Not P but Moby-Dick (71) Mercy Me

[O G]

Look, in all fairness to me, how was I supposed to know Mao is a fourteen
year old girl translating this shit for her mother in some village hut on
the northern banks of the Yangtze?

I thought Mao was a grisled white haired ex-Beijing university professor
laughing over his pipe as he typed in his stereotypical bowing Chinese
nicething that they do.  "Ahw, Thahn yoh Miistah Mahk, yoh so kihn and auh,
tho-ful an auh, gehnroh."

Now that I know this, yes, I can see it.  Can't unsee it now.  So thanks
for that man.  I'm a slow fucking learner, that's right.  While all my ever
enchanting, everlasting hermeneutics are essentially no not evasive
effulgent, I would never build divine rainbows for a wee lass in a lil
willage.  For legal purposes alone I can't be caught responding to ju--


>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:59:11 -0500
> From: Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
> To: P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Subject: Re: Not P but Moby-Dick (70)
> Message-ID:
>         <CALAvXn3=
> FFs2JNwRAnv-FFxjMKoOvxOiHOwg9Co_XY-s7POgww at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hmm -
> If Jupiter isn?t a planet, then what is it?
>
>
> If Chinese AI gains a better understanding of public domain Moby-Dick, or
> in previous interactions, of the illustrious writings of Mr Pynchon**, it
> could only help -
>
> Or if Mike Jing is a dude* - just covering the possibilities - ie, he?s
> never said either that he was or wasn?t - simply being reticent with
> personal data (eg - did the GR & AtD xlations meet with a friendly
> reception from publisher?***As of yet, no word volunteered, but one hopes
> it went well)
>
>
>
> In the spirit of disclosing moderately personal info, I?ll volunteer that I
> also like to drink tea.
>
>
> * If so, he?s living the dream - maybe someday I?ll get around to doing a
> new translation of _Journey to the West_ & hope to find a friendly Chinese
> listserv?(goals)
>
> ** one would hope the AtD & GR efforts were sanctioned by the original
> author and would generate royalties for him and his tribe (May they
> increase!)
>
> Per Wikipedia -
> *China has acceded to the major international conventions on protection of
> rights to intellectual property*. Domestically, protection of intellectual
> property law has also been established by government legislation,
> administrative regulations, and decrees in the areas of trademark,
> copyright, and patent.
>
> - it didn?t occur to me to question this w/r/t the GR & AtD questions,
> because each individual cite was well within fair usage ? also I enjoyed
> the attention to actual Pynchon text, which, umm, in this group
> is?ummm?yes, highly valued.
>
> But would I be greeted with similar co-operation if I tried to gain Chinese
> assistance with a new English translation of _The Three Body Problem_?
>
> Anyhoo - weepers, that Moby-Dick is a heckuva book, isn?t it?
>
> *** oh, wait, way back I think Mike posted that he was translating GR for
> his mother, which would be non-commercial, right?
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 11:42?AM O G <octogonalyoyo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Gauges.
> >
> > No doubt the following is utterly witless and I am missing something
> > obvious as usual, for example I only just learned fifteen minutes ago
> that
> > Jupiter is *not*, in fact, a planet, but it is nearly noon and I have
> > consumed much hot tea so nonetheless or allthemore in true Ishmaelian
> > spirit I will gauge my best.
> >
> > All previous translations of Moby-Dick have interpreted a nine-inch cable
> > as, being, that long?
> >
> > That is, hard to even throw words at.  How did the translators translate
> > the word whale?  Small fish?  Minnow?  Moby the minnow?  Moby-Minnow?
> >
> > How did they translate the word, ship?  Row-boat?  How about ocean.  Was
> it
> > a pond?
> >
> > Whadyergonnado with a nine-inch cable.  Queequeg could maybe have tied
> his
> > bike down with it, but didn't he leave that Stateside?  Leaning against
> the
> > totem pole?
> >
> > Listen, I'm all for China, I really am.  I love China.  Go China!  I hope
> > they win Taiwan, I really do.  I hope they tie that sucker down to the
> > mainland ship like a speared whale, and to the sharks that come--
> >
> > But come on, a nine-inch long cable?  Who are these translators?  Can I
> > have their email addresses?  No I won't mention where I got their emails
> > from.  Is your name really Mike?  Can I call you Mao?  Is Chinese your
> > first language?  Which number is English?  How does typing work in China?
> > I don't really know how Chinese works, I have only seen the pictures, and
> > it seems like a lot.  Keyboards like whales.  But, so, when a, okay I am
> > not even going to bother with the concept of Chinese AI right now, but
> so,
> > when a Chinese dude, yes dude only a dude, translates a nine-inch cable,
> or
> > a nine-inch anything, into Chinese, is there a rule in Chinese that says
> > you have to state what dimensional aspect of the nine-inch object is
> being
> > referred to?
> >
> >
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 03:30:52 -0500
> > > From: Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> > > To: Pynchon Mailing List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> > > Subject: Not P but Moby-Dick (71)
> > > Message-ID:
> > >         <
> > > CAPs1BB+99E4BmHQuXeZQbcCnB-C37_ioU-KRH-kjjda1_h0fLA at mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > >From Chapter 89:
> > >
> > > First: What is a Fast-Fish? Alive or dead a fish is technically fast,
> > when
> > > it is connected with an occupied ship or boat, by any medium at all
> > > controllable by the occupant or occupants,?a mast, an oar, a nine-inch
> > > cable, a telegraph wire, or a strand of cobweb, it is all the same.
> > >
> > > Here, the "nine-inch" refers to the girth of the rope, is that correct?
> > >
> > > Previous translations interpreted it as the length, which seems
> obviously
> > > wrong to me.
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 5
> > > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 06:34:22 -0500
> > > From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> > > To: Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Pynchon Mailing List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> > > Subject: Re: Not P but Moby-Dick (71)
