The Whore Called War - Thomas Pynchon "Gravity's Rainbow"

Sitaram: Ii spent all last night in Pal Talk chat... it was a room which discusses Islam, but run by Egyptian
Coptic Christians but, many were Arabic speakers

Sitaram: Pal Talk is amazing, with quality voice

Tehran_MD: ah wonderful

Sitaram: i spent some time in protestant and catholic chat rooms

Sitaram: oh, and an organization can pay to have a room open 24/7 but, if you dont pay, then your room is only open till the last person leaves it

Sitaram: but then, you must have a number of people as admins, to keep it orderly. So you must find folks in many time zones, because, part of the terms of use is that you will moderate such rooms
Sitaram: so, if you leave it unmoderated, and there is mischief, then, you may lose your privileges


Sitaram: oh, one AMAZING thing about pal talk, they have about 50 rooms just for the Kurds

Sitaram: the kurdish people are using it BIG TIME
Sitaram: I was shocked
Sitaram: i have never noticed a kurdish presence on internet
Sitaram: i am sure they have strong desires for political identity, independence, sovereignty

Tehran_MD: yes, but they wont be happier.if independent as a country.

Sitaram: that is quite understandable, looking at the centuries of their history

Tehran_MD: no natural resources.nothing for improvment

Sitaram: true, independence will not give them happiness, but, they desire it, as a matter of personal dignity, identity; it is only human

Tehran_MD: stupid.

Sitaram: although it is far better to be as Socrates, a "citizen of the world" and globally minded and multicultural and tolerant

Tehran_MD: yes

Sitaram: hmmm.... "the meek shall inherit the earth". Only just now does that phrase hit me with new meaning. It is something from Ingeel (Gospels) only just now does it dawn upon me, that if those meek enough to transcend local nationality, tribal identity and be global, transcultural

Sitaram: that is a kind of meekness. And, lacking such meekness, the world is destroyed in violence
Sitaram: most interesting
Sitaram: that is undoubtedly my great insight for today
Sitaram: there is some other good word for nationalism, but i cant remember, must google

Tehran_MD: oh interesting

Sitaram: i am searching now for synonyms

Sitaram: perhaps i am thinking of chauvenism

Tehran_MD: ah that is a right word for kurds.

Sitaram: yes! chauvinism is extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of a group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards a rival group.

Sitaram: one Pakistani psychotherapist on chowk.com (in Canada, in the diaspora) wrote an
article about how people must get beyond tribalism and embrace globalism

Sitaram: The term is derived from Nicolas Chauvin, a semi-mythical soldier under Napoleon Bonaparte

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism

Tehran_MD: oh interesting really

Sitaram: are you able to access wikipedia in Iran?

Sitaram: wiki is so useful, i do hope it is not blocked

Tehran_MD: yes I am.

Sitaram: ah, wonderful!

Sitaram: as fareed zakaria of newsweek said, Iran has a young, virbrant population, open to the world

Sitaram: the world of ideas

Sitaram: he was host of foreignexchange.tv educational television broadcast
but he was replaced by Daljit Dhaliwaal who is an equally impressive intellectual

Sitaram: i rather imagine foreignexchange.tv is blocked
Sitaram: but perhaps not

Tehran_MD:

Sitaram: here is how i see it.....

Diversification and sectarianism are DEEPLY ingrained in the human psyche,.... and it was originally a
survival advantage for the species so that some would choose rainforest, others tundra, others the
desert, others seafaring

Tehran_MD: yes.different tastes.

Sitaram: so, because of our natural tendency to become diverse

Tehran_MD: that is beautiful isnt it

Sitaram: therefore, should one use weapons of mass destruction to eliminate all opposition, with genocide Sitaram: why, the remaining population would eventually become equally sectarian

Tehran_MD: I remember when I was 15
Tehran_MD: they took me to a
beautiful place .
Tehran_MD: because I was a brilliant
student.won science prize etc
Tehran_MD: and it was a very green
hill in the north of iran;.close to the
sea
Tehran_MD: but the thing is they

obliged us to wear similar clothes
Tehran_MD: I remember how it made

me angry
Tehran_MD: so even in a simple

matter like wearing clothes people

want to differ.,


Sitaram: so, if all the world, tomorrow, were to become say sunni, shia, sufi...
Sitaram: why in 100 years, there would be sectarian difference and more strife and violence
Sitaram: so, we must agree to differ
Sitaram: how interesting!
Sitaram: because, our expression of individuality, is an element of our identity
Sitaram: we validate our own existence, by our individualistic self expression
Sitaram: and, it is the very essence of free will choice

Tehran_MD: yes

Tehran_MD: what book are you

reading these days?

