NABOKV-L post 0008727, Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:44:32 -0700

Subject

Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3597

From

Date

Sat, 10/11/2003 - 13:44

Body

----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
> pynchon-l-digest Saturday, October 11 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3597
>
>
>> Date: 10 Oct 2003 14:50:10 -0400
> From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> Subject: RE: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 14:06, Ghetta Life wrote:
>
> > Well at first I thought Terrance was just quibbling and being
argumentative,
> > but I think he's correct to dispute your characterization of Shade's
> > meaning. The message is most simply that such musings are beyond our
human
> > ability, and thus (as he says earlier) our efforts to imagine an
afterlife
> > fail by their very lack of implausibility. A fantastic state beyond our
> > ability to imagine COULD very well await us, so don't join the scoffers.
>
> This is correct as far a Shade's meaning is concerned.
>
> Who's in a position to say there will be no afterlife though my
> expectation of seeing it is about as remote as socialism coming to
> America.
>
> P.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 11:49:32 -0700
> From: "Vincent A. Maeder" <vmaeder@cycn-phx.com>
> Subject: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ghetta Life [mailto:ghetta_outta@hotmail.com]
> > >
> > > >From: "Vincent A. Maeder" <vmaeder@cycn-phx.com>
> > > >
> > > > > From: Terrance [mailto:lycidas2@earthlink.net]
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vincent A. Maeder" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Line 230 is the last line of the 8th stanza of canto two. Mr.
> > Shade
> > > >has just completed an argument in the seventh stanza that if, before
> > we
> > > >came to life, we tried to imagine life we would have dismissed such
> > > musings
> > > >as mere nonsense.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is that right? I don't think that is it at all. That is not what
he
> > > >says, at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > he says that
> > > > >
> > > > > IF prior to life we had been able to imagine life,
> > > > > what mad, impossible, unutterably weird,
> > > > > wonderful nonsense it Might have appeared!
> > > > >
> > > > > He doesn't say we would have dismissed it at mere nonsense. And I
> > > don't
> > > >think that he implies that we Would have.
> > > >
> > > >Terrance: Well, I agree you have properly recited what he says, but
I
> > > >think he means we would dismiss such musings. Unless we would
> > entertain
> > > >"nonsense" as anything more than dismissive musings. And vulgar
> > laughter
> > > >further demonstrates the contempt there would be for such thoughts.
> > > >
> > > >Mr. Kinbote's commentary of science vs. spirituality tends to bolster
> > > this
> > > >argument as it is usually the ken of science to dismiss spiritual
> > claims.
> > > >If there were scientists in the world of life before life, they would
> > > >probably work toward dismissal of claims of life after pre-life as
> > well.
> > > >V.
> > >
> > > Well at first I thought Terrance was just quibbling and being
> > > argumentative,
> > > but I think he's correct to dispute your characterization of Shade's
> > > meaning. The message is most simply that such musings are beyond our
> > > human
> > > ability, and thus (as he says earlier) our efforts to imagine an
> > afterlife
> > > fail by their very lack of implausibility. A fantastic state beyond
our
> > > ability to imagine COULD very well await us, so don't join the
scoffers.
> > >
> > > Ghetta (Dave's dead)
> >
> Well, I respectfully disagree. Although such a world might exist beyond
our
> life, you have phrased the argument to be ipso facto regarding our current
> perspective. Mr. Shade's canto discusses what nonsense it would seem to
> imagine a life beyond pre-life (an absurd thought itself). What else
would
> we do with nonsense but dismiss it. For example, it is nonsense to expect
> rain in Phoenix Arizona... oh wait, it's raining...
> V.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:54:06 -0700
> From: "Keith McMullen" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> >>>Who's in a position to say there will be no afterlife though my
> expectation of seeing it is about as remote as socialism coming to
> America.<<<
>
> Prelife, life, and afterlife are synonyms.
> You are seeing none of them.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 11:54:46 -0700
> From: "Vincent A. Maeder" <vmaeder@cycn-phx.com>
> Subject: RE: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> Looking back at my original argument, I stated that we would dismiss any
> pre-life musings of life. Since we are alive, it therefore follows such
> musings would not be nonsense. Therefore, don't dismiss musings of an
> afterlife. As I had stated:
>
> "[I]f, before we came to life, we tried to imagine life we would have
> dismissed such musings as mere nonsense. Now in the eighth stanza, he
> completes the thought by arguing that it is just as naОve for us to argue
> there is no hereafter especially when all we can conjure up in our
> imagination for life in the hereafter is 'a domestic ghost.'"
