BEg2 Chap 8: Adam Bombs! Eve of Destruction

Tue Dec 14 02:01:20 UTC 2021

I was clearly being too literal. I officially rescind my statement about dead bodies. What I really meant was that you seem to all to frequently support US regime change operations. As far as I can tell these have produced nothing positive  and many dead bodies. I think every US war since vietnam was immoral and wrong. In the large picture I too am neutral on dead bodies since it does make room for live bodies and keeps the evolutionary ball rolling. Perhaps it is time to move away from the politics of dead bodies and get back to pynchon and BE, since that is the basis of ths list serve.

> On Dec 13, 2021, at 6:25 PM, Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
> Just confirming Quail's doubts about me "loving dead bodies", whether past,
> present or future.
> 
> I do not love dead bodies. Don't even LIKE them, really. In fact,
> considering every living body will eventually become a dead one, I'd have
> to say I'm neutral towards dead bodies by necessity.
> 
> As for all the various processes that CREATE surplus dead bodies, THAT is
> where things get complicated.
> 
> Jerky
> 
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 6:03 PM Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I understand that you didn't think I said it. But because you quoted *my*
>> post, and started with "But I thought..." Well, that's pretty standard
>> sarcasm there, and it certainly seemed you were conflating my post with
>> Mark's, or at the very least, challenging me to publicly disagree with
>> Mark. The "I'm getting confused here" part also contributed to the
>> sarcastic tenor of the reply. And if you were attempting to be tongue and
>> cheek, it was certainly undermined by your last post, which accused Mark:
>> "he seems to like dead bodies." I doubt Mark likes dead bodies, and I
>> suspect you don't really believe that, either.
>> 
>> I am genuinely not trying to pile on, start an argument, or rile you up. I
>> appreciate your insightful comments, your hard work interpreting Pynchon,
>> and your willingness to discuss any topic. I have been thoroughly enjoying
>> the BE group read, and I recognize your part in keeping things on-track.
>> But I do occasionally feel your tone is sometimes more argumentative than
>> it needs to be, particularly when your interlocutor is not attacking you
>> personally. (I am not talking about your beef with David or Mark K. here,
>> either.)
>> 
>> Thanks, and I hope I am clear. I feel that I've said my piece, and I have
>> no ill feelings. I look forward to discussing Chapter 9.
>> 
>> —Quail
>> 
>> PS: We do actually disagree on this, though: nuclear annihilation can
>> definitely be funny—"Dr. Strangelove" comes to mind, as does the Fallout
>> video game franchise. And—you don't think "Duck and Cover" is hysterical?
>> 
>> On 12/13/21, 5:34 PM, "Joseph Tracy" <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>> 
>>    I did not accuse you of this idea that humans are evil. I ascribed
>> that notion to MT because he actually said it. ( from M T -"In fact, far
>> from an evil, I suspect that the wiping out of our all-devouring species
>> could easily be seen and argued as a GOOD for the planet.")  .
>>      So Allen.  I Understand perfectly well what you said and  agree. I
>> was attempting tongue in cheek ala Colbert with a twist of anarchy.  As to
>> what Thibodeau means, ??? I only know what he says. He seems to like dead
>> bodies , the more the better, whether  in Syria or the glowing  future. The
>> part of me that agrees is a rogue and a fake, a liar with a twisted sense
>> of humor. Try re-reading my thibadeu posts and you will understand.
>>      I was trying to be funny about something that isn’t funny. There
>> just aren’t that many good jokes about nuclear or ecological annihilation.
>> I guess there’s a reason for that.
>> 
>>> On Dec 13, 2021, at 5:04 PM, Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hey now! I never said humans were all evil sinners, etc. True, while
>> sometimes I feel exactly like that—what monsieur Thibodeau said—I usually
>> recognize that kind of nihilism in myself for what it is, and I try to
>> shake it off and remember puppies, and tacos, and that Rush is the greatest
>> band ever. So no, I don't want the world purged in fire, and I don't think
>> Mark really does, either, or he'd be on a Michel Houellebecq or Thomas
>> Ligotti list! (Not that there's anything wrong with that! I admire both
>> writers.)