Sitaram: in abraham maslows pyramid

of the hierarchy of needs

Sitaram: i am reading Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Sitaram: he toured america around 1840
Sitaram: and wrote very insigtful observations about the form of government
Sitaram: and of course he was french
Sitaram: so, i had a much different

perspective


Tehran_MD:
Tehran_MD: tres bien
Sitaram: the expression "a shot heard round the world" pertains to both
French Revolution and American Revolution
Sitaram: freedom is begotten by violence, unfortunately
Sitaram: when shall we ever separate the wheat from the chaff, and have freedom without violence?

Tehran_MD: really?

Sitaram: well, look at history

Tehran_MD: I dont see any freedom

Sitaram: the French economist Proudhon, wrote "Property is theft"

Sitaram: but, stop and think, how France was in the 16th 17th century

Tehran_MD: ah you told me about it

Sitaram: there was the landed priviliged nobility class

Tehran_MD: so you are interested in politics these days?

Sitaram: and the surfs peasants who had nothing, and could never escape their status

Sitaram: well, in that context, one may easily view property as theft

Sitaram: but, in france or america today, property, ownership is a very different sort of thing

Sitaram: Henry David Thoreau was the very FIRST to use the expression "human rights"
in his essay on "Civil Disobedience"
Sitaram: how interesting, that the term did now arise from some scripture, or from some theologian
but from a secular humanist


Tehran_MD: hey can you recommend to me some books?

Sitaram: i recently made the argument that advances in the modern world may NOT be attributed to Christianity, as many right wing americans would claim...but to secular humanist philosophers, and
the framers of laws and constitutions

Sitaram: well, someone just gave me a book on Lincoln, published by CNN network, for the bicentenial
celebration

Tehran_MD: well am not much interested in politics.

Sitaram: Thomas Pynchons Gravity's Rainbow comes to mind, as a complex example of postmodernism
Sitaram: but, it is , though profound, somewhat risque in places

Sitaram: anything by Milan Kundera,

Tehran_MD: what is it about

Tehran_MD: I read kundra

Sitaram: well, Pynchon's opening line is "A missile rocket came screaming across the sky"
Sitaram: it is about London during the World war II bombings
Sitaram: and, the smoke trail arc of the bomb missiles, is what he calls "Gravity's Rainbow"
Sitaram: now, in the old testament bible, God, in anger, sends a flood to
kill all creatures, except for Noahs ark
Sitaram: and when the flood is over, a rainbow is a sign of God's peace (truce)
Sitaram: that God will never again destroy creatures with a flood
Sitaram: so the great irony of Gravity's Rainbow, is that this is a Rainbow
symbolizing human destruction

Sitaram: now, there is one passage, for example where Pynchon is really
refering to King Leopold of Belgium, and the mistreatment of the Belgian
Congo
Tehran_MD: aha

Sitaram: treating them as slaves and prostitutes

Sitaram: now, pynchon is often obscene... BUT, he uses the obscenity artistically, to make profound points.

For example, there is one passage where a woman, who is a dominatrix, summons a general (or
lieutenant), to come, and be her love slave, and do degrading things

Sitaram: BUT, you see, the woman is symbolic of WARFARE

Tehran_MD: is she?

Sitaram: so, he is writing about how WARFARE, has enslaved human spirit
Sitaram: and, just like a lover, who is drawn to be humiliated

Tehran_MD: why a woman is a symbol of warfare?

Sitaram: the military is drawn to this dominatrix woman WARFARE
aha, BECAUSE, when you understand the male vulnerability for
sexual activity then you have a metaphor
for the human vulnerability for violence, warfare, destruction

Sitaram: so, he likens warfare to a sexual passion
Sitaram: except it is not one which procreates,
Sitaram: it is one which degrades, destroys, humiliates
Sitaram: BUT, we willingly choose to humiliate ourselve, because of our passion/desire

Tehran_MD: I see
Sitaram: and it is so like Abu Graib, and the torture, the waterboarding....
Sitaram: the suspension of habeus corpus....

