Chapter Four in The Crying of Lot 49: Connections, Answers and Questions

The fourth part of Pynchon's novel is short but very important for the rest of the book. It answers some of the questions brought up before, but leaves new ones to look for afterwards. This makes it the most interesting chapter so far. The novel is progressing to a point where I've changed my view towards it and its theme. Before this chapter I thought the book was slow, and not very interesting. I didn't even know what the main theme really was! After reading this chapter I think it is a lot more interesting and I'm a little more settled. I believe this novel's main theme is Oedipa's investigation to find out the meaning of the WASTE symbol, the Tristero, the mailing system, and something deeper in Pierce's will.

In this chapter we found out that the WASTE symbol is very similar to the 'post horn', the Thurn and Taxis symbol. From what Cohen said in this chapter the WASTE symbol might've been created to silence the Thurn and Taxis symbol. "There it was again, her WASTE symbol, showing up black, a little right of center. 'What is this?' she asked, wondering how much time had gone by. 'I'm not sure,' Cohen said. 'That's why I've referred it, and the others, to the Committee." (p. 77) The very curious fact about the WASTE symbol is that everybody avoids talking about it. Every time Oedipa goes on an investigation wanting to find out about the symbol, she never gets an answer. Why is it that many people know a lot about this, but never talk about it? This mystery is why I believe there is something deeper en Pierce's will. I think this is the reason why Pierce chose her, Oedipa, not a lawyer or a trusted friend, to execute his will. 

I concur with Mariana, which on her blog said she believed Oedipa is so desperate to get information on anything that will lead her investigation further that she is far - fetching information. For example when she is pondering about the murder in the lagoons. The site said: "The only other clue was a cross, traced by one of the victims in the dust." (p. 71) Oedipa tried linking this small cross with the tristero: "A cross? Or the initial T? The same stuttered by Niccolo in The Courier's Tragedy." (p. 71) She is so hopeless about find answers she is thinking a cross can be a T, and that T stands for tristero, not any other word in the english dictionary starting with a T.

The Crying of Lot 49 - Third Chapter

The third chapter of The Crying of Lot 49 is very complex and includes many important things. First of all it introduces "The Tristero" through a play called The Courier's Tragedy, and I believe this will be of a lot more importance further on in the novel. I also found some more patterns that are continuously used throughout the book such as the use of strange names, in this case, Mike Fallopian. Curiously, I also found a few connections with Slaughterhouse - Five.

The main topic covered in this chapter is that of the play The Courier's Tragedy. There are many connections between this play and the lives of the characters in The Crying of Lot 49. First of all, the relationship mentioned the most, is the fact both plots dug up bones from the bottom of a lake. This coincidence led Oedipa to find out more about the play at the end of the chapter when she went to talk to the director. This small talk led to the importance of the word tristero. From that moment on, Oedipa connected everything in her life to The Tristero. Another similarity between both plots was the use and mentioning of a mail system. The Thurn and Taxis' conspiracy is strictly connected to the sue Manny Di Presso established against Pierce  Inveraity. It also resembles the mail system Pierce owns. When Pynchon talked about The Courier's Tragedy, he explained absolutely everything and included all the small details. Once again the author is using exaggeration.

Another point that stood out to me in this part of the novel, was Manny Di Presso's description of the battle in Lago di Pieta during World War II. Even though this battle didn't really occur, I believe Pynchon might've invented it  based on a different, similar situation. "For weeks, a handful of American troops, cut off and without communications, huddled on the narrow shore of the clear and tranquil lake while from the cliffs that tilted vertiginously over the beach Germans hit them day and night with plunging, enfilading fire." (pg. 46)

This is what led me to find a couple of small connections between The Crying of Lot 49 and Slaughterhouse - Five. First of all, both authors mentioned World War II (obviously Vonnegut's novel is completely based on this war, and Pynchon barely mentions it). Another similarity is that of the use of the word latrine. Even though latrine is not a very common word, both authors used it in their novels. "On the latrine wall, among lipsticked obsceneties, she noticed the following message..." (Pynchon pg. 38) "Billy was approaching, without knowing it, the back of the latrine." (Vonnegut, pg. 124)

Vocabulary:

Vertiginously: Causing vertigo by being extremely high or steep. (pg. 46)

Divan: A long low sofa without a back or arms, typically placed against a wall. (pg. 51)

Interim: The intervening time. (p. 53)

Livery: Special uniform worn by a servant or official. Or, a special design and color scheme used on products of a particular company. (p. 55)

KCUF: The call sign of the radio system in The Crying of Lot 49. (p. 63)

The Crying of Lot 49 - Second Chapter: Exaggeration in Satires

When I read the second part of Pynchon's novel, I encountered myself with several parts that were interesting, or stood out. First of all cam the intrigue of why the TV was called a tube. Then I noticed that Pynchon writes in a very exaggerated manner, something typical in satires.I also questioned the reason for including so many songs. Is this necessary for the overall meaning? Finally I noticed that the author is constantly mentioning other countries. I believe this might indicate (as I mentioned in my previous blog) that Pynchon doesn't like his country.