>>> 
>>> So I'm not sure why you are confused? Mark and I had similar, but
>> different opinions on your post. And I think I was being polite? While I
>> have disagreed with you on a few things, I believe I have been civil. And
>> even then, it's not like I vehemently disagree with you here: "OH NO! Let's
>> destroy the earth, that would be grand!" I'm just saying that even if we
>> did nuke the earth, my glowing ghost would be sadder at the loss and
>> failure of humanity than all the other extinct creatures; creatures that'll
>> get replaced, like they have countless times in the past, every time Gaia
>> rolled over in her sleep. Nor do I see what my post had to do with America,
>> first, last, or middle. I'm not attacking you, Joe. I like America a lot,
>> but she's an abusive partner and really needs constant therapy.
>>> 
>>> Or *is* this Chinatown? Am I gonna get my beak slashed, walk around
>> all movie with a Band-Aid?
>>> 
>>> —Quail
>>> 
>>> On 12/13/21, 4:01 PM, "Pynchon-l on behalf of Joseph Tracy" <
>> pynchon-l-bounces at waste.org on behalf of brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>   But I thought all humans were evil sinners  and the universe
>> would be better off without us. So you think Thibodeau got that wrong? I’m
>> getting confused here. I don’t even know what we’re weighing against what.
>> And who is going to hold the scale? There’s a lot of biomass involved.
>> Here I am trying to renounce my foolish and inauthentic America Last
>> position for a  more patriotic and semi- sincere, though I sometimes can’t
>> tell, America First stance and I am getting corrective remonstrance from
>> both ends. Look, I only have one tongue and 2 cheeks; I’ m doing the best I
>> can.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Dec 13, 2021, at 3:23 PM, Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The part of me that's actually a chemist and former astronomy
>> teacher has to weigh in here:
>>>> 
>>>> "The planet and green stuff and animals and shit" is the last thing
>> I’d worry about regarding nuclear bombs. Nature is SO MUCH MORE
>> catastrophic than humans. Think about the asteroid that whacked the
>> dinosaurs. Or long before that, the "Great Dying," in which rising CO2
>> levels possibly caused by volcanic eruptions caused mass extinctions the
>> likes of which stagger the imagination. And there were many other "smaller"
>> extinction events. The universe can behave like a hostile, indifferent
>> place, and old Mother Nature has gobbled down her children wholesale on
>> countless occasions. Hell, the very oxygen we breathe now was DEADLY POISON
>> to much early life on earth: wiped 'em out of existence without blinking an
>> eye. (Or a pair of Os.) And I have some news for you re: 5 billion years
>> from now...
>>>> 
>>>> So yeah, it's the destruction of humans I worry about more. Mother
>> Nature will always cook up more animals and green stuff, but I don't want
>> to be replaced by crab people. (And this isn't to argue with you, Joe—I
>> know you also care about human life! I'm just putting it into perspective.)
>>>> 
>>>> —Quail
>>>> 
>>>> PS: On a related note—indifferent, hostile universe and all—thank
>> you for the Lovecraft/Pynchon paper!
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/13/21, 2:30 PM, "Pynchon-l on behalf of Joseph Tracy" <
>> pynchon-l-bounces at waste.org on behalf of brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>  Some people , especially those america lasters are probably just
>> not getting those subtle dstinctions of anglo colonialism.
>>>>    The BOMB. Only destructive. Not really evil at all. Sheeesh why
>> didn’t I think of that. Just a planet with green stuff and animals and
>> shit. Imean I’mgoing to die, … maybe, so why shouldn’t billions of years of
>> evolution be burnt to a crisp to keep America First. Damn fuckin straight.
>> Don’t you love straw men? I do. Just a match, a quick breath  and whooosh.
>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 13, 2021, at 1:25 PM, Mark Thibodeau <
>> jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jeez-whiz, and it's not just China!