Tehran_MD: why you call it humiliation/

Sitaram: well, stop and think of the sado masochistic relationship
Sitaram: one person so obsessively desires the other
Sitaram: that they will pay any price to be with the other

Sitaram: now, in Pynchon's scene, the woman commands the man to do
something which is the most extreme form of degradation

Tehran_MD: is it?

Sitaram: and it is very disgusting, BUT pynchon WANTS us to be disgusted by war

Sitaram: well, you will be SHOCKED when i tell you what happens

Sitaram: the technical term is COPRAPHAGIA
Sitaram: phagia = eatiing
Sitaram: copra = excrement

Sitaram: but, you see, warfare IS as disgusting and unnatural as that
Sitaram: pynchon chooses the most repulsive act imaginable to drive
home his point about the evils of our passion for war

Sitaram: it is not at all about normal intercourse

Sitaram: and the army officer is SO EAGER to participate

Sitaram: now, obviously, such a passage is very scandalous, shocking


Sitaram: only if one can see the redeeming social value of the artists message, can one accept such a work

Sitaram: but, most definitely, pynchon is NOT a pornographer... but, a true novelist, and philosopher
who makes a radical social commentary

Sitaram: but, he is a total recluse he lives a few miles from me
in manhattan

Sitaram: but, he has never been photogrphed
Sitaram: except once, in his 20s

Tehran_MD: oh interesting

Sitaram: there are many websites about pynchon and gravitys rainbow
Sitaram: there are people who devote themselves to it, like a hobby, or cult
Sitaram: to analyze it, footnote

Sitaram: pynchon received some kind of pulitzer or nobel.... but he sent a
comedian to accept it in his place he would not appear in
public

Sitaram: and the comedian is someone i used to watch in the 1970s
Tehran_MD: haha
Tehran_MD: cute

Sitaram: who played an eccentric professor
Sitaram: and would appear on the late
night shows, Johnny Carson

Sitaram: the most beautiful novella is
pynchons "The Crying of Lot 49" Sitaram: which may be read in a weekend

Tehran_MD: what is it about?

Sitaram: and, in the first 3 pages, he describes a certain painting, and it is
one of the most beautiful passages of literature i have ever found

Tehran_MD: oh
Tehran_MD: am eager to read it
Tehran_MD: can you find that description online?

Sitaram: i am searching now
Tehran_MD: thank you
Sitaram: it will take some moments


http://www.turingmachine.org/remedios/picture11.html

Sitaram: that is the painting by a woman in mexico city
Sitaram: by Remedios Varo
Sitaram: Bordando el Manto Terrestre / Embroidering Earths Mantle ', 1961

Sitaram: that is what pynchon writes about

Tehran_MD: yes I saw it
Tehran_MD: beautiful.insprinig

Sitaram:

http://www.bookandreader.com/forums/author-discussion/1837-thomas-pynchon-2.html

Sitaram: that is what i wrote
Sitaram: i will email
Tehran_MD: thank you
Sitaram: there, pynchons page on painting is emailed to you

Tehran_MD: thank you so much
Sitaram: so, you must try to read "Crying of Lot 49" novella

Paltalk Christian Chat Christmas Eve

Sitaram: one problem about the notion of A RELATIONSHIP WITH JESUS, is that in the first 1000 years of Christianity, the concept of the importance of a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus was never mentioned, nor did martin Luther or John Calvin of the reformation speak in terms of a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus

Sitaram: the theology which emphasized RELATIONSHIP with Jesus is only very recent, since early 20th century

Sitaram: rapture is never explicitly mentioned in king james translation...

Sitaram: but, Jesus told one man that he could gain eternal life by observing the commandments

Sitaram: the very first pages of the new testament was an epistle by Paul, around the year 55 A.D., so that means that for the first 20 years, the Christians did NOT have the Gospels, or Epistles, but only the Old Testament

Sitaram: actually Jesus said, you are my FRIEND IF you do as I say... so, that sounds like works to me...