>
> I think we are talking about the same thing, just depends which part of
the
> elephant we blind people are looking at. V.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:01:14 +0000
> From: "Ghetta Life" <ghetta_outta@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> >
> >The sense seems to be that Life's coming into being is in no way a
> >logical and predictable consequence of anything coming before.
> >Therefore, we should not rule out Afterlife simply because it is not a
> >logical and predictable consequence of life.
>
> Yes, but he's using logic to come to this conclusion, reasoning about the
> unreasonable.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Need more e-mail storage? Get 10MB with Hotmail Extra Storage.
> http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:12:10 -0400
> From: Terrance <lycidas2@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> Keith McMullen wrote:
> >
> > >>> A fantastic state beyond our ability to imagine COULD very well
await
> > us, so don't join the scoffers. <<<
> >
> > That state is not awaiting. It is right now.
>
> Thus spoke the Romantic Poet William Blake.
>
> Hell too is a state of mind. God did not make hell. Satan, did, is, in,
> Hell.
>
> Eternity is what always is, the reality underlying all temporal
> phenomena, the nunc stans of STA. It is not the end of time. It is not
> the future. It is the annihilation of Time, which is limited to this
> temporal world; in short, Eternity is the real now.
>
> Shade is a Romantic poet.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:09:01 -0700
> From: "Vincent A. Maeder" <vmaeder@cycn-phx.com>
> Subject: FW: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> > From: Ghetta Life [mailto:ghetta_outta@hotmail.com]
> > >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> > >
> > >The sense seems to be that Life's coming into being is in no way a
> > >logical and predictable consequence of anything coming before.
> > >Therefore, we should not rule out Afterlife simply because it is not a
> > >logical and predictable consequence of life.
> >
> > Yes, but he's using logic to come to this conclusion, reasoning about
> > the unreasonable.
>
> It is a fun, nonsensical argument. The more I read this stuff, the more
> funner it gets...
> V.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:24:42 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Michael Joseph <mjoseph@rci.rutgers.edu>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon E-texts
>
> Unless Teepee and his publisher have given their permission, which I would
> doubt.
>
>
>
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Ghetta Life wrote:
>
> > Shhh! Don't tell anyone, but V & COL49 (and alot of other folk's stuff)
can
> > be found on-line:
> >
> >
http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_the_crying_of_lot_49.txt
> >
> > http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_v.txt
> >
> > Isn't this a copyright violation?
> >
> > Ghetta
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Fast, faster, fastest: Upgrade to Cable or DSL today!
> > https://broadband.msn.com
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:35:12 EDT
> From: KXX4493553@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Pynchon E-texts
>
> - --part1_12e.32f00e62.2cb863f0_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> I think "Gnutenberg" never takes care for any "copyright".
>
> kwp
>
> In einer eMail vom 10.10.2003 20:25:57 Westeurop=E4ische Normalzeit
schreibt=
> =20
> mjoseph@rci.rutgers.edu:
>
>
> >=20
> > Unless Teepee and his publisher have given their permission, which I
would
> > doubt.
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Ghetta Life wrote:
> >=20
> > > Shhh! Don't tell anyone, but V & COL49 (and alot of other folk's
stuff)=20
> > can
> > > be found on-line:
> > >
> > >
http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_the_crying_of_lot_49.tx=
> t
> > >
> > > http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_v.txt
> > >
> > > Isn't this a copyright violation?
> > >
> > > Ghetta
> > >
> >=20
>
>
> - --part1_12e.32f00e62.2cb863f0_boundary
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <HTML> =3D"Arial" LANG=3D"2">I think "Gnutenberg" never takes care for any
"copyrig=
> ht". 
> 
> kwp 
> 
> In einer eMail vom 10.10.2003 20:25:57 Westeurop=E4ische Normalzeit
schreibt=
> mjoseph@rci.rutgers.edu: 
> 
> FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"2"> 
> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid;
MARGIN-LEFT=
> : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> 
> Unless Teepee and his publisher have given their permission, which I
would<B=
> R>
> doubt. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Ghetta Life wrote: 
> 
> > Shhh! Don't tell anyone, but V & COL49 (and alot of other folk's
st=
> uff) can 
> > be found on-line: 
> > 
> >
http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_the_crying_of_lot_49.t=
> xt 
> > 
> > http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/pynchon_thomas_v.txt 
> > 
> > Isn't this a copyright violation? 