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd give this list's cohort of America Lasters some homework re:
>> the
>>>>> Empire *Upon
>>>>> Which the Sun Never Set (among others) throughout the *19th
>> century and
>>>>> beyond, out both ends, from slave ship to cotton field to diamond
>> mine to
>>>>> the killing fields of drug war and strategic famine and applied
>> racial
>>>>> "science" to etc, etc, etc, before they spend another moment in
>> that state
>>>>> of blessed easy leftish innocence that sees the USA as the be all
>> and end
>>>>> all of EVILE in world history...
>>>>> 
>>>>> With the caveat that they DID (in many ways) produce The BOMB,
>> which is the
>>>>> point upon which our species' ending may ultimately pivot, some
>> day soon.
>>>>> But I would argue that, technically, while destructive, that's not
>> really
>>>>> "EVILE" per se... unless you see Imperial Japan and Fascist
>> Germany as the
>>>>> Good Guys.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 9:29 AM Allen Ruch <
>> quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Joseph,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Heh—this ain't my first rodeo, pardner! I wasn't taught debate by
>> Mr.
>>>>>> Farkas just to fall for the ol' Motte-and-Baily trick! I tilted a
>> humorous
>>>>>> joust towards your bailey: "The Bill or Rights was suspended,"
>> not some
>>>>>> indefensible motte: "Extradition and torture don't matter." Of
>> course I
>>>>>> believe that Western rights can be, and have been, infringed,
>> subverted,
>>>>>> and perverted, and of course I believe torture matters. I was
>> teasing you
>>>>>> about your hyperbole, the same I would expect someone to do if I
>> said
>>>>>> something like "Rush is the greatest band ever." Just with less,
>> you know,
>>>>>> moral high ground? And also, if you genuinely believe that China
>> needed the
>>>>>> United States to develop a surveillance state dedicated to
>> controlling its
>>>>>> citizens, I urge you to read about Imperial China long before the
>> Canton
>>>>>> system. It's pretty grim stuff. (The first Opium War is one of
>> favorite
>>>>>> historical subjects. It's like: "Oh, oh, oh, you are *all* so
>> terrible!")
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But on to the heart of your post—thank you for clarifying your
>> ideas. I
>>>>>> understand you much better now, and I really appreciate your
>> "layers"
>>>>>> analogy. It offers a nice vocabulary to discuss Pynchon. For
>> instance, I
>>>>>> agree with you that the third, mythic later is detuned in
>> "Bleeding Edge"
>>>>>> compared to many of his other books. And there's some weird
>> interplay
>>>>>> between the second and third layers: the Naser? I mean....come
>> on? Which
>>>>>> creates a strange tension in the novel for me.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For instance: I accept mechanical ducks in "Mason & Dixon," and
>> Godzilla
>>>>>> in "Vineland." I can even accept ghosts in "Bleeding Edge." But
>> stiff like
>>>>>> the Naser raises my eyebrows: if this is *real,* if the Naser and
>> people
>>>>>> fleeing from it are meant to be taken literally in the world of
>> the book,
>>>>>> how seriously are we meant to take the characters? It feels
>> different than,
>>>>>> say, "Against the Day," which clearly operates in a magical
>> space. Or the
>>>>>> time travel in "Bleeding Edge"—but I'm getting ahead of myself.
>> I'll wait
>>>>>> until those chapters to raise those questions. Some good stuff
>> coming down
>>>>>> the road in the novel, once you clear all these opening chapters.
>> (Which I
>>>>>> still enjoy.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> And I just wanted to pull this quote out, because I really like
>> it:
>>>>>> "Whether Pynchon believes M&D’s line was really a colonial
>> violation of
>>>>>> telluric patterns or just a means of land theft, we know he has
>> M&D wrestle
>>>>>> with the ethical dimensions of what they are doing and uses
>> supernatural
>>>>>> stories to amplify such issues." <--yes! Well said.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Anyway, thanks for taking the time to clarify. And I would be
>> interested
>>>>>> in reading your essay, if you send it along!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> —Quail
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/11/21, 10:07 PM, "Joseph Tracy" <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> easier questions first- Pynchon readers seem less enthralled
>> with BE
>>>>>> as a whole, and I think this is part of why. We like the
>> weirdness and the
>>>>>> sublime quality of hanging out for a few days or weeks with Ball
>> lightning,
>>>>>> talking across that usually unbridgeable gap.  I think the
>> confrontation
>>>>>> with the abyss combined with 9-11 and ithe loss of privacy is also
>>>>>> uncomfortably close to home. Throw in the weird scene and video
>> with the
>>>>>> shoulder fired missile, and who wants to think about it all. Look
>> what it
>>>>>> stirred up here.