Sitaram: Paul said 'WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling", so, if the TV ministers are right, and you just say the magic words, and get eternal security of salvation... then, why would you need to WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling

Sitaram: the vision of prophet Ezekiel, the resurrection of the dry bones, suggests that a physical body is necessary in the resurrection

Sitaram: it is stressed that Jesus, after the resurrection, ate fish and honey,.... to stress the fact that Jesus had a physical body

Sitaram: the Jehovah's Witnesses say that there was no physical body, only a spirit

Sitaram: i am just contrasting with regard to physical body in resurrection

Sitaram: vision of Ezekiel, and Jesus eating fish and honey

Sitaram: Peter II epistle says something very interesting "Paul has said some things which are difficult to understand, and those who are weak in mind twist and distort them to their own destruction, as they do many other Biblical passages"

Sitaram: Paul said that he disciplines his flesh, lest, having led others , he should LOSE his own salvation

Sitaram: for example, the KJV correctly translates from Revelation "and TIME SHALL BE NO MORE", BUT the NIV mistranslates the Greek as "and there shall be no more delay"

bobbylips: i like this song

Sitaram: the Greek is Kai Xronos ouketi estai

Sitaram: which can only mean that time is no longer

Sitaram: so, it is just like quantum and relativity

Sitaram: time itself ceases

Sitaram: and, the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll.... i.e. space ceases

Sitaram: that phrase about "rolled up like a scroll" appears only in one other place, in Isaiah i think

Sitaram: so, it is describing something similar to Stephen Hawking in "A Brief History of Time"

bobbylips: Isaiah 34:4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.

Sitaram: so, time and space cease to exist

Sitaram: KJV correctly translates "time shall be no longer"

Sitaram: NIV is incorrect in saying "there shall be no more delay"

Sitaram: which implies that temporality continues

Sitaram: for the first 1000 years of Christianity, the Greek orthodox totally integrated old testament and new testament into one understanding

Sitaram: roman catholic theology is significantly different from greek orthodox, and Luther and Calvin of the reformation are radically diffent innovations

Rambo-55: DIOGR ARE YOU SAVED BY JESUS CHRIST OR ALL THESE DOCTOLOGIES OF THE DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS.....

Sitaram: that is one sectarian theory

Sitaram: consider charles stanley's doctrine of eternal security of salvation, which is not accepted by all protestant denominations

Sitaram: but is severly criticized

Rambo-55: DIOGR OSAS IS REJECTED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE BUT CHARLES STANLEY IS NOT ONE OF THEM....

Sitaram: and, the calvinist notion of limited atonement is rejected by Baptists and others

Sitaram: so, bottom line, it is naive to speak as if there are not many sectarian differences between denominations, and to claim to be the ONE TRUE sort of Christian, who is beyond sectarianism

Rambo-55: WHO CARE WHAT THEY THINK THE BIBLE IS THE TRUTH NOT THE CALVINIST OR THE BAPTISTS OR ANY OTHER DENIMINATION OR CULT...OK???

Sitaram: i mean, if it makes you feel good (and obviously it makes many feel good) then you can say OH WE ARE TRUE Christians, and saved,.... but, you are not dealing with actual history, or the facts of the many denominations today

Rambo-55: WE ARE NOT SAVED BY HOW GOOD SOMETHING FEELS THAT IS NEW AGE....WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE THRU FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST...ONE WAY....SO YOU PEOPLE TALK AND DREAM ALL YOU WANT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO SALVATION...

Sitaram: why does JEsus tell a parable about people who come to him at the judgment and say "Lord Lord, we worked miracles in your name", and Jesus says, "go away I never knew you"

Sitaram: How can you understand that parable, and the others, who are totally shocked when he says "i was naked and clothed me..." and they even say "when did we do all these things"

Sitaram: surely, the first group who said "Lord Lord", were confessing Jesus in their lives, and believed themselves saved...

Sitaram: why does Jesus describe the way as "straight and narrow, and FEW find it"

Rambo-55: THAT WAS IN THE BEATITUDES THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT AND IT WAS JESUS TELLING THE CHRISTIANS HOW THEY SHOULD SERVE HIM....

Rambo-55: WHY DONT YOU GET A BIBLE AND READ IT??? AND WHAT ARE YOU ANYWAY DIOGR ANYTHING????

Sitaram: well, I cannot imply ignore 2000 years of history and scholarship, and simply go along with your notions...

Sitaram: why does Paul say "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", if salvation is such an easy matter

Sitaram: why does epistle of II Peter say there are some who are weak in mind, and twist and distort scriptures to their own destruction

Sitaram: you see, you cannot deal with my questions intellectually, with scholarship, you can only attack or criticize me on a personal level, which is called AD HOMINEM

Sitaram: so, what do you think of Huckabee,.... is he a Christian, is he saved?

clearkat555: father come and spend time with us your children

Sitaram: i mean, he was an ordained pastor, and then he ran for presidential nomination, and you had a chance to hear him speak


Rambo-55: SEE YOU CANNOT TELL US IF YOU ARE A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN EITHER SO WHO ARE YOU TO CONDEMN US SO DIO DO YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO ANS THE ROOM ARE YOU A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN...???YOU LOVE TO TRY TO IMPRESS US WITH YOUR IGNORANCE....

