GR translation: their own pitiable contingency here, in its midst

[Mark Kohut]

Seems to me Gestell has two separately framable,I.e. Not identical,  meanings in the first two sentences. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 11, 2017, at 3:32 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> > If both the people launching the rockets and those being targeted by them are victims
> of pure chance, then who or what, if anything, is controlling the rockets? <
> 
> I'd say it's --- the Gestell (enframing).
> > ... In defining the essence of technology as Gestell, Heidegger indicated that all that has come to presence in the world has been enframed. Thus what is revealed in the world, what has shown itself as itself (the truth of itself) required first an Enframing, literally a way to exist in the world, to be able to be seen and understood. Concerning the essence of technology and how we see things in our technological age, the world has been framed as the "standing-reserve." Heidegger writes,
> 
> Enframing means the gathering together of that setting-upon which sets upon man, i.e., challenges him forth, to reveal the real, in the mode of ordering, as standing-reserve. Enframing means that way of revealing which holds sway in the essence of modern technology and which is itself nothing technological.
> 
> Furthermore, Heidegger uses the word in a way that is uncommon by giving Gestell an active role. In ordinary usage the word would signify simply a display apparatus of some sort, like a book rack, or picture frame; but for Heidegger, Gestell is literally a challenging forth, or performative "gathering together", for the purpose of revealing or presentation ... <
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestell
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Question_Concerning_Technology
> http://www.psyp.org/question_concerning_technology.pdf
> 
> The human being is not the lord of beings, but the shepherd of Being.
> Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/martin_heidegger.html The human being is not the lord of beings, but the shepherd of Being.
> Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/martin_heidegger.html 
>> Am 07.05.2017 um 01:50 schrieb jody boy:
>>  Pitiable contingency is one of three qualities that together define
>> their existence,
>> here, along with the War and the "absolute rule of chance." There would seem to
>> be an ironic connection between their condition and our narrator's
>> suggestion, not
>> sure where in the text, that we, too, "will want cause and effect" the
>> absolute lack
>> of which is as terrifying as its opposite- everything being caught in
>> a causal web of
>> connection. Of course, causality and contingency are not mutually exclusive, but
>> in a universe ruled by absolute chance, causality is ultimately meaningless. Not
>> that meaninglessness is such a bad thing...
>> 
>> Ironic, too, in the sense of Roger Mexico's suggestion that Pointsman's focus on
>> causality in his zeal to unravel the connection between Slothrop's map
>> and the V2
>> strikes in London, is outdated, and that he needs to move beyond cause
>> and effect
>> in order to come to terms with the two distinct yet complementary phenomenon.
>> 
>> If both the people launching the rockets and those being targeted by
>> them are victims
>> of pure chance, then who or what, if anything, is controlling the
>> rockets? Which leads us
>> back to the consequences of Slothrop's conditioning forming an
>> ?unintended? connection
>> between cause and effect.
>> 
>> On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> V96.5-16, P97.40-98.10   How seriously is she playing? In a conquered
>>> country, one’s own occupied country, it’s better, she believes, to
>>> enter into some formal, rationalized version of what, outside,
>>> proceeds without form or decent limit day and night, the summary
>>> executions, the roustings, beatings, subterfuge, paranoia, shame . . .
>>> though it is never discussed among them openly, it would seem Katje,
>>> Gottfried, and Captain Blicero have agreed that this Northern and
>>> ancient form, one they all know and are comfortable with—the strayed
>>> children, the wood-wife in the edible house, the captivity, the
>>> fattening, the Oven—shall be their preserving routine, their shelter,
>>> against what outside none of them can bear—the War, the absolute rule
>>> of chance, their own pitiable contingency here, in its midst. . . .
>>> 
>>> What does "contingency" mean here?
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>> -
>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=nchon-l
>> .
>> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170511/ab2d3611/attachment.html>