on 3/30/00 1:19 PM, Wat Tyler at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> I note Pynchon's portrayal of dichotomies in Gravity's Rainbow.
> What is immediately apparent in reading Pynchon and Chomsky is the use of
> commas in each. Chomsky appends irony and sarcasm to many sentences using
> commas. It's very unique. Pynchon uses a lot of commas which serve to slap
> the reader across the brain repeatedly. What's going on here?

Wat: That's a point of similarity I hadn't thought of until just now. I may
have to think about it more. One theory I've had about Pynchon's runaway use
of the comma, and of cascading metaphors and the like, is that, when you are
paranoid, the connections come at you so fast that it's annoying to have to
funnel that seamless web of correspondences into a conventional sentence
structure. Periods are for the non-paranoid. Certainly one tends to find
that kind of writing the works of other writers who court paranoid themes as
well, like Don DeLillo and Robert Coover.

As for Chomsky, he's definitely for people who like high-density information
throughput. So there's a point of reference right there.
>
> The left-right stuff is very interesting. Some Marxist economists are
> working with some Institutionalist economists, but this is sort of a
> technical thing. I also note that when Chomsky attempts to write about
> economics that he loses his unique voice. His writing becomes fragmentary
> and halting.
Again, interesting. I hadn't noticed that. By Institutional economists, you
mean people like Galbraith? I like Galbraith a lot. He used to be an advisor
to Kennedy, I believe. Pretty hard to imagine nowadays, of couse.
--
Tresy Kilbourne
Seattle WA