Sitaram: so, can you say of ANY OTHER PERSON that you know, that they are saved?

Sitaram: IF you say NO, then I shall ask you how you can be so certain that you are saved

Sitaram: since, during the first 1000 years of Christianity, no one ever spoke in such terms, of "being saved"

clearkat555: born again dio born again

Sitaram: this is all a very recent theology, that began in the mid 19th century

Sitaram: but you see, the problem is, a lot of this is just rhetoric, words, slogans repeated over and over... it is not careful scholarship

Sitaram: well, i thought you were suppose to LOVE your enemies

Rambo-55: BYE DIOGR YOU MUST BE A MUSLIM......ON IGNORE...

Sitaram: so, i am not even your enemy, yet , you are unable to love me

Sitaram: but, you have to WORK OUT your salvation

Sitaram: what i personally believe is not germane

Sitaram: not pertinent

Anne49MI: dodging your question

bobbylips: diogr...work out...i reason out a math problem 2+2=4...same with our salvation...we are to reason it out...know what Christ has done on the cross for us

Rambo-55: WE DONT NEED TO WORK OUT OUR SALVATION IT IS A FREE GIFT OF GOD NOT OF WORKS LEST ANY SHOULD BOAST.....

Sitaram: you must justify your beliefs with reasoned arguments from scripture and history

Sitaram: and i doubt that many people can do that

Sitaram: you are totally missing my point

Sitaram: what i personally do or do not believe is not the issue

Rambo-55: HE DONT HAVE A POINT HE MUST BE A MUSLIM.....

Sitaram: the issue is, can you defend your beliefs without making some personal referance to me

Sitaram: but, all that many people understand is ad hominem attack

bobbylips: certainly d

clearkat555: rambo no one of those educated kind

HumanMaik: High Leveled Secret discution going on here or it is hokus pohus

Sitaram: ok, let me explain more clearly.... let us pretend, that you find a bottle in the ocean, with some difficult questions about your beliefs... and you must write a book, to answer those questions

Sitaram: so, you have no individual to question, as to their personal beliefs, or their morality

bobbylips: i would show you scripture

HumanMaik: no new Bible will be Written .....

Rambo-55: RIGHT ON MILES THIS IS UNCALLED FOR..... DOT HIM AND LET HIM LEARN BY LISTENING HE ISNT HERE TO SERVE THE LORD ANYWAY....

bobbylips: yes clear...two are set up...i'm just waiting to hear the pop

clearkat555: bobby i hate traps but i hate mice more

Sitaram: so, you must take those questions, those problems, and you must write a book, like Martin Luther, or Aquinas, or Augustine.... and future generations must read your book, and be convinced

Sitaram: but, i dont think you can write that book

bobbylips: ...why would i want to write a book...the bible is enough

Sitaram: in otherwords, you must be able to defend your beliefs, which is what Paul had to do in the Roman world

bobbylips: i would just point them in the direction of the scripture

Sitaram: yes, but each of the hundreds of denominations understand those scriptures very differently


Rambo-55: WE DO NOT NEED TO DEFEND THE WORD OF GOD... BUT YOU NEED TO DEFEND YOUR IGNORANCE AND YOU WILL STILL GO TO HELL....

HumanMaik: nonesensence

Sitaram: so, how do you go about loving your enemy

rpmark5: hey sun i got the big boot uugh

clearkat555: the word can stand on its own

bobbylips: by sharing the truth with them

Sitaram: i am not your enemy, yet you seem to hate me simply because i dont agree with everything you say

Sitaram: so, many have ignored me, perhaps

HumanMaik: no need to hate, just neclect your opponents

bobbylips: ...now you are being presumptuous

Sitaram: someone once said to me "i have to LOVE my enemies, but i dont have to LIKE them"

Sitaram: it is like that question "but who is my neighbor"

Sitaram: but, you see, all you understand is how to criticize ME as an individual, which is argumentum ad hominem (against the person)... but you do not have the ability to defend your beliefs on the basis of scripture and history