> > 
> > Ghetta 
> > 
> </BLOCKQUOTE> 
> FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"2"> 
> </HTML>
> - --part1_12e.32f00e62.2cb863f0_boundary--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: 10 Oct 2003 15:51:47 -0400
> From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 15:01, Ghetta Life wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> > >
> > >The sense seems to be that Life's coming into being is in no way a
> > >logical and predictable consequence of anything coming before.
> > >Therefore, we should not rule out Afterlife simply because it is not a
> > >logical and predictable consequence of life.
> >
> > Yes, but he's using logic to come to this conclusion, reasoning about
the
> > unreasonable.
>
>
> Yes, it's a form of logic to conclude that we can't form definite ideas
> about something we've not experienced.
>
> However the "formal logic" Shade employs--the syllogism--is
> intentionally bogus. other men die; but I/Am not another
>
> The logic of teenage drivers.
>
> I was mainly trying to escape from the in utero or pre-utero imagining
> life before life began which seemed to be kind of a red herring.
>
> I liked the in vitro better. Can test tube babies remember that far
> back?
>
> P.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:55:35 -0400
> From: Terrance <lycidas2@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: VLVL: chapt 7, p. 92 real and fake
>
> Michael Joseph wrote:
> >
> > Paul, another exciting inroad into the text. Do you see any resonance of
> > Augustine's City on the Hill in the hillside description beginning this
> > chapter, and in this any suggestion of the Wayvones being a metonymy of
> > idealized America? I can see this idea resonating with Otto's regarding
> > the ironic identification of the good family and la cosa nostra:
American
> > "family values" are being equated with patriarchal control, and the City
> > on the Hill becoming a mafia seizin or stronghold--which the text offers
> > in several versions. [more responses interlined below]
>
>
> I still can't see how these ideological reading can fit between the
> covers of P's novel unless you tear out three fifths of the book.
> Wayvone or his holding company are not on Brock's team.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: 10 Oct 2003 16:09:08 -0400
> From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: FW: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 15:09, Vincent A. Maeder wrote:
> > > From: Ghetta Life [mailto:ghetta_outta@hotmail.com]
> > > >From: Paul Mackin <paul.mackin@verizon.net>
> > > >
> > > >The sense seems to be that Life's coming into being is in no way a
> > > >logical and predictable consequence of anything coming before.
> > > >Therefore, we should not rule out Afterlife simply because it is not
a
> > > >logical and predictable consequence of life.
> > >
> > > Yes, but he's using logic to come to this conclusion, reasoning about
> > > the unreasonable.
> >
> > It is a fun, nonsensical argument. The more I read this stuff, the more
> > funner it gets...
> > V.
>
> Is there an Ontological Argument for the Afterlife? It's the Perfect
> Idea, therefore it must be true.
>
> P.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:36:58 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Michael Joseph <mjoseph@rci.rutgers.edu>
> Subject: Re: VLVL: chapt 7, p. 92 real and fake
>
> well, terence, a lot of Pynchon's novel doesn't "fit between the covers."
> Like foot pain, you know? The kind that doesn't fit inside the shoe.
>
> Happy Canadian Thanksgiving!
>
> M
>
>
>
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Terrance wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Michael Joseph wrote:
> > >
> > > Paul, another exciting inroad into the text. Do you see any resonance
of
> > > Augustine's City on the Hill in the hillside description beginning
this
> > > chapter, and in this any suggestion of the Wayvones being a metonymy
of
> > > idealized America? I can see this idea resonating with Otto's
regarding
> > > the ironic identification of the good family and la cosa nostra:
American
> > > "family values" are being equated with patriarchal control, and the
City
> > > on the Hill becoming a mafia seizin or stronghold--which the text
offers
> > > in several versions. [more responses interlined below]
> >
> >
> > I still can't see how these ideological reading can fit between the
> > covers of P's novel unless you tear out three fifths of the book.
> > Wayvone or his holding company are not on Brock's team.
