Re: MDDM Gershom's Intervention

Paul wrote:

> If I read the passage correctly there are two reasons Washington couldn't be
> the author of the "nigger" sentence.
> 
> One, after the lead in text saying that "more and more arrive at Raleigh's
> Billiard-Room," it would be terrible narrative style to let only one of these
> "more and more" speak.

Yes, I agree with this, and should have cited that lead-in paragraph as
well. The second sentence in that paragraph (572.9) shows just how secretive
GW was in arranging the social call with M, and how damaging to his
reputation and career a friendly meeting between he and someone who would
probably be regarded as one of the King's agents might have been should it
have become public, which is almost what happens at Raleigh's. And, it's
just a friendly visit, too, nothing ominous or malevolent in it. George is,
again, depicted as being most gracious and reasonable.
 
> Secondly, the N word sentence is uttered by someone of lower rank and
> circumstances than Washington,  whom we know to be a well off landowner and
> quite incapable of being bollixed by being equated with a slave.

Not only that. This speaker concludes by asking "Are you sure?" These two
gents amongst the gathered throng are rumour-mongers; I'd say George was
very well-informed about colonial policies. He is someone who would have
been very "sure" about such things, and hardly likely to be gossiping or
seeking his information in a smoky poolroom.
 
> The "civility, sir" sentence is of less certain origin, perhaps intentionally
> be because it doesn't matter which one speaks it. The reader is meant ot find
> it quite beyond belief that an 18th Century free white man could ever possibly
> object to the N word in the way we all do today. Another example of projecting
> 20th Century sensibilies onto people living 200 plus years ago, which P
> obviously thinks is humorous and possibly instructive.

Perhaps. I think a clue here is that Mason is "twitching away" when he
speaks, and seems to be gently trying to stop Washington from causing a
ruckus. I really don't think that Mason would be the one to cause an uproar
in this place, at this time. I agree that it could be anyone, and that GW
might be just a bystander too, but I think there's enough circumstantial
evidence to conclude with some certainty that it's George. I'll try and
explain.

Another question which the scene leaves the reader to stew over is, why has
Gershom come to Raleigh's in the first place? It isn't an establishment
where he is particularly welcome, or where a Negro would be expected (or
permitted) to fraternise with white men at all. It's not a "Coaching-inn",
and he hasn't come there to perform for tourists. When he does make his
presence known he interjects himself into the looming dispute not with a
King-Joak, but with a fairly provocative remark about everyone looking like
"Niggers", because only their shadowy silhouettes are visible in the smoky
gloom. Despite the literal truth of the comment it *is* a provocation under
the circumstances, particularly as it's a Negro making the observation!
 
There's no reason to suspect Gershom is bent on suicide, or that he's some
fanatical (and anachronistic) civil rights crusader aspiring to martyrdom.
Obviously George hasn't brought him along, and hadn't known he was coming,
and his reaction when he realises that Gersh *is* present is one of outright
surprise, but there's also an element of shock in it too. It's not a
pleasant realisation for George at all, as he also knows that this isn't a
safe place for Gershom to be parading about in. Note that George doesn't say
another word in the entire scene. I can visualise the scene, he and Mason
grabbing one another's arms and whispering to each other as events unfold,
neither of them now wanting anybody's identity to be revealed.

I think the reason that Gersh has followed GW to Raleigh's is to ensure his
friend's safe-keeping. I think he speaks as he does when he does because he
realises that George is about to get himself into a dispute with the racist
man. I think the point to note in the way that Pynchon has articulated this
scene is that GW is quite intent on making a big deal out of the gent's use
of the racist term. It is only when he realises that Gershom is present, and
might be in jeopardy, that he shuts up. And, further, it is Gersh who has
manipulated this particular detente.

I think that the way that Nathe intervenes on Gersh's behalf, and the
conversation between Murray, he and Mason which ends the chapter, show
likewise the high esteem with which Nathe, the employee, regards M & D, his
"masters".

> Finally, Gershom MUST be the utterer of the "do I hear that word again"
> sentence, because GW recognizes the voice.

Yes, that's certainly correct.

I think that the nub of Pynchon's characterisation, and the beauty and
remarkableness of it, is to show that GW, while he remained a slaveholder,
was never a racist.

best