"Oedipa had planned on nothing more involved that evening than watching Bonanza on the tube." (pgs. 17 - 18) I am not sure whether "the tube" is just the way it looks or if it is something special or new made especially as a tube and not a TV.

One of the most important parts of this chapter is where I notice an exaggeration. Oedipa is preparing herself to play strip botticelli and goes in to put all her clothes on. When she looks at herself in the mirror a hair spray can falls and blows all around the room. This is so exaggerated that it takes up a whole page of description. "The can, hissing malignantly, bounced of the toilet and whizzed by Metzger's right ear, missing by maybe a quarter of an inch." While on the topic of Oedipa and Metzger in the motel room, I would like to mention the prolonged importance of the movie Cashiered. I feel this is unnecessary and takes up a lot mores space than needed. The point that Pynchon is really trying to stress is simply the fact a lawyer is an actor at times, and an actor is a lawyer at times. All of this is basically describing Metzger's personality and life, which I think will play an important role further on in the novel.

Another catch in The Crying of Lot 49 is the excessive use of songs. Throughout the second chapter Pynchon shows us three different songs: Miles's Song, Baby Igor's Song, and Serenade. I feel that the author is trying to express something through the use of songs but don't really know. Perhaps Pynchon is criticizing or making fun of music as a vice in modern people's lives.

As I mentioned in my previous blog, Pynchon uses many countries throughout his novel. I believe the excess use of foreign countries as examples or important roles, might be leading towards a dislike of his own country: United States. In the first chapter Mexico and Germany were mentioned, and in the second, England plays a pretty important role. The Parnoids is a music group Oedipa meets in this chapter through the manager of the motel she is staying in. As a member of the group, Miles told Oedipa it was important to sing all the band's songs in an english accent.

Rapunzel and Uncle Sam: The Crying of Lot 49 - First Chapter

In the first chapter of The Crying of Lot 49 I experimented with Pynchon's way of writing and got an introduction to the novel.  I found some comical moments and got to know some of the main characters: Oedipa Maas, 'Mucho' Maas and Roseman. The structure of this novel and the long sentences made it hard to understand at times, and required more than one time of reading it. I believe some of the jokes come through the characters names such as Dr. Hilarius, Roseman and Mucho Maas. Roseman's name might be linked to his personality by showing a type of romance. I recall a part were he told Oedipa to run away with him and that is what lead me to think this. Some of the words in spanish might show the author knows this language and "mucho mas" (meaning 'a lot more') might have a deeper meaning.

Some of the parts that stood out in the beginning of the book were the references to Rapunzel and Uncle Sam. Oedipa Maas compares herself to Rapunzel indicating a claustrophobic and trapped personality. I believe she wants to be saved by her ex - boyfriend Pierce Inverarity (now deceased), but when this fails it can show a failure of their relationship. "...only when Pierce had got maybe halfway up, her lovely hair turned, through some sinister sorcery, into a great unanchored wig, and down he fell, on his ass." This is another funny part in the novel and when mentioning "some sinister sorcery" this might mean a powerful source didn't let their relationship succeed.

Thomas Pynchon uses Uncle Sam to describe the moment when Dr. Hilarius tells Oedipa he wants her for an experiment. Here, a weak Uncle Sam is described with "his eyes gleaming unhealthily, his sunken yellow cheeks most violently rouged..." This description of Uncle Sam might mean the United States are fragile or the author doesn't like this country. I am also intrigued about the author's mentioning of Germany in several cases such as the connection with the German symphonies. Will this play an important role further on during the novel? If so, this can be connected both to A Clockwork Orange and The Man in the High Castle. In A Clockwork Orange the German symphonies are also mentioned, and in The Man in the High Castle Germany occupies the United States. I am also intrigued about how Oedipa Maas will carry out the execution of Pierce's will.

