|
At first, it all seems very simple. An historical novel about two Englishmen
of singular importance to American history, written in a meticulous eighteenth
century prose style replete with idiosyncratic mannerist capitalizations, by a
writer eminently qualified to research and prepare convincing historical
representations. Thomas Pynchon is, after all, a well-established master of the
Baedeker, the Fausto-ian history of Malta, the intricacies of the new Turkic
Alphabet and the Thurn und Taxis postal system, the film schools of both pre-war
Germany and a recently psychedelic California, the progress of Oriental,
Kabbalistic, and Karmic philosophies, and the emergence of Catatonic
Expressionism!
In Mason & Dixon, Pynchonian History, and all the attention it warrants,
provides us with the continuity we have come to expect in the writing, as much as
we crave the incisive descriptions of paranoia and anti-paranoia. So, we are not
surprised to find both in Mason & Dixon. The ancestor of the perennially debauched
"Pig" Bodine appears as the equally raucous "Fender-belly" Bodine. Vast political
intrigues provide us with ample paranoia as Mason seeks the patronage of the
Royal Astronomer Bradley via the duplicitous Maskelyne, and both Mason and Dixon
repeatedly wonder if their duties as observers of the heavens and surveyors of the
earth are entirely subservient to the interests of the French, English, and Dutch
naval powers which, in turn, represent the implacable bureaucracies of slavery,
religion, nationhood, and oligarchy. The concept of Family and the concept of Duty
are made cruelly incompatible in this world, and the daily lives of the populace of
several different lands are frequently interrupted by the interdiction of ghosts or,
more generally, of inhabitants of a very familiar Pynchonian region known as the
Other Side... Even the powerful, often-noted opposition between North and South
gets its due. In short, Mason & Dixon is at first glance everything a Pynchon novel should be. Both history and paranoid speculation abound.
But, in the final analysis, Mason & Dixon comes across as something like a
24-year-old housecleaning, much like going through the pockets of James Joyce
and coming up with wads and wads of notes for research projects which were
never quite finished. Pynchon's new novel is like a gigantic, seductive paradigm
which was somehow never completed convincingly, a marvellous but ultimately
empty theoretical construct which ironically took as its subject the ubiquitous
Pynchonian theme of failed paradigms!
A famous Pynchon question asks us: "what are the Stars but points in the
body of God where we insert the healing needles of our desire and longing?" Mason
& Dixon plays on the idea mightily by re-iterating the famous idea, "as above; so
below." In brief, the novel is an attempt to map out the aetherial contours of the
noumenal in the multiplicity of the phenomenal. It is geomancy in a terrifically
refined sense, a quest to show the world as contained within a vast set of force
lines which are magnetick and telepathick, and yet more-than-magnetick, more
than-telepathick.
The energies of the Dragon, Sha, are described by a Feng Shui master who is an enemy of all the right-angles, great circles, and tangents which are so
necessary to the surveying of the Mason/Dixon line. The power of Ley lines
crisscrossing the Salisbury Plain and its psychic nexus, Stonehenge, receive
detailed treatments. North American Indian burial mounds are mapped out along
patterns of power and communication, and the energy of their Warrior Path
truncates the progress of the Englishmen's paltry property line. A mechanical
duck races at otherworldly speeds unerringly straight along topographic vectors
which have somehow caused chickens to line up like the needles of compasses and
receives erotic pleasure from its journeys. Secret Jesuit fraternities use an aura
of force and energy to experiment with communication and levitation. Pynchon's
paradigm would become the map of a world which interpenetrates the Heavens
seamlessly, as easily as the knotted cords of a fishing-net pass through the very
sea which it trolls. But it just doesn't work.
Perhaps it is simply weak characterization, far too many digressions into
pet subjects, a failure to exploit readily available oppositions like slavery and
abolitionism, an unconvincing reliance on the convenient appearance of various
mystics, oddballs, and historical figures like Franklin, Emerson, Johnson, and
Boswell, too many bad bawdy songs, or a sheer inability on the part of an older
writer to draw together the fruits of almost a quarter century of research; but the
paradigm just does not stick. The paint does not adhere to the canvas, and
although we are charmed by wit and a supremely well-chosen idiomatic language
which is so deliciously appropriate to any number of finely delineated subjects we
can scarcely believe it, Pynchon just does not pull the web of spidery lines which
comprise his map of the world and the Universe which surrounds it together in a
convincing manner.
Amazing try, but...
Laurence Daw is a London writer who maintains an Internet site dealing with
Pynchon at Spermatikos Logos.
|