Deep state

[Mark Kohut]

I will add, as the old song goes *You Don't Know Me* and I love the 'logic'
of how since almost no one
posts as they used to, that the list is now a deep state zombie, so to get
cute and my 50% of the posts
indicts ME not all the non-posters, I should leave it....

That's great Joseph logic, Mike, esp since I have even shared---obviously
compulsively, lol--some of what else I
have been doing and occasionally reading relevantly, I thought...,

You and Joseph can hold the list up---unless of course my absence will
bring out more people.

 I hope so. It was a wonderful list once.

Me


On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 3:40 PM Mike Weaver <mike.weaver at zen.co.uk> wrote:

> While awaiting chapter 2 of Joseph's latest I must ask what is the deep
> state being referred to in the review and by Joseph.
>
> I was under the impression the deep state was a red flag waved by
> reactionary leaders to distract the animus from the capitalist structure
> onto a confection of bureaucrats, and  scheming statist decision makers
> who probably doesn't exist in any joined up way which could be described
> as either deep or state actors.
>
> Apart from that I do have to say I'm the same as Joseph, still here
> because I like to read comments from so many of the people here, but 50%
> of posts coming from one person just ain't healthy and suggests he's
> using the list as an outlet for something not satisfied elsewhere.
>
> Maybe it's time to take a sabbatical Mark. Come back in a year or so and
> see how the list has developed without your compulsive posting.
>
>
> On 08/10/2025 20:15, J Tracy wrote:
> > I don’t care about many of  the things the reviewer was talking about,
> but I kind of agree that some kind of Pynchonian deep look into the deep
> state would be a reasonable hope or expectation at this point in history.
> This review was as personal as anything I have read, too personal in my
> view, whiny even.  Pynchon seems to me to have had a somewhat Brechtian or
> socially revolutionary outlook in his early work, and he clearly admired
> the moral and analytical consistency of Orwell and 1984, but Pynchon is
> more of an analyst of humanity seduced by control systems and personal
> ambition than a believer in any counterforce.   But my expectations of
> anybody agreeing about what Pynchon’s writing is all about or  about the
> quality of that writing are pretty low. I remember when several p-listers,
> including M. Kohut disparaged Against the Day and I found another reading
> group to discuss it with. Now he acts as though he always recognized the
> genius of that novel. Not that he had anything of depth to say about it .
> >     The truth is that the list has been almost taken over by his
> bombastic garbage. Mark Kohut  seems to think that without any serious
> attempt to write coherently or in any depth of thought about anything
> Pynchon writes he qualifies as some kind of guide to the perplexed in
> understanding this complex and layered writer.  I really like the other
> list participants whether we agree or not on any topic, but  with both
> parties supporting genocide and facilitating the monstrous macinery of the
> .1 % I  look for little solace or wisdom in this novelist who was once a
> powerful influence on my map of the world.  He has written some wildly
> entertaining books to sell and has done pretty well for himself.  I
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Oct 8, 2025, at 1:25 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> All reading of literature is or should be personal.
> >> And infused with one’s personally human.
> > what does “infused with one’s personally human” mean?
> >
> >> That five decade stuff is like people who tell you they must be right
> >> because they’ve been thinking about it so long. Or they have a PH D.  A
> >> soft intimidation. And/or Tom might be feeling otiose after all these
> >> years. I remember and liked and learned from him so he may be right.
> >>
> >> But I don’t care.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:19 PM Michael Lee Bailey via Pynchon-l <
> >> pynchon-l at waste.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> “With me, Pynchon is personal.  I’ve been reading him for more than
> five
> >>> decades….”
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yada yada yada
> >>>
> >>> “…his ninth novel.  Maybe he just wanted to have some fun in what may
> be
> >>> his final book.  But he wasn’t free for fun.”
> >>>
> >>> (Quelle Douche comment)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> …bla bla bla
> >>>
> >>> (more douchey comments)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *”Tom LeClair is …”
> >>>
> >>> …forgetting what Gaddis said in re  his critics & the importance of
> what
> >>> one brings to a reading?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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
>