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:42:36 -0700
> From: "Steve Maas" <tyronemullet@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Pynchonian echoes
>
> He really, really dislikes Davis. Steve Maas
>
> - ----------------------
> Welcome to Arnold, King for a Day
> By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
>
> [...] when they looked at you, governor Davis, they saw the gray of your
> name, and on your face the sex-less pallor of death and corruption.
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn10092003.html
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Instant message with integrated webcam using MSN Messenger 6.0. Try it now
> FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 17:09:33 -0400
> From: Terrance <lycidas2@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: VLVL: chapt 7, p. 92 real and fake
>
> Michael Joseph wrote:
> >
> > well, terence, a lot of Pynchon's novel doesn't "fit between the
covers."
> > Like foot pain, you know? The kind that doesn't fit inside the shoe.
>
> Yeah, speaking of tooth aches, Wayvone's company is a wholly-owned
> subsidiary of the Church. Good thing you didn't have your boot on. That
> smarts.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 17:37:42 -0400
> From: joeallonby <vze422fs@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: NP Red Sox Win
>
> Let's see what Pedro and the Rocket have on Saturday in Fenway. It's all
> even at 1.
>
> on 10/10/03 10:13 AM, Richard Romeo at romeocheeseburger@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > red sox Lose! ;)
> >
> > fondly
> > Rich
> > NYC
> >
> >
> > --- joeallonby <vze422fs@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> on 10/7/03 8:36 AM, Otto at ottosell@yahoo.de wrote:
> >>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Tim Strzechowski" <dedalus204@comcast.net>
> >>> To: "joeallonby" <vze422fs@verizon.net>; "Dave
> >> Monroe" <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> >>> Cc: "Pynchon-L" <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 12:28 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: NP Red Sox Win
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Tim to Dave: Sorry, man. I love ya and all, but
> >> baseball is the perfect
> >>>> sport, the American sport, and the only sport
> >> with actual *spiritual*
> >>>> potential this year!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tim to Joe: Looking forward to the Series of the
> >> Century, my friend!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Dave:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Uh, er, howzabout them Brewers? Packers?
> >> Basketball
> >>>>> season begin yet? Okay ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Joe:
> >>>>
> >>>>> We'll deal with the Yankees. You deal with the
> >> Marlins. See you in the
> >>>> Hell
> >>>>> Freezes Over Series.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Seems as if you guys missed the women's soccer
> >> semi-finale . . .
> >>>
> >>> Otto
> >>>
> >> Yes, I heard the future Mrs Garciaparra came up
> >> short.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> > http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:47:08 -0700
> From: Mary Krimmel <mary@krimmel.net>
> Subject: NPPF Commentary Line 209
>
> <html>
> <table border=0>
> <tr><td width=624></td></tr>
> <tr><td width=624></td></tr>
> <tr><td width=624>Ghetta Life wrote:</td></tr>
> </table>
> .... 
> Not remembering isn't proof that an awareness wasn't there. Sometimes I
> barely remeber last night, but I'm told I was charming nonetheless :)
> 
> Also, I think foetus have been observed to dream. Of what could they be
> dreaming? 
> Ghetta 
> Fetuses have even be said to be learning, too. I cannot recall specifics,
> but I believe that someone reported an experiment in which he read over
> and over a section of Homer to his unborn child. Later the child
> memorized some of the same work, and learned the passage which he had
> heard as a fetus noticeably more easily than other passages. 
> Also I think that young infants have been observed to respond to music
> they heard in utero with more attention than to music they had not heard
> previously.Too, there is a theory backed with some evidence that a
> simulated heart-beat sound is soothing to an infant because it was
> accustomed to the sound before birth.. 
> Anyone have references to such anecdotes or experiments? 
> Mary Krimmel 
> </html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:21:21 -0500
> From: "MdShrk1" <mdshrk1@writeonill.org>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon E-texts
>
> Considering some of the others on the list...I would say that this major
> copyright infringement. But, I won't tell if you won't.
>
> Tim Mooney
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:45:15 +0100
> From: "David Gentle" <Gentle_Family@btinternet.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon's to the left....I think Pynchon's anti-secrecy, is
what....
