Re: MDDM Washington

jbor wrote:

> on 30/6/02 3:01 PM, Doug Millison at [email protected] wrote:
>
> > It's revisionist history -- which Pynchon here plays with -- and not the
> > "official" national myth that lets us know that Washington raised hemp,
> > that emphasizes his slave ownership, etc.
>
> I'm not denying that the revisionist histories exist, or suggesting that
> Pynchon is unaware of them. What I'm saying is that Pynchon's depiction of
> GW at home in _M&D_ in fact *contests* the negative - and often highly
> polemical - assessments of GW which typify those histories.

The original question (asked by Rob) was why is M&D's depiction of Washington
flattering. But do we mean why is it seriously  flattering, or why is it mock
flattering? To me the passage gentlly pokes fun at what is surely the enlighened
view of potential readers of M&D that slavery was an unjust and cruel
institution. That is the given. The question for discussion should be WHY does P
joke about such things. (Something like the question of why does the narrator in
another part of the book say 'who sez slavery is so bad?') What purpose does
this kind of admittedly rather gentle mockery serve? I'm sure some readers have
found the GW section of M&D both offensive and not very funny. I'm not one of
them but still ask myself what was Pynchon up to here?

P. (middle of the night here)