re Re: re Re: Reagan in Vineland

It's always both/and, not either/or, with Pynchon isn't it? That
individuals are flawed and share some responsibility in their interactions
with the System doesn't make folks like Nixon-Reagan-Bush-Bush look any
better in their exploitation and abuse of weak people like Frenesi or Zoyd
(or any of us, as far as that goes), however. The power-elite's betrayal of
our trust and Their increased ability to determine the shape of events puts
them in rather a different category -- and from a certain perspective, more
despicable one -- from Their pawns, don't you think?, Pynchon shows some
sympathy for even his most reprehensible characters as individuals, but his
texts appear to judge them quite harshly in their capacity as agents of the
System actively working to fuck over others or otherwise increase the
general levels of suffering. Pynchon's texts deal with multiple vectors and
degrees of responsibility across a spectrum (rainbow, if you will) of
culpability for the human plight; we see this clearly, I think, in the
shocking passage where Pokler, a victim himself, confronts the slave
laborers who suffer and die in part as a result of his actions or of his
failure to act. I think P's rather harder on the System than he is on the
individual, but that's a judgement call that follows my personal
preference, I'm sure.


rich:
>I think we can all agree that Pynchon blames the system forcefully enough,
>but he just as well blames the failings of individuals--Frenesi being a
>prime example--her naivete that she could live outside of time.
>The system has corrupted all, but like technology, you can blame it all on
>the big S, but Pynchon reminds that it's individuals who are behind that big
>S, too.