Changes in Love Songs Throughout the Years

I decided to compare "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot to "And I love her" by the Beatles. Their song goes like this:

I give her all my love

That's all I do

And if you saw my love

You'd love her too

I love her

She gives me ev'rything

And tenderly

The kiss my lover brings

She brings to me

And I love her

A love like ours

Could never die

As long as I

Have you near me

Bright are the stars that shine

Dark is the sky

I know this love of mine

Will never die

And I love her

Bright are the stars that shine

Dark is the sky

I know this love of mine

Will never die

And I love her

I chose this song because I consider The Beatles to be a great group, with good songs and very inspiring lyrics. I had never heard of this song but when I read it I thought it was great in terms of getting to all the love souls on the world. However, when comparing it to The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock it was nothing like it. For one, the vocabulary and way of writing was very different in 1917 and 1964. I also think that they are very different because they were written for different purposes. Eliot is a writer, and I imagine he wrote this Love song thinking more of a poem than a song. In contrast, Paul McCartney is a singer which probably wrote And I love her specifically as a song for his group. Obviously the length is another different factor between these two love songs, Eliot's having 130 lines and the Beatles song having just 24 lines.

The meaning of these two love songs is also quite different being that And I love her is just a repetitive rhythm with very monotonous words and phrases. The only thing this song says is basically "I love you, I love you, and I will never leave you." Completely opposite is The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock having possibly many more meanings than the ones I even comprehend. What I barely do get from reading this poem is the fact Eliot isn't so descriptive and doesn't show his love very much. The poem is just about a man, Alfred Prufrock that spends his life beside one woman until he ages. Some parts are very strange and don't have anything to do with love or the rest of the song. For instance, every once in a while Michelangelo is mentioned, and all the women love him. Perhaps this is the ideal man described in the poem.

The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock doesn't have any kind of pattern or meter the readers can follow to find a specific meaning or important words. Every line has a different number of syllables. The only important catch is the rhyme every once in a while:

Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.

There is also an interesting rhyme scheme in the Beatles song, which is probably the only relationship with Eliot's love song. The words shine and mine, and sky and die repeated in the last two stanzas rhyme.

The End of The Waste Land: Hope for Our Voyage

The last two parts of The Waste Land are called Death by Water and What the Thunder Said. The second to last section is the shortest of all because, perhaps, Eliot despises this kind of death more than all others. Death by Water simply narrates the story of Phlebas the Phoenician, a sailor who got drained by a current in the ocean and killed. I believe Eliot despises this kind of death because he describes Phlebas as once handsome and tall, but now simply dead.

I think the last section, What the Thunder Said, is one of the most important parts of the poem. Here, Eliot describes and combines deaths by water and by fire. As Juan Mauricio Venegas said in his blog, I think fire might represent spontaneous, and passionate humans, while water represents calm humans that allows the fire to stop and come back some other time. Hope is also very important in the last part of the poem. When Eliot tells the story of a voyage through a mountain with no water, I believe the water represents hope. 

Here is no water but only rock
Rock and no water and the sandy road
The road winding above among the mountains
Which are mountains of rock without water
If there were water we should stop and drink
Amongst the rock one cannot stop or think

This relates to modern society where all humans want to get to the top of the mountain, but if they don't have any water they won't get anywhere. Therefore, I believe that indirectly Eliot is trying to tell us that we always need hope to achieve our goals.

The Waste Land: Describing a utopia?

As Camilo Bermudez said, throughout the second part of the Waste Land, A Game of Chess, T.S. Eliot compares death to a game. The game of chess that Eliot proposes to play is simply wasting time, wating for something to come.

And if it rains, a closed car at four.
And we shall play a game of chess,
Pressing lidless eyes and waiting for a knock upon the door.

I believe the chess game might represent life and the players are simply wating for death to arrive, which would be written as a knock on the door. This connects to what I said in my previous blog which is death as a natural part of nature. Humans, or the players of a game, just accept the time when it comes.

I think this second part of the Waste Land is related to the movie The Seventh Seal. In this movie the main character plays a game of chess with Death, and simply waits for the time to come when he is beaten by him. The same thing is told in the quotation above where two people play a game of chess determining their life or death.

When I read the third part of The Waste Land called The Fire Sermon, I couldn't help but notice the numerous times the author talked about the same things over and over again. In various cases Eliot mentions the "Unreal City" and names it as if the sermon was directed to it. For ex:

Unreal City
Under the brown fog of a winter noon
Mr. Eugenides, the Smyrna merchant
Unshaven, with a pocket full of currants

I believe that in this case the three lines after "Unreal City" are directed towards it. Kind of as if there was a colon in front of it, kind of as if the other lines were said in honor to it. I believe this "Unreal City" might be a utopia or a dystopia because utopias and dystopias are fake. They are bad or good worlds that don't exist. Considering what comes after this line, I believe T.S. Eliot might be imagining a utopia in which everything occurs well. I think it is a utopia because it is set in winter, and Eliot describes winter as the best season of the year. However, I might be wrong in my hypothetical thinking, maybe the "Unreal City" has nothing to do with utopias and dystopias. What I do know is that the author wants to make this line stand out. I know this because in the first part of The Waste Land the quote "Unreal City Under the brown fog of a winter noon" appeared identically with one small change. First it said dawn, and then it said noon. This means this poem is set in the Unreal City, but at different times.

