Katje's peer

[Paul Mackin]

Does p. 695 pass as deconsturction?

No proof declares Ives . . . .
Alas beems the revd . . . .
These family stories have been perfected in the hellish forge of Domestic
Recession . . . .till what survives is the pure truth . . . .
no matter how stretched or embellished .  . . .
Don't leave out irresponsible embellishments (sez Ives) . . . .

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 5:51 AM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:

> GR is too deconstructive for the usual Western rationality. Not sure I
> understand this, but the novel certainly is "deconstructive" in that
> it questions traditional assumptions about certainty, identity, and
> truth. And because it is so deconstructive it makes for difficult
> reading, often undermines reason, traditional expectations of Western,
> 'rational" reading.
>
> If I'm reading Bruno right here, the archives of the WASTE for GR are
> support for his assertion.
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170104/41d720c8/attachment.html>