rejection of the monological nature of such autonomous codes
>>>> leads to radical fusion and fantastic alternatives.
>>>>
>>>> A Hand to Turn the Time the Menippean Satires of Thomas Pynchon
>>>>
>>>> Theodore D. Kharpertian
>>>>
>>>> Kharpertian goes to school on decades of Pyndustry publications and,
>>>> in a dense and clear style, shows how the ideas of V. and CL49 are
>>>> combinesd in P's masterwork.  Not the first to recognize P as
>>>> satirist, more specifically, Menippean Satirist, but a fine work,
>>>> dense and clearly composed. Easy to read.
>>>>
>>>> But we know all this so....
>>>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Monte writes:
>>>> > 58.24: "Pointsman’s... his... a bleakness whenever she meets him.
>>>> > Scientist-neutrality." How does that differ from Roger's commitment
>>>> to the
>>>> > data and only the data about rocketfalls, which was only recently
>>>> "cheap
>>>> > cynicism"...? Or is Roger's version of neutrality less creepy to her
>>>> > *because* it makes him uncomfortable even as he insists on it? NB he
>>>> > repeatedly, parodically *plays* the mad scientist in exchanges with
>>>> her. If
>>>> > I didn't know that Pynchon fears and condemns science like all good
>>>> creative
>>>> > souls, I'd think there's some quite interesting ambivalence being
>>>> modeled
>>>> > here.
>>>> >
>>>> > There IS a good mini-essay here on science and Pynchon in GR), which
>>>> Monte
>>>> > might write. Focussing leads me to offer
>>>> > THIS possible reading: Roger believes that there might be SOMETHING
>>>> > ("magic") beyond the "scientific", beyond the measurement of material
>>>> > reality. ( One might be reminded of Oedipa's "something beyond the
>>>> visible"
>>>> > or not).
>>>> >
>>>> > Pointsman has no such belief. His science-neutrality is really a
>>>> > positivistic belief in nothing but science.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com
>>>> >
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> end of P. 57 -> P. 58
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Foxes and dogs again, among the latter a painted pointer "alerted by
>>>> the
>>>> >> eternal scent, the explosion over his head always just about to
>>>> come." Good
>>>> >> boy, Tyrone!
>>>> >>
>>>> >> http://www.old-print.com/mas_assets/full3/J5141807/J5141807448.jpg
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/43/02/f0/4302f06cbc44b3b2e6fbc371f51b2bce.jpg
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What makes these images -- standard English fare at the time  for
>>>> exurban
>>>> >> bourgeois as well as country-house aristocracy -- "even more
>>>> autumnal,
>>>> >> necropolitical, than prewar hopes"..? This section has reminded us
>>>> before
>>>> >> and will remind us again that Roger & Jessica's evasion  of the war
>>>> is
>>>> >> temporary and precarious -- but here we're told that golden autumnal
>>>> meadows
>>>> >> are *becoming* a City of the Dead (necropolis). Just a _memento
>>>> mori_ for
>>>> >> the lovers, for a nostalgic English self-image? More?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 58.11-15: something blocks Roger's speech, and "how does she know...
>>>> so
>>>> >> exactly what Roger meant to say?" (Reinforcing 56.37's "Roger really
>>>> wants
>>>> >> other people to know what he’s talking about. Jessica understands
>>>> that.") A
>>>> >> hug, melting into arousal for both, is more than a consolation prize
>>>> for
>>>> >> "failure to communicate" -- it *is* communication, "mind-to-mind."
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 58.16 brings us back to the framing night of winter solstice.
>>>> Perhaps the
>>>> >> clinch just above was earlier the same night -- the section began
>>>> with
>>>> >> "pillows in front of the fire. Roger’s clothing... scattered all
>>>> about." Or
>>>> >> perhaps all their nights here are one, off the timeline and off the
>>>> books.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 58.24: "Pointsman’s... his... a bleakness whenever she meets him.
>>>> >> Scientist-neutrality." How does that differ from Roger's commitment
>>>> to the
>>>> >> data and only the data about rocketfalls, which was only recently
>>>> "cheap
>>>> >> cynicism"...? Or is Roger's version of neutrality less creepy to her
>>>> >> *because* it makes him uncomfortable even as he insists on it? NB he
>>>> >> repeatedly, parodically *plays* the mad scientist in exchanges with
>>>> her. If
>>>> >> I didn't know that Pynchon fears and condemns science like all good
>>>> creative
>>>> >> souls, I'd think there's some quite interesting ambivalence being
>>>> modeled
>>>> >> here.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 58.33: "And the people who might have been asleep in the empty
>>>> houses here
>>>> >> . .., are they dreaming of cities that shine all over with lamps at
>>>> night,
>>>> >> of Christmases seen again from the vantage of children and not of
>>>> sheep
>>>> >> huddled so vulnerable on their bare hillside, so bleached by the
>>>> Star’s
>>>> >> awful radiance?"
>>>> >> Spoilers be damned, this is a sweet foretaste of the Advent evensong
>>>> >> coming up three nights from now (p. 127)
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160518/497e901a/attachment.html>