Difference between revisions of "Talk:ATD 97-118"

(the Hollow Earth discussion gets longer :))
m
Line 20: Line 20:
 
::--[[User:Squidwiggle|Squidwiggle]] 15:45, 17 January 2007 (PST)
 
::--[[User:Squidwiggle|Squidwiggle]] 15:45, 17 January 2007 (PST)
  
:Heyo, I stand by my impression that Tunbridge Wells and Amazon reviews have nothing to do with anything, but you've added a ton of argument in favor of some larger Pynchon works/Chums of Chance book connection. So let's see what you've got:
+
Heyo, I stand by my impression that Tunbridge Wells and Amazon reviews have nothing to do with anything, but you've added a ton of argument in favor of some larger Pynchon works/Chums of Chance book connection. So let's see what you've got:
  
 
1) I agree that the Darby/Miles exchange on [[ATD_97-118#Page_112]] seems to allude to verbose Pynchon commentators, but Darby and Miles are at that point talking about 4th of July fireworks. I don't see how that connects to any kind of  ''CoCitBotE''-as-''GR'' argument.
 
1) I agree that the Darby/Miles exchange on [[ATD_97-118#Page_112]] seems to allude to verbose Pynchon commentators, but Darby and Miles are at that point talking about 4th of July fireworks. I don't see how that connects to any kind of  ''CoCitBotE''-as-''GR'' argument.
Line 28: Line 28:
 
3) It is possible that ATD's opening word of "now" in some way connects to the final two words of GR, but how does relate to a CoCitBotE-as-GR argument?
 
3) It is possible that ATD's opening word of "now" in some way connects to the final two words of GR, but how does relate to a CoCitBotE-as-GR argument?
  
4) I'm skeptical that a comparison of the Chums' underworld adventure and GR is intentional, although if you think it's there, by all means explain further. Quickly glancing over these pages again, all I see is an internatinoal mining cartel getting involved in the underworld, but such corporate enemies are typical in all Pynchon works.  
+
4) I'm skeptical that a connection between the Chums' underworld adventure and GR is intentional, although if you think it's there, by all means explain further. Quickly glancing over these pages again, all I see is an internatinoal mining cartel getting involved in the underworld, but such corporate enemies are typical in all Pynchon works.  
  
 
5) The narrator on p. 117 claims explicit ownership of ''CoCitBotE'', but where does the narrator come across as both Chums author and TP, besides the fact that Pynchon wrote this book?
 
5) The narrator on p. 117 claims explicit ownership of ''CoCitBotE'', but where does the narrator come across as both Chums author and TP, besides the fact that Pynchon wrote this book?

Revision as of 22:31, 18 January 2007

Page 117

Tunbridge Wells

An astonishingly inside joke: On April 18, 2000, in what was an otherwise positive Amazon review of Gravity's Rainbow, Peter Marcus of London, England observes that Pynchon commits "a grating slip" when he uses the term downtown to refer to a town in England, the term being patently an Americanism. This obscure allusion seems to suggest that we may understand 'The Chums of Chance in the Bowels of the Earth as being a stand-in for Gravity's Rainbow, which Pynchon might very well describe as "my harmless little intraterrestrial scherzo." Understood this way, the War occurring in the Telluric interior is in fact WWII, and the Chums are currently half a century in the future, which explains the shortness of the inhabitants of the interior, as they can be associated to a degree with infantilism. The Directive can now also be seen as an injunction against acting in times not apparently their own.