>>>>>> Abyss- all of the above with the full impact of all that we do
>> not
>>>>>> know.
>>>>>> I don't think you could take things any more seriously than GR.
>>>>>> China's system was born here, but they have caught up.
>>>>>> The redcoats have not come to my house directly but they are
>> turning
>>>>>> over Julian for more torture and that matters.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Less supernatural as in missing the third layer that is in most
>> of his
>>>>>> novels. As you know, because the story, I’m fairly certain, came
>> from your
>>>>>> web page, Pynchon once compared his writing to one of those
>> medical texts
>>>>>> with overlappable transparent layers.  As a stained glass
>> conservationist I
>>>>>> sometimes have worked with Tiffany and Lafarge Windows with
>> multiple layers
>>>>>> and the whole idea has affected my own art and the way I look at
>> TP and
>>>>>> other fiction. I see 3 fundamental layers( I have an essay
>> somewhere if you
>>>>>> are interested)with the more direct comments of the author
>> himself being a
>>>>>> kind of 4th layer and the readers a 5th in the sense that like
>> all writers
>>>>>> he wants to connect. The base , or at least fundamental to the 3
>> layers is
>>>>>> history itself and Pynchon tries hard to make this accurate and
>> full of
>>>>>> timely details. My presumption here is not that history can be
>> accurately
>>>>>> told but that it actually happened and is a proper setting for
>> writing
>>>>>> about the  human experience and maybe some other shit too. The
>> second layer
>>>>>> I call the plausible fictive, but is also called realism
>> naturalism or just
>>>>>> fiction. This is the primary characters and their imagined lives
>> along with
>>>>>> fictional towns , bars, mayonnaise attacks etc..  Still pretty
>> normal
>>>>>> stuff. The third layer is the supernatural, which almost always
>> has a
>>>>>> mythic dimension. This is why I referred to Pugnax, the Chums,
>> Thanatoids,
>>>>>> etc. These could be dismissed as silly but fun storytelling
>> devices but I
>>>>>> think there is more to it. It adds a layer that has always been
>> part of
>>>>>> human consciousness and treats it as something perfectly normal
>> with real
>>>>>> effects on other layers. Whether Pynchon believes M&D’s line was
>> really a
>>>>>> colonial violation of telluric patterns or just a means of land
>> theft, we
>>>>>> know he has M&D wrestle with the ethical dimensions of what they
>> are doing
>>>>>> and uses supernatural stories to amplify such issues.
>>>>>>    That was probably too big of an answer but this third
>> supernatural
>>>>>> layer is seriously reduced in BE and a more psychological
>> approach takes a
>>>>>> central role. I think it makes the writing  just a bit less
>> lively, less
>>>>>> fun,  and less multi-dimensional but Pynchon's other emphasis is
>> on the
>>>>>> role of computer tech and the web and I am suggesting that maybe
>> this
>>>>>> forfeiting of the supernatural and mythic weird comes from a
>> sense that
>>>>>> screens  is where we have turned our attention and that in doing
>> so  we may
>>>>>> well have forfeited a vital dimension.  Not only that but we have
>> forfeited
>>>>>> it to a logic system that  easily serves  as system controls for
>> a ruling
>>>>>> class that may be socipathic at a fundamental level, and also  a
>> logic
>>>>>> sytem that is not part of biological complexity, moral
>> compassion, or real
>>>>>> joy in living . I personally doubt that biology or physics  or
>>>>>> consciousness is built up from binary logic. I like computers as
>> a very
>>>>>> powerful  tool, but like you and  Cassidy certain things or
>> spaces or
>>>>>> energy systems, movies, etc. feel as you said ’colonized’ and
>> while I try
>>>>>> to face my own shadow some things I just walk away from or dig
>> into my
>>>>>> internal love mantras and wait for some light.  Is there evil?
