Line in Vineland on "Unspeakable"

[Laura Kelber]

It's been ages since I've read Vineland, but I think your reading of this
passage is spot-on, Mack. It definitely fits Pynchon's puerile, but fun
(soft-off, fecoventilatory collision, etc.) sense of humor.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 10:58 AM mack devon <mackdevon74 at gmail.com> wrote:

> To be fair, this is the same book that provided the passenger next to
> Takeshi playing a game about the duality between the atomic bomb and sex on
> his Gameboy titled "Nukey" (a play on Nookie) lol.
>
> If not this, then what do you imagine the paragraph meaning in the scope of
> the story to this point, beyond just this metaphorical (maybe) submarine's
> name and intention? Not to be too much of a bother, obviously I would
> prefer not to be racking my mind for a day straight on a couple of lines,
> but it comes out of nowhere, with nothing before or after bearing any
> relation.
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 9:55 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > No. But all undertones might work in Pynchon but this is too literal and
> > not meaningful enough for Pynchon imo.
> >
> > Check all the older and psychological means of Pynchon but you think
> > you’ve got it so go with it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 9:04 AM mack devon <mackdevon74 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I appreciate both responses, but I'm more searching for the literal
> event
> >> within this page of Vineland. With these variations of the word
> Unspeakable
> >> that Mark has shared (Inexpressible, Wicked, Return of the Repressed)
> and
> >> Hubshrauber's "Usually, the Unspeakable is below the surface," the
> context
> >> of unrequited love (or lust) between Takeshi and DL by this point, the
> >> reference to Love Boat, and the rising, then sinking at
> unfulfillment...I'm
> >> still leaning towards believing this is a schoolboy style joke about an
> >> erection written just a little bit more eloquently than usual. I'm just
> >> wondering if this is your takeaway from this event within the book, not
> >> necessarily just the dissection of Pynchon and the word Unspeakable.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 8:27 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The phrase *"The Unspeakable"* in English carries a fascinating
> >>> duality: it refers to both the *divine* (that which is too glorious for
> >>> words) and the *diabolical* (that which is too horrific to name). Its
> >>> history reflects a shift from religious awe to psychological horror
> and the
> >>> modern "uncanny."
> >>> 1. Etymological Origin and History
> >>>
> >>> The word *unspeakable* emerged in Middle English around *1400*. Its
> >>> meaning has evolved through two primary lenses:
> >>>
> >>>    -
> >>>
> >>>    *The Ineffable (c. 1400):* Originally, it meant "inexpressible" or
> >>>    "too great for words." This was often used in a religious context to
> >>>    describe the glory of God or the "Unspeakable Being."
> >>>    -
> >>>
> >>>    *The Wicked (Mid-15th Century):* By the mid-1400s, the meaning
> >>>    shifted toward "indescribably bad or wicked." It became a way to
> categorize
> >>>    crimes or entities so heinous that naming them would be a secondary
> >>>    violation of morality.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>    For Freud, the Unspeakable was the content in his concept of The
> >>>    Uncanny. Simplified, The Unspeakable is the 'return of the
> repressed' --a
> >>>    phrase P uses somewhere, I believe, or at least a concept he uses
> fer sure..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 8:03 AM Hübschräuber via Pynchon-l <
> >>> pynchon-l at waste.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Usually, the Unspeakable is below the surface...
> >>>>
> >>>> The title of Thomas Merton's collection of essay "Raids on the
> >>>> Unspeakable" (1966) comes to mind, which was inspired by T.S. Eliot's
> >>>> description of poetry in "East Coker" as a "raid on the inarticulate".
> >>>>
> >>>> https://merton.org/ITMS/Seasonal/36/36-4Labrie.pdf
> >>>>
> >>>> I only know Merton through Jim Douglass' "JFK and the Unspeakable"
> >>>> (2008).
> >>>>
> >>>> Douglass writes:
> >>>>
> >>>> -- "The Unspeakable" is a term Thomas Merton coined at the heart of
> the
> >>>> sixties after JFK’s assassination—in the