I also agree with Mariana Rodriguez about the mentioning of the Inferno in The Fire Sermon. On line 245 Eliot makes allusion to Dante and Virgil in their voyage through hell.

I who have sat by Thebes below the wall
And walked among the lowest of the dead.

The Waste Land

I thought this poem was very hard to understand and to read; However, when listening to T.S. Eliot read it, many things became a lot more clear.  For example, in the beginning I was kind of confused when reading lines 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. In all of these lines there is an enjambed word at the end, and that confused me about which line that word belonged to. 

APRIL is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing

Here I didn't know whether breeding was part of the first or second line. Fortunately, after listening to Eliot reading it I knew it was part of the second line. In the beginning of the poem (as shown in the quote above), The Waste Land talks about seasons. April being the worst month, and December being the best (winter).

The Burial of the Dead was a great introduction to the rest of the poem. I believe The Waste Land is based on death. At least this is the theme that excels the most, and surpasses all other, smaller themes. The first part, titled The Burial of the Dead talks mainly about the changing of nature. I believe Eliot expresses natures changes as part of life, something inevitable. This can also be applied to death, because death is a part of nature, which we can't change. This can be linked to Slaughterhouse - Five because Billy Pilgrim eventually accepts death due to the lessons taught to him by the Trafalmadorians.

Another interesting point in this poem is the fact that the author includes some parts in German. I wonder whether this is important to the overall meaning? Does this, in any way, link T.S. Eliot to Kurt Vonnegut for the fact Vonnegut also includes some interesting parts involving Germans in World War II?

Handbook of Epictetus, Sections 31 - 53

One of the most important ideas I got about the reading of these sections was in section 31. Epictetus said that it is important to obey the gods in what they say and not blame them for the bad things that happened to you. This same idea is also displayed in the very last section, section 53: 

"On every occasion you must have these thoughts ready: 

Lead me, Zeus, and you too, Destiny, 

Wherever I am assigned by you; 

I'll follow and not hesitate, 

But even if I do wish to, 

Because I'm bad, I'll follow anyway."  

These two sections or ideas lead me to connect the handbook of Epictetus with "The Serenity Prayer". The Serenity Prayer says to accept the things you can't change but to try changing the things you can. As told by Reinhold Niebuhr this prayer says: 

"God grant me the serenity 

to accept the things I cannot change;

courage to change the things I can;

and wisdom to know the difference."

Both of these pieces of text express the idea that humans have to obey everything an all powerful, supreme being such as Zeus or any other God says. Humans also have to accept things that happen to them without blaming the Gods, or try to change the bad things that happen to them.

In general throughout the end of the handbook Epictetus gives us many lessons about not judging people. I completely agree with this idea, and return to the fact that if everyone follows it, we would live in a utopia. This philosophy told by Epictetus is very wise, and I wish I could apply it to my every-day life.

Epictetus in my Life

Once again the handbook of Epictetus reminds me a lot about my life. I can basically relate anything he talks about to my life. One of the things I read in the sections 16 - 30 that created mixed feelings and reminded me about my mother was in the 16th section.  Epictetus said not to grieve about the departure of a child or the loss of land. I say that it created mixed feelings because my mother always tells me and my brothers that we are growing up fast and she doesn't know what she is going to do when we leave. In ways this makes me laugh  because I always tell her not to worry about that. However,  in other ways this makes me sad because of the idea of my mother crying about me, and reading that she shouldn't do that.

Another very interesting part of this section was the part when the author compared humans to actors and life to a play: "Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is as the playwright wants it to be: short if he wants it short, long if he wants it long." (p. 16) I believe that here Epictetus is trying to say that humans are at the compassion of a superior force. I believe I know exactly what he is talking about because last year I was in the play The Sound of Music, and as an actor I had to do exactly as the director told me to. Now the only question is: Is Epictetus right? Are humans really at the mercy of a superior God?

One of the best lessons for life is told in section 29: "For each action, consider what leads up to it and what follows it, and approach it in the light of that." I have heard this many times in my life. In school, at home from my father, and everywhere in general. It is not an easy task to follow, but I believe Epictetus is right. If only everyone followed this advise in the world I suppose it would become a utopia because no one would do bad things, everyone would think before time and realize they shouldn't do that.