SLPAD - 30 - Surrealism / Terry Reilly

[Michael Bailey]

The phrase that leaps out is “Having as yet virtually no access to my dream
life, I missed the main point of the movement,”


I wonder how he would elaborate on that idea, which does seem to have
eventually had an influence on his writing. There are plenty of dreams,
especially in _Vineland_ and _Bleeding Edge_ but also in the rest, aren’t
there?



               “…and became fascinated instead with the simple idea that
one could combine inside the same frame elements not normally found
together to produce illogical and startling effects.”

Stencil and Profane, eg? & then the disparate elements of Stencil episodes
also.

Then the famous Spike Jones, Jr quote about the C-sharp gunshot, and the
care needed for managing Surrealist-style contrasts.

He laments a lack of finesse in the assemblages of “The Secret Integration”
but not as much as earlier errors.



The Terry Reilly article, after a sampling of SL reviews - including a rare
disparagement from Richard Poirier, whom I’ve always seen as a stalwart
supporter - fastens onto the idea of likening the “confessional” tone of
the Intro to other ‘80s confessional writing.

He treats the Intro as almost another story in the collection, one which
can be read “straight” as a useful catalog of errors, but also as a
satirical entry in the “confessional” parade of the era.

I remember in the ‘80s reading the long confessional autobiography of John
Phillips from The Mamas and the Papas. Not mentioning his daughter
Mackenzie’s  later revelations, he still managed to give a lot of
reprehensible details, maintaining a mostly contrite tone. I read it for
the dirt, and, I guess, so I could tsk-tsk a little, which is enjoyable- I
think that is why the genre was so popular.

Also, in _Vineland_, Pynchon recounted with satirical humor the producers
Ernie Triggerman and Sid Liftoff wanting to make Frenesi’s tale into that
kind of movie, to tap that market.


The two takes that most make the Reilly article strong, imho, are

- a comparison of this confessional tone “my youthful ignorance” in the
Intro with the way Reagan distanced himself from Iran-Contra by claiming
incompetence (however true that may have been)

- and the suggestion that the particular instantiation of the phrase “Slow
Learner” for its use as title was drawn from O’Brien’s characterization of
Winston Smith as a “slow learner” in _1984_ right as Winston finally learns
- through the mediation of torture - to believe anything he’s told.

With Pynchon’s Intro to _1984_ still in the future, that attribution’s not
a slam dunk - but considering SL came out in 1984, it’s not far-fetched as
all that, is it?

Still, that article is mainly a sidelight, for me: my focus is mostly on
the face-value of the Intro & the stories in conventional terms (with an
occasional wild notion) and chasing down some of the references, while
appreciating humor & stuff like that.