This is an astonishing *whopper* of a stretch! Pynchon invokes a fictional critic with the name, "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells," which as the link and entry above indicate is a well-understood reference to a conservative English critic of modernity. To suggest that Pynchon also invokes the term to allude to a SINGLE English reviewer of Gravity's Rainbow on Amazon.com is practically a quantum leap. There is no textual evidence, at least here, that the subterranean journey or "CoC in the Bowels of the Earth" in any way allude to Gravity's Rainbow. Bleakhaus 04:00, 17 January 2007 (PST)
Howdy Bleakhouse--
So, I agree wholly that the Tunbridge Wells allusion is likely meant to call to mind "Disgusted," but there's certainly textual evidence in favor of my reading, too. Bear with me a sec: back on p. 112, Miles bids
the company consider, in tones of urgency they seldom heard from him, the nature of the skyrocket's ascent, in particular that unseen extension of the visible trail, after the propellant charge burns out, yet before the slow-match has ignited the display--that implied moment of ongoing passage upward, in the dark sky, a linear continuum of points invisible yet present, just before lights by the hundreds appear
a description, he tells them, that is suggestive "of the trajectories of [the Chums'] own lives." Now, Gravity's Rainbow, which covers the ground between the rocket's post-brennschluss screaming to its terminal explosion would seem to cover exactly that part of the rocket life cycle that Miles is describing, and the Chums are at this moment about to learn that they are to head for the Telluric Interior. This is reinforced by the narrator's use of "scherzo" to describe CoCitBotE, scherzos being the jaunty second or third movement of a larger musical composition, that larger composition in this case being, presumably, both the cosmology of the rocket life cycle that Pynchon returns to again and again, and whatever macro-structure he sees his different novels as being contained within. The fact that he opens AtD with "now" should be enough to demonstrate that there is an conscious structural relationship between that dark, disintegrating work and this bright building of a novel.
That, and one can hardly ignore the fact that the narrator on p. 117 claims explicit ownership of CoCitBotE. Elsewhere in AtD, where the narrator steps in explicitly, it seems consistent that his assertions can be understood both as those of the author of the fictive Chums series and as TP himself. This is evident from page one (well, really three), where we, the faithful readers are told we will recognize Darby from earlier books, and indeed we do, though as a juvenile Pig Bodine.
Finally, Pynchon clued us all in, in a big way, to the fact that he's familiar with Amazon's feedback system just this fall.
So, whaddaya say, that constitute textual evidence? I honestly believe my thesis here, but I also honestly believe that it might seem a stretch to another reader. If you still think I'm out on a limb, let's trim back entry simply to mention the existence of Amazon comment. Or, if you want more evidence, I can give you a read of the Chums' underworld adventure and how it relates to GR (which I didn't do here largely cause, well, I'm sure I already sound like a pedantic sot). Or, we can flesh out the CoCitBotE-as-GR assertion more fully so that it doesn't seem like such a stretch. Or, we can copy and paste this whole thing to a discussion page and let the unwashed masses weigh in.
--Squidwiggle 15:45, 17 January 2007 (PST)

Heyo, I stand by my impression that Tunbridge Wells and Amazon reviews have nothing to do with anything, but you've added a ton of argument in favor of some larger Pynchon works/Chums of Chance book connection. So let's see what you've got:

1) I agree that the Darby/Miles exchange on ATD_97-118#Page_112 seems to allude to verbose Pynchon commentators, but Darby and Miles are at that point talking about 4th of July fireworks. I don't see how that connects to any kind of CoCitBotE-as-GR argument.

2) I disagree that the use of "scherzo" on 177 has anything to do with GR, the rocket, or other Pynchon works. The definition of scherzo you note is very music-specific, but my dictionary sez that scherzo means, "a vigorous, light, or playful composition, typically comprising a movement in a symphony or sonata." And CoCitBotE *is* alluded to as a vigorous, light work. You've compared it to the rocket life-cycle and what you see as the greater structure of Pynchon's novels-- the latter may exist, but I don't see how this use of "scherzo" is related in any way.

3) It is possible that ATD's opening word of "now" in some way connects to the final two words of GR, but how does relate to a CoCitBotE-as-GR argument?

4) I'm skeptical that a connection between the Chums' underworld adventure and GR is intentional, although if you think it's there, by all means explain further. Quickly glancing over these pages again, all I see is an internatinoal mining cartel getting involved in the underworld, but such corporate enemies are typical in all Pynchon works.

5) The narrator on p. 117 claims explicit ownership of CoCitBotE, but where does the narrator come across as both Chums author and TP, besides the fact that Pynchon wrote this book?

6) This is the first I've heard of Darby = Bodine, which you should flesh out further here or somewhere on the wiki.

Conclusion) While interesting, I think that your interpetation of the subterranean suquence is so far just a bunch of unconnected fragments of observation. Connecting them into some kind of greater thesis is required to convince me, at least, that the Hollow Earth suquence and description of CoCitBotE is anything more than Pynchon having fun and imagining an entire novel he'll never actually write. Thanks, Bleakhaus 21:29, 18 January 2007 (PST)

Personal tools