> > > Message-ID:
> > >         <
> > > CAD8KJ4HAKeov2FHQec9LbmOny9a_y3M-Dn3nXzatdNG0Bb96Vg at mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Standard rope gauges were determined by the number of folds made in the
> > > rope walk. Standard sailing ship rigging usually varied from 1?1/4 inch
> > dia
> > > to 10 inches in diameter, the latter used for towing another ship, tie
> up
> > > to docks, and far less often for anchors, chain being preferred for
> > > anchors.
> > > 2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 3:31?AM Mike Jing <
> gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From Chapter 89:
> > > >
> > > > First: What is a Fast-Fish? Alive or dead a fish is technically fast,
> > > when
> > > > it is connected with an occupied ship or boat, by any medium at all
> > > > controllable by the occupant or occupants,?a mast, an oar, a
> nine-inch
> > > > cable, a telegraph wire, or a strand of cobweb, it is all the same.
> > > >
> > > > Here, the "nine-inch" refers to the girth of the rope, is that
> correct?
> > > >
> > > > Previous translations interpreted it as the length, which seems
> > obviously
> > > > wrong to me.
> > > > --
> > > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pynchon-l mailing list
> > > Pynchon-l at waste.org
> > > https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > End of Pynchon-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 12
> > > *****************************************
> > >
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 03:21:59 -0500
> From: Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> To: Pynchon Mailing List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Subject: Not P but Moby-Dick (73)
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAPs1BB+AxUyjAgr+VvzM3x8Jn5nMUSBiFB3HDkQ4qaQj-2hwhw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> >From Chapter 89:
>
> Mr. Erskine was counsel for the defendants; Lord Ellenborough was the
> judge. In the course of the defence, the witty Erskine went on to
> illustrate his position, by alluding to a recent crim. con. case, wherein a
> gentleman, after in vain trying to bridle his wife?s viciousness, had at
> last abandoned her upon the seas of life; but in the course of years,
> repenting of that step, he instituted an action to recover possession of
> her. Erskine was on the other side; and he then supported it by saying,
> that though the gentleman had originally harpooned the lady, and had once
> had her fast, and only by reason of the great stress of her plunging
> viciousness, had at last abandoned her; yet abandon her he did, so that she
> became a loose-fish; and therefore when a subsequent gentleman re-harpooned
> her, the lady then became that subsequent gentleman?s property, along with
> whatever harpoon might have been found sticking in her.
>
> In saying "Erskine was on the other side", does it mean Erskine was
> actually the defending lawyer in that other case, or only that he supported
> the position of the other side?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 04:15:33 -0500
> From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> To: Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> Cc: Pynchon Mailing List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Subject: Re: Not P but Moby-Dick (72)
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAD8KJ4G42JCEmPaPd937ewoV9VPpqxOZGQ69eXNamMgjztnjGg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> by way of praises, hymns to God to the deed he had done....
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 12:27?AM Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > From Chapter 89:
> >
> > And when those defendants were remonstrated with, their captain snapped
> his
> > fingers in the plaintiffs? teeth, and assured them that by way of
> doxology
> > to the deed he had done, he would now retain their line, harpoons, and
> > boat, which had remained attached to the whale at the time of the
> seizure.
> > Wherefore the plaintiffs now sued for the recovery of the value of their
> > whale, line, harpoons, and boat.
> >
> > What does "by way of doxology to the deed he had done" mean here?
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 04:48:26 -0500
> From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> To: Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>, pynchon -l
>         <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Subject: Re: Not P but Moby-Dick (73)
> Message-ID:
>         <CAD8KJ4Hux6H4oGoFCfv24F=_
> 9hdgwf2wmT7oY+neQ1DwUOp+fw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> I would suggest that it means only that he agreed with the other side.
> Seems
> that Melville would have made it more exact in description if he was
> actually counsel...
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 3:22?AM Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > From Chapter 89:
> >
> > Mr. Erskine was counsel for the defendants; Lord Ellenborough was the
> > judge. In the course of the defence, the witty Erskine went on to
> > illustrate his position, by alluding to a recent crim. con. case,
> wherein a
> > gentleman, after in vain trying to bridle his wife?s viciousness, had at
> > last abandoned her upon the seas of life; but in the course of years,
> > repenting of that step, he instituted an action to recover possession of
> > her. Erskine was on the other side; and he then supported it by saying,
> > that though the gentleman had originally harpooned the lady, and had once
> > had her fast, and only by reason of the great stress of her plunging
> > viciousness, had at last abandoned her; yet abandon her he did, so that
> she
> > became a loose-fish; and therefore when a subsequent gentleman
> re-harpooned
> > her, the lady then became that subsequent gentleman?s property, along
> with
> > whatever harpoon might have been found sticking in her.
> >
> > In saying "Erskine was on the other side", does it mean Erskine was
> > actually the defending lawyer in that other case, or only that he
> supported
> > the position of the other side?
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pynchon-l mailing list
> Pynchon-l at waste.org
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Pynchon-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 13
> *****************************************
>