>
> <<Some facts on the Hollywood Ten and that era:
> Ring Lardner, Jr. is mentioned in Catcher in the Rye, very warmly--or is
it
> Ring, Sr--anyway, the refutation of McCarthyism is clear; Dalton Trumbo
> is credited with screenwriting in Spartacus, a move seen as "giving him
> his name back," and a clever move by an English director, Stanley Kubrick,
> early in his career>>
> Kubrick was from New York, though he was based in England later in life.
>
> http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/faq/html/page2.html
>
> David Gentle
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:24:02 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: VLVL The Wayvones; drugs
>
> on 11/10/03 1:14 AM, Otto wrote:
>
> > We all know the history of the mafia, which had become powerful through
> > prohibition, from all those great movies, but what
> > has become of the heirs? And why has been especially the American
society so
> > receptive to mafiotic structures? Strictly neo-liberal economies and
> > prohibition that enabled huge profits?
>
> The connections in Pynchon's text run both ways, however, back to Zoyd and
> Van Meter: "Zoyd had played a few mob weddings in his career" (21.9), and
> recall how it's Zoyd who sets up Isaiah with the gig (20-21); and he, Van
> Meter and Ralph Wayvone Jr (and Hector as well, for that matter) are all
> pretty simpatico with one another (9-10).
>
> And DL is a close friend of Ralph Sr and his family too, and she and
Takeshi
> have done business with him in the past. While Ralph Sr admits to being
> "copacetic" with the "Republican Justice Department" -- though not with
> Brock Vond apparently -- he's obviously equally "copacetic" with DL and
> Takeshi (102-3).
>
> DL "objected philosophically to all drugs" (101.10), so the narrator tells
> us, and this aligns her with Hector, if not Brock also. She tells Prairie
> that Takeshi "[t]akes a lot of speed, gets grandiose" (100.27-8), and it's
> interesting that we see Isaiah "snorting a couple of lines" (104.2-3) with
> Meathook in this chapter too.
>
> > Ralph junior's comparison with The Royals isn't that bad, like the case
> > of Prince Charles seems to indicate the heir by birth isn't necessarily
> > the best man for the job, the basic structural error of feudal systems:
> >
> > "His kids -- well, there was still time, time would tell." (93.10-11)
>
> Ralph Snr is pretty dismissive of his son's simplistic comparison to the
> British monarchy, however. What "the corporation that owned them" is
exactly
> isn't explained, but it's pretty clearly the Mob, isn't it? The "Family"
> with a capital "F", as opposed to the Wayvone "family"? (93-4)
>
> best
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:40:08 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Shade's meditations on life after death
>
> on 11/10/03 4:06 AM, Ghetta Life wrote:
>
> > The message is most simply that such musings are beyond our human
> > ability, and thus (as he says earlier) our efforts to imagine an
afterlife
> > fail by their very lack of implausibility. A fantastic state beyond our
> > ability to imagine COULD very well await us, so don't join the scoffers.
>
> Yes, the italicised "if" is important. Shade is setting up a hypothetical
> scenario which is analogous to the question posed about when resurrection
> occurs.
>
> Yet *if* prior to life we had
> Been able to imagine life, what mad,
> Impossible, unutterably weird,
> Wonderful nonsense it might have appeared! 220
>
> He's equating "life" to "[w]onderful nonsense" from an imagined (and
> impossible) perspective outside of life. It's got nothing at all to do
with
> foetuses.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:19:57 -0700
> From: "Keith McMullen" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> >>> Mr. Shade's canto discusses what nonsense it would seem to
> imagine a life beyond pre-life (an absurd thought itself).<<<
>
> This restatement really doesn't capture the spirit of what Shade said.
> His words indicate delight, not dismissal. When I dismiss something
> by calling it nonsense, I never use the modifier, 'wonderful.'
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:21:20 -0700
> From: "Keith McMullen" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Commentary Line 230, P. 164
>
> >>>Shade is a Romantic poet.<<<
>
> And Nabokov is an "indivisible monist."
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:19:13 -0500
> From: "Tim Strzechowski" <dedalus204@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: NP Red Sox Win
>
> Well, Clemens is gonna get lit up like a chandelier Sunday night.
>
>
>
> Prior will pitch the BEST game of his career.
>
>
>
> And we will be another game day closer to the Hell Freezes Over series.
>
>
>
> Tim (you watch!)
>
>
>
> > red sox Lose! ;)
> >
> > fondly
> > Rich
> > NYC
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3597
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.