>> Even with my
>>>>>> inclination toward Taoism I can’t dismiss it as easily as I used
>> to.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2021, at 7:17 PM, Allen Ruch <
>> quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The suspension of the Bill of Rights was the worst—I was shocked
>> to
>>>>>> find I had to quarter Redcoats in my apartment! They really drank
>> me out of
>>>>>> house and home. Couldn't make a decent pot ocoffee to save their
>> lives.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But kidding aside, while your post contains all the eloquence
>> I've
>>>>>> come to enjoy from your writing -- I'm a sucker for "chthonic" --
>> I'm not
>>>>>> sure I'm following a few of your points, which is likely my
>> fault. Just to
>>>>>> clarify: You feel the book is less supernatural because Pynchon
>> is taking
>>>>>> things more seriously, because he's dealing with recent events?
>> Or because
>>>>>> he feels modern people, or perhaps his characters, have lost
>> touch with the
>>>>>> mythic? And when you say the Deep Web (via DeepArcher) draws
>> people "toward
>>>>>> the abyss that is an inevitable part of the subconscious," do you
>> mean
>>>>>> loneliness? The self? Depression? Death? All of the above?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think I get what you are saying—perhaps in a Gurdjieff/Watts
>> kind
>>>>>> of way—but here's something about the Deep Web in Bleeding Edge
>> that still
>>>>>> feels more sinister to me than the Dark Night of the Soul, perhaps
>>>>>> more—colonized? Or maybe this is just one of the Pynchon things
>> I'll never
>>>>>> really "get." (Yes, I admit, there are parts of "Against the Day"
>> that
>>>>>> still leaving me scratching my head.)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And finally, what do you mean by "What readers do with that is
>>>>>> interesting. Pynchon fans seem distinctly less enthralled." Less
>> enthralled
>>>>>> with exploring darkness, or just less enthralled with BE as a
>> whole?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Anyway, I certainly agree with you that our "planet wars" have
>>>>>> claimed enough victims, and we should treasure human contact.
>> Well said.
>>>>>> (Though I reckon that China may be offended by your claiming that
>> the US
>>>>>> has the "largest civilian surveillance system ever imagined." You
>> should
>>>>>> really give them more credit, they're trying so hard!)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> —Quail
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 12/11/21, 6:02 PM, "Joseph Tracy" <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But I do have that question for everyone: how literal do you take
>>>>>> Bleeding Edge?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Good question, especially because, as you point out, there is
>>>>>> distinctly less intrusion of the supernatural or mythic weird
>> than in any
>>>>>> other Pynchon Novel: no talking ball lightning, no chasing
>> harmonicas into
>>>>>> the underworld, no Thanatoids, lovestruck mecahincal ducks,
>> Pugnax, Vheissu
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>> I mean there is the cosmic bike messenger and in this very
>>>>>> chapter a psychic bladder function, but these are, let’s face it,
>> just not
>>>>>> the same. Later there are ghosts but even those can be
>> interpreted as
>>>>>> psychological illusions or alternately insights.  It is as though
>> the
>>>>>> dreaded nuclear armed V2 had finally hit and the worst it could
>> do was
>>>>>> bring down towers and kill a few thousand more victims of the
>> planet wars.
>>>>>> Which by the time BE was being written had produced more planet
>> wars and a
>>>>>> hundred fold increase in innocent victims. Well innocent in that
>> most
>>>>>> people don’t actively drop bombs on other people and wouldn’t
>> even donate
>>>>>> to the bombers if the national bomb campaigns relied on volunteer
>>>>>> donations.
>>>>>>>   The human suffering is all too real too, and other realities
>>>>>> have come with it: the sudden turn to patriot act paranoia, the
>> drone wars,
>>>>>> the suspension of the Bill of Rights and the institution of the
>> largest
>>>>>> civilian surveillance system ever imagined.
