Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 139-140 (511-512)

 "As anyone not insulated by wealth from the cares of the day is obliged to be. Sir."

* * * * * * * * * *

Think about how often conservative talking heads on Twitter accuse young people and socialists about being ignorant of history. And then think about how much research and study and reading Thomas Pynchon has done on the history of the United States and then he writes something like this in Against the Day. Sure, I agree that Ray Ipsow's dialogue does not necessarily equate to Pynchon's beliefs. He's also writing Scarsdale Vibe's dialogue. How could both represent Pynchon?! But also realize that he's spent an awful lot of time showing the reader how contemptible, vile, and unempathetic Scarsdale Vibe is. He's so cartoonish that he's obviously the villain. And Ray Ipsow is the little man standing up to him, unafraid to have his say. But also adding "Sir" to the end just to show he means no disrespect and doesn't actually want to be beaten within an inch of his life by Vibe's bodyguards. No wait. He adds the single sentence full stop sir at the end as a contemptible sign of disrespect, acknowledging he understands that Scarsdale's previous "sir" wasn't in earnest.

What I mean to say is think about how ignorant of history you actually have to be to believe the kinds of things Charlie Kirk or Dinesh D'Souza or Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity or Laura Ingraham say. I'm sad I even know those names. Just vile, terrible people with less remorse than Vonnegut's Howard J. Campbell from Mother Night (and I'm not quite sure how much remorse he really had! He was pretty apathetic about most of his life when you get right down to it. Which might have been a large part of Vonnegut's point. "Look how much evil you can do when you just shrug your shoulders and don't give a shit.").

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 138 (510)

 "You are a socialist, sir."

* * * * * * * * * *

Yeah? So?

Imagine thinking what makes socialism socialism is all the terrible fascist leaders who have become authoritarian rulers on the idea of socialism and not that socialism is a means to make sure government provides protections for all citizens, not just the wealthy. Imagine being so wealthy that even if you were taxed nearly 100% on the highest amounts you make and, instead of losing that extra wealth that, as Scarsdale admitted, would simply sit there growing unused, you chose instead to convince all of the non-wealthy people that a government that could protect them against the crimes of the rich was itself evil and despicable. Imagine shrugging and pointing out that socialism is corrupt because leaders are corrupt but also living in a democracy where you can vote out those corrupt leaders. Now imagine people actually choosing to vote for known corrupt leaders simply because they said the right mean things about the right people.

Just try it. Try to imagine being a conservative in America. It's not fun.

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 136-137 (508-509)

 "Except that in these times, 'need' arises directly from criminal acts of the rich, so it 'deserves' whatever amount of money will atone for it. Fathomable enough for you?"

* * * * * * * * * *

My man, Ray Ipsow!

What are the themes of Pynchon's big three books, Gravity's Rainbow, Against the Day, and Mason & Dixon (and isn't he supposed to have one more of these in here? Covering some major turning point in American history? He'd better be working on it!)? That's not a question that I'm asking so that I can answer it. I'm not that smart. But it seems Gravity's Rainbow had something to do with technology reaching a point where our lives could be taken not just in an instant but almost before an instant . . . sort of beyond the zero. Technology isn't some actor on the stage either so part of the theme was about the people—the Them—who built and controlled this technology, and who use every one of us as a means to their own greedy end: wealth. And guess what the theme of Against the Day is turning out to be? The wealthy manipulating markets and law to increase their wealth while walking over the stooped backs and carcasses of the masses. It also has a lot to say about technology but I'm only thirty pages in so I can't speak to that much (plus I'm only thirty pages in so maybe I've got the whole capitalism is super bad theme all wrong! (But I doubt it)). And what about Mason & Dixon? I don't remember much thematically about that book (which is why I need to re-read it). But it must have a lot to say about racism and the wealth garnered from the slave trade. How could it not?! It's about the frickin' Mason/Dixon line!

My point is that this is another book that I'm thrilled to realize a conservative reader would get angry while reading it. Goddamned Social Justice Warrior Thomas Pynchon!

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 135 (507)

 "Out of a belief, surely fathomable, that merely to need a sum is not to deserve it."

* * * * * * * * * *

And this statement gets to the heart of American life. It's the great illusion many people choose to live by: some people don't deserve life; it must be earned. Just imagine thinking that way. Imagine being such a bitter, angry, cynical, envious piece of shit that you're constantly judging the way other people live based on some arbitrary system you've either created or bought into. Imagine choosing to be a carpenter and then being angry at a poet for not also being a carpenter. Imagine having inherited money and still thinking that you earned it and your life means more than somebody who didn't inherit any money.

Fuck. You don't have to imagine any of that. If you live in America, just look around. Way too high a percentage of the people you're surrounded by believe this shit that life must be earned. And this is why religion, on top of wealth, is such a travesty. Because now you're teaching people that the afterlife must be earned! Not only must you waste your one precious life working your ass off, almost certainly not being compensated enough for it, but you also need to waste your one precious life not enjoying earthly things because you're trying to earn a place in the afterlife.

Goddamn. Imagine throwing your only life away for fictions and plutocratic machinations? Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. I'm so depressed now!

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 134 (506)

 "So we always hear the plutocracy complaining."

* * * * * * * * * *

"plutocracy"
Government by the wealthy. Not that anybody living in America needs to be told that definition.
    The greatest lie our plutocracy ever told was that anybody can become a plutocrat. I mean, yes, anybody can. But only by accident (lottery), inheritance (almost certainly based on wealth achieved through unethical means, probably slavery), or illicitly (this is how most people get theirs. And I don't mean to suggest "illicit" means simply "illegal." More like against custom or norms or ethical behaviors). Plutocrats steal wealth from millions of people and then convince those people that they're benevolent linchpins in the economic frame of our country, providing jobs and investments. But they're really just leeches and parasites and pricks.

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 133 (505)

 "That's not the way it works," said Scarsdale Vibe.

* * * * * * * * * *

"Giving money sitting around doing nothing for anybody to people who could use it to improve their lives isn't the way it works" is a hell of a way to argue for changing the way things work.