Bleeding Edge better 2nd or is it 3rd time?

[Mark Kohut]

I am afraid you lost me at ..."my idea is to move faster than we tend to
do." Nope, slower is always better imo. it is feeling the detail, all of it
that matters most. Rendering the generalities that arise in touch with the
reality of the text. Otherwise it is
bloviating with one's higher order "truths', which may be truths but exist
independently from a connection to the text.

You also lost me here: " I also suggest we try to avoid the you’re wrong
I’m right approach and  handle disagreement with more respect or simply to
try to enjoy the variety and put down one’s own thoughts."..Have you been a
part of our most recent but
now in the wayback time, Reads? They have already been what you want. There
is so much to notice and say. You, Joseph, as I've said to you directly do
mini-essay riffs I like when you put down your thoughts. Your test-based
thoughts. Also, it seems simply a fact that there can be scores of
different readings, more than scores, but there can also be simply mistaken
ones that need pointed out as mistaken. Otherwise the words of Bleeding
Edge have no meaning at all.

IF you may be thinking of some of my rude language regarding non-Pynchon
writers, like the way I call some moronic commentators you quote, morons,
know I do not do that, never have, on a Group Read and won't. If you quote
one of them moronically I will note that.

I'm up for a reread of *Bleeding Edge*. I hope it would be more than we
two. But if you want to comment via a faster read, continue as you did to
start this. Nice observations.

Mark


JT: No worries about spoilers etc. freely seeing the text as a whole in
commenting on any given passage, theme or event. It really is quick as an
audio book. The reader is good with narrative flow and dramatic voicing if
sometimes weaker with longer ruminations.

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 12:26 AM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> I am listening to Bleeding Edge via Library audio  book system today. It
> seems different with 20 years of distance from actual 9/11 and from  the
> time of  publication, both funnier and darker, in some ways more eerily
> prescient( maybe not so eerily). I have HS students born after 911.
>  Pynchon's approach of viewing the event through the lens of the internet
> and digital technology that is such a large part of our cultural reality
> gives it a McLuhanesque spin that is worth some thought. In some ways New
> York is one of the last outposts of dense non-digital neighborhoods and
> human contacts but is increasingly, as all places, mediated by cell phones,
> commercial media, isolation and less by social gathering and conversation..
> Still there is an intensity of color in NYC that P works with expertly.
>
> If anyone wants to engage in a read/listen/conversation and all the
> attached risks, my idea is to move faster than we tend to do. I also
> suggest we try to avoid the you’re wrong I’m right approach and  handle
> disagreement with more respect or simply to try to enjoy the variety and
> put down one’s own thoughts. No worries about spoilers etc. freely seeing
> the text as a whole in commenting on any given passage, theme or event. It
> really is quick as an audio book. The reader is good with narrative flow
> and dramatic voicing if sometimes weaker with longer ruminations.
>
> Anyone? Mike? How many would make a quorum?
>
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>