>>>>>>>  Maybe TP  has brought his readers out of a world on which the
>>>>>> people interact powerfully with the mythic because that is his
>> sense of
>>>>>> what is happening. I have the feeling he is not that thrilled
>> with a world
>>>>>> so severed, both from the mystical and from the multicultural,
>> multivalent
>>>>>> social hodgepodge that does not so easily lend itself to the
>> manipulations
>>>>>> of binary code and binary politics. Maxine is the most
>> interactive human in
>>>>>> P’s writings and what she is is the normal social experience of a
>> great
>>>>>> deal of human history. She gives us the big picture view that
>> cyberspace
>>>>>> promises but can’t deliver.  Everyone is different, looking for
>> meaning,
>>>>>> respect, everyone is struggling with the effects of social
>> isolation and
>>>>>> lack of power to stop a growing plutocracy, marital and family
>> breakups,
>>>>>> predators, bad habits.
>>>>>>>   The deep web functions not so much like a balloon ride into
>>>>>> new dimensions of understanding, or even a cthonic confrontation
>> with the
>>>>>> deep forces of history and myth like Slothrop’s toilet adventure.
>> It draws
>>>>>> people toward the abyss that is an inevitable part of the
>> subconscious. It
>>>>>> is lonely and we all must enter eventually.  What readers do with
>> that is
>>>>>> interesting. Pynchon fans seem distinctly less enthralled. I have
>> mixed
>>>>>> feelings. I been there plenty and the main result is I want to
>> treasure
>>>>>> every human contact.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2021, at 4:04 PM, Allen Ruch <
>> quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I liked Myst. I am a hardcore video game player, and I still
>> love
>>>>>> open worlds the best. Myst was a forerunner to so many great
>> things, even
>>>>>> stuff like GTA and Skyrim. Great game.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Which brings me to Cassidy. I keep re-reading that section, and
>>>>>> even though I read "Bleeding Edge" when it first came out, maybe
>> I just
>>>>>> don't remember—what is there about the abyss in Deep Archer? It's
>> often
>>>>>> spoken of in mystical terms. I think Cassidy gives the first
>> impression of
>>>>>> that, beyond Maxine's initial "gee wow," that is. Cassidy remarks:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> “Hard to explain. It was all just coming from somewhere, for
>> about
>>>>>> a day and a half I felt I was duked in on forces outside my normal
>>>>>> perimeter, you know? Not scared, just wanted to get it over with,
>> wrote the
>>>>>> file, did the Java, didn’t look at it again. Next thing I
>> remember is one
>>>>>> of them saying holy shit it’s the edge of the world”
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Pynchon loves supernatural spaces, and I think he's strongly
>>>>>> suggesting that the Deep Web—or video games, or Myst, etc.—has
>> the capacity
>>>>>> to be an Other World. And not just Gibsonian cyberspace—or maybe
>> it's just
>>>>>> that after all?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Maybe because weird fiction/horror is my favorite genre, I'm
>>>>>> fascinated with the intrusions of the supernatural—or if not the
>>>>>> supernatural, then the sublime?—in "Bleeding Edge." I mean, it's
>> one thing
>>>>>> in M&D, AtD, etc., but this seems to be Pynchon's most
>> "realistic," or
>>>>>> perhaps "historical," book. Sure, there are some things that
>> suggest an
>>>>>> alternate, wackier universe—the Naser, proösmia, Maxine being ok
>> with being
>>>>>> a stripper—but then again, there's something even weirder going
>> on, right?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Anyway, I won’t go into any future events just yet, I'll wait
>> until
>>>>>> we get there. But it's something to keep an eye on as the book
>> develops.
>>>>>> But I do have that question for everyone: how literal do you take
>> Bleeding
>>>>>> Edge?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> —Quail
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> PS: Sorry I know this post is all jumbled with ideas and not
>>>>>> lucidly written, but I'm on my third Abelour.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  --
>>>>  Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   --
>>>   Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>> 
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l