BEg2 chapter 4 - more about Shawn & his emotherapy

[Joseph Tracy]

I woke up with fresh thoughts on the Buddhist statues and the interaction between Shawn and Maxine. In an obvious way the symbolism of  the destruction of the buddha statues  bears a foreshadowing resemblence to theWorld Trade Center. They were both the largest architectonic example of the prowess and beliefs that produced them. Both events trace back( among other forces and to what degree is debated) to US intervention in Afghanistan/regional-politics-of-the-gulf. I remember being angered by this action but also feeling how hypocritical our national outrage was. I remember also thinking how our writers seem to get more worked up over the destruction of a work of art which we were willing to commoditize and turn into the property of the Met than the possibility that we had started something in Afghanistan and the gulf region that did not bode well.  

 Shawn, like most americans, is reactionary rather than meditative or non-attached . He does not ask why in any depth.  He conflates a very narrow expression of Islam and nationalism to the whole of Islam. One might wonder if this shpiel has worked on other clients to build some kind of solidarity.  Maxine doesn’t go for it and his response, when Maxine resists his thoughts, is unimpressively shallow. For Shawn the intensity of his feelings appears to come from a kind of tourist version of Buddhism, an image he has adopted derived from Kundun, southern california surfer spirituality.  This image may be as brittle and non-aive as the statue. He is like so much of US culture and for similar reasons. How deep is America’s sense of our role in the world, or in history, filtered through Bonanza and the Brady Bunch, Filene’s and Armani? What are US and our allies version of salafism ( “God told me to smite Osama bin Laden, so I invaded Afghanistan. Then He told me to smite Saddam Hussein, so I invaded Iraq. Now He wants me to work on the Middle East problem” G. Bush)( We came we saw , he died   H Clinton)? 

 My thoughts are because I think this section is very frought with underlying tensions  which P wants readers to think about, but he may also want us to consider how easily we gloss over important events in the seinfeldian flow of sit-comized culture.   




> sitOn Nov 15, 2021, at 11:23 PM, Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
> Despite her ability easily to find deficiencies in Shawn’s professional
> qualifications, Maxine has chosen him.
> 
> I think a lot depends on the labeling - NY state has licensing laws for
> various kinds of therapists, but “emotherapist” must fall outside the
> definitions of any of those.
> Seems like he lives in the walk-up: the dozen identical Armani suits in the
> closet, and the verbiage “he works out of” suggest a home office.
> 
> This may be part of a retro- oldtimey doctor’s drawing room vibe that
> brings in people not as drawn to the steel-and-glass, clinical, surgical,
> statistical professionalism evinced, nay, embraced, by many of the helping
> professions, as to a personal touch, a hint of mystery, and a bit of
> right-brain woo.
> 
> (Me too)
> 
> Not just this session, but several, have featured Shawn’s outrage at the
> Taliban and their destruction of ancient Buddha statues in Bamiyan,
> Afghanistan.
> 
> The Met, inter alia, had offered to buy the Buddha statues. Mullah Omar
> turned them down. Really not good diplomatically or financially.
> 
> Shawn’s anger runs high - he utilizes detournement on the word “Islam” by
> interpolating a space to make the phrase “I slam,” as if that proved
> anything.
> 
> Kind of like Reg’s response to Maxine when she set her imagination loose
> upon the meaning of the ACFE seal, Maxine’s calming influence here takes 3
> forms.
> 
> First, she reminds him that Buddhists have a saying themselves, “If you
> meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.” (Which, wtf in the 1st place,
> imho?!?!?!!)
> 
> He rejects that by claiming that that advice only pertains to Buddhists,
> and that this is a political action.
> 
> Secondly, she questions his anger, given that he is supposed to be above
> these considerations, to which he only replies, “Overattached me.”
> 
> Much less thought on the second pass!
> 
> His third gambit is the “Islam/I slam” word salad, and it’s here that
> Maxine resorts to the calmative humoring of describing his comment as
> “thought-provoking” - so similar to Reg’s “Interesting thought, Maxine,” in
> Chapter 2.
> 
> Having to calm Shawn down *is* probably actually therapeutic for Maxine;
> retrieving calmative formulas, including the one Reg had used successfully
> on her, is good practice.
> 
> Shawn seems satisfied - that is, having glanced at his Tag Heuer (5 digit
> price tag I think) watch while miming his mangling of Islam, he skips right
> past showing mollification -
> 
> as if, as a practiced client, she too will be aware of her accomplishment
> here -
> 
> And announces an end to the session so he can watch a canonical
> emo-behavior guide: The Brady Bunch.
> 
> They are always talking about and alert to each other’s feelings about
> every little thing under the sun on that show! Except when they miss them -
> but then somebody realizes, and they talk about that.
> 
> They are the opposite of Horst’s alexithymism!
> 
> The Bradys have, like, emorrhea. (One might say, in the nicest way
> possible.)
> 
> But why aren’t we all more alert and responsive to each other’s feelings? I
> begin to see the attraction.
> 
> 
> There are references to the 3 part Hawaii trip - BB4:1,2,3 - was this the
> first sitcom such?
> 
> I remember that My Three Sons in the 60s went to Ireland or Scotland…and
> pretty sure Our House went to Hawaii, but that was the 80s.
> 
> Anyhoo, there’s no sign that Maxine goes away any otherwise than satisfied.
> 
> Why it is she’s drawn to BB2:15, Will the Real Marsha Please Stand Up, is
> left for the reader.
> 
> Unless there are hidden clues, eh?
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l