> >>>> midst of the escalating Vietnam War, the nuclear arms race, and the
> >>>> further assassinations of Malcolm X, Martin
> >>>> Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. In each of those soul-shaking events
> >>>> Merton sensed an evil whose depth
> >>>> and deceit seemed to go beyond the capacity of words to describe.
> >>>>
> >>>> "One of the awful facts of our age," Merton wrote in 1965, "is the
> >>>> evidence that [the world] is stricken indeed,
> >>>> stricken to the very core of its being by the presence of the
> >>>> Unspeakable." The Vietnam War, the race to a
> >>>> global war, and the interlocking murders of John Kennedy, Malcolm X,
> >>>> Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy
> >>>> were all signs of the Unspeakable. It remains deeply present in our
> >>>> world. As Merton warned, "Those who are at
> >>>> present so eager to be reconciled with the world at any price must
> take
> >>>> care not to be reconciled with it under
> >>>> this particular aspect: as the nest of the Unspeakable. This is what
> >>>> too few are willing to see."
> >>>> When we become more deeply human, as Merton understood the process,
> the
> >>>> wellspring of our compassion
> >>>> moves us to confront the Unspeakable. --
> >>>>
> >>>> https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/Unspeakable/index.pdf
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Gesendet mit Proton Mail: Ein sicherer E-Mail-Dienst.
> >>>>
> >>>> mack devon <mackdevon74 at gmail.com> schrieb am Dienstag, 20. Januar
> >>>> 2026 um 18:04:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Page 174 I've been stuck on for a little while. The book normally
> >>>> stays
> >>>> > pretty literal with its depictions, oftentimes getting a bit tricky
> >>>> with
> >>>> > what to take as metaphor or not. This is my 2nd read-through, I must
> >>>> not
> >>>> > have thought too much of this my first time around. Anyways, around
> >>>> early
> >>>> > page 174, after the Thanatoid introduction and DL & Takeshi explore
> >>>> > their village, a paragraph pops up that I'm still confused with.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > With a little context:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > "Yep, one foolish mistake, now I'm payin' it off for the rest of my
> >>>> life."
> >>>> >
> >>>> > "Only for the rest of mine, angel!" as up out of a calm and sunny
> >>>> ocean
> >>>> > the killer sub Unspeakable briefly poked its periscope, eyeballed
> >>>> their
> >>>> > vessel, ascertained that it was not the Love Boat, and withdrew. But
> >>>> they
> >>>> > were learning, together, slowly, how to take evasive action, and at
> >>>> the
> >>>> > moment it was down through an austere maze of Shade Creek alleyways
> >>>> and
> >>>> > vacant lots for an extended breakfast and another day's business.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Now, I've got a couple guesses as to this Unspeakable passage, as
> I'm
> >>>> > almost certain it's not meant to be taken literally (unless in
> >>>> reference to
> >>>> > the men after Takeshi currently spying...but that's way off it
> seems.)
> >>>> > There's a very likely chance this is not in reference to an actual
> >>>> Killer
> >>>> > Sub on the prowl.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > 1. Could this be a classic Pynchon erection joke meant to reference
> >>>> > Takeshi's lust towards DL being unfulfilled due to her lack of
> desire
> >>>> & her
> >>>> > contract? The Unspeakable being The Unspeakable Erection, poking
> out,
> >>>> and
> >>>> > withdrawing when not encountering a Love Boat. I feel like there
> >>>> might be
> >>>> > some old-school slang for Unspeakable/unmentionable wrt a penis, but
> >>>> I'm
> >>>> > too young to know. (This is the most likely option to me.)
> >>>> >
> >>>> > 2. Could this be just a strange reference to Thanatoids spying on
> the
> >>>> duo,
> >>>> > noticing that they aren't in love, but rather that they're truly
> >>>> partners?
> >>>> > (Very unlikely, just made up to not have to 100% align myself with
> >>>> Erection
> >>>> > Theory.)
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > This is my first post here, I wanted to discuss this topic as I
> >>>> haven't
> >>>> > seen these lines discussed anywhere, I hope I formatted this well
> >>>> enough.
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > 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
>