Reading 1001 discussion
This topic is about
Mason & Dixon
PAST Quarterly reads
>
2Q 2024- Mason & Dixon - Thomas Pynchon
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
Mod
1. "Snow-Balls have flown their Arcs, starr'd the Sides of Outbuildings, as of Cousins, carried Hats away into the brisk Wind off Delaware, -- " It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?
2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks?
3. There are actually two narratives taking place simultaneously in Mason & Dixon: the story of Mason and Dixon and the framing narrative, set in the LeSparks' living room many years later, as the Reverend Cherrycoke tells his tale. How does the framing narrative serve the novel? How do the discussions, comments, and arguments by the framing characters affect the relation of the narrative? What undercurrents of tension can you identify in the framing narrative? How do they affect the "storytelling"?
4. Pynchon's works tend to spill over the edge of their pages into the real world, pulling in science, history, philosophy, and the arcane nature of popular culture. In Mason & Dixon, he has two worlds to flood into: the world of the eighteenth-century, and the modern world. Does he limit himself to the eighteenth-century? Is there a macrocosm -- or two macrocosms -- imbedded in the microcosm of Mason & Dixon?
5. Mason is an astronomer, Dixon a surveyor. But the opposing natures of their characters go much deeper than that. "Mason is Gothickally depressive, as Dixon is Westeringly manic" (p. 680). "Mason and Dixon would like to stay, one to fuss and the other to flirt" (p.27). Account for all the ways their natures are divergent. How does this serve the narrative throughout the novel?
6. Pynchon is nothing if not playful with language. Any reading of his work is more enjoyable if you keep your eyes open for allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more. Share and discuss your discoveries with fellow readers, and try to determine whether they serve the narrative or simply display the author's sense of literary playfulness.
7. "Mason, pray You, -- 'tis the Age of Reason . . . we're Men of Science," states Dixon (p. 27). How, then, do they account for ghostly visitations, giant beets, and talking dogs?
8. The Reverend Cherrycoke says, "As to journey west . . . in the same sense of the Sun, is to live, raise Children, grow older, and die, carried along by the stream of the Day, -- whilst to turn Eastward, is somehow to resist time and age, to work against the Wind, seek ever the dawn, even, as who can say, defy Death" (p. 263). How does this observation resonate throughout the novel during Mason and Dixon's travels?
9. The Mason-Dixon Line is seemingly insignificant, merely "Five degrees. Twenty minutes of a day's Turn," as Dixon notes (p. 629). But, as later events testify, it becomes symbolic of much more than
that, -- the division of a country. Do the characters have any sense of the significance of what they are creating? Mason asks, "Shall wise Doctors one day write History's assessment of the Good resulting from this Line, vis-à-vis the not-so-good? I wonder which list would be longer" (p. 666). Why does Captain Zhang declare that the line's feng shui is the "worst I ever saw" (p. 542)? What moral implications do Mason and Dixon face as they create the line? What other lines and boundaries are there in the novel?
10. "Whom are we working for, Mason?" inquires Dixon (p. 347). Later, he says, ". . . Something invisible's going on, tha must feel it, smell it . . . ?" (p. 478). Conspiracies abound in Pynchon's oeuvre, and Mason & Dixon is no exception. Identify the conspiracies, real and imagined, in the novel. Are they rooted in paranoid speculation or in real events? Do they find any echoes in modern conspiracy theories?
11. On pages 349–352, Cherrycoke and Uncle Ives argue about the nature of history. To understand history, Ives says, "You look at the evidence. The testimony. The whole Truth" (p.352). Cherrycoke, in contrast, sees history as "a great disorderly Tangle of Lines, long and short, weak and strong, vanishing into the Mnemonick Deep." Which definition do you think Pynchon credits? Which do you? Who, according to Cherrycoke, is best able to convey history?
12. In chapter 53 (p. 511), the novel embarks on an entirely new narrative, that of Eliza, a novitiate in the Widows of Christ, and Captain Zhang, the feng shui expert who rescues her. The source of the new narrative turns out to be a bawdy book that Tenebrae and Ethelmer secretly read in 'Brae's bedroom. However, the new narrative soon melds into the one being told by Cherrycoke. How does Pynchon account for this? How is it resolved? What does this tell us about the nature of storytelling and writing?
13. A Quaker reminds Mason and Dixon that the sugar they enjoy is "bought . . . with the lives of African slaves, untallied black lives broken upon the greedy engines of the Barbadoes" (p. 329). Dixon later declares, ". . . we lived with Slavery in our faces, -- more of it at St. Helena, -- and now here we are again, in another Colony, this time having drawn them a Line between their Slave-Keepers, and their Wage-Payers, as if doom'd to re-encounter thro' the World this public Secret, this shameful Core . . ." (p. 692). How do the surveyors respond to slavery throughout the book? Do their awareness and their response change?
14. Pynchon offers up an alternative ending, sending the surveyors farther and farther west, ". . . away from the law, into the savage Vacancy ever before them . . ." (p.709). What purpose does this false ending serve? What do Mason and Dixon discover as they voyage on?
I'm floundering in the first couple of hundred pages of this. I wish I had gone for the audiobook because then I'm doing something else at the same time, and I don't mind so much if I don't feel rewarded by a book. 1. I don't mind the archaic language and style. It adds to the sense of being in the 18th century, although perhaps it also adds to my feeling that I'm reading nonsense or satire. It reminds me of Gulliver’s Travels. This of course would be missed in an audiobook. It can't convey the look of the words on the page.
Not ready for the other questions!
Mod
Rosemary I feel the same way as you! This book is not easy to read. I am going to try to switch to an audiobook and see if that helps.
I am reading along to the audiobook! I think this is the only way it's going to work, at least until I get the hang of the language.
Mod
Great idea Jane. I may try the same thing for part two.
Mod
Diane wrote: "I have finished part one Latitudes and Departures. I am going to pick up part two as an audiobook next month. I need a break from this book that I am not enjoying."Congrats on getting through part one. I am struggling too. It is my homework for the day; one chapter each morning, and I'll be done in 78 days. Hoping it picks up as I learn to "read" his writing.
Mod
Congrats on getti..."
I love the word 'homework' as that is how I saw it too.
I also had to stop trying to read it quickly and switch to scheduling 25 pages a day. I want to finish it this month because next month I plan to read Young Joseph, the second part of the annual book, and I know I'll have to schedule that one too. Like homework, so true!I'm about two-thirds of the way through, and it's going better since they've been in America. There was a cheese-rolling passage in the section set in England that I actually enjoyed. But I really hated the section in part 1 when they were in South Africa, especially the way he portrayed the women.
There's more I can relate to in the American section, but my eyes still slide over the words and I lose the sense of it a lot (or wonder if there is even any sense in it!) I think all the capital letters confuse my eyes, but it's not only that.
I'm disappointed because I had this book as a birthday present this year at my request, expecting to enjoy it enough to want to keep it. But I really don't.
So, I have now finished. The impression I am left with is that the main characters of Mason and Dixon were endearing, but I had to wade through a lot of mud to reach this. 2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks?
I felt no connection at all to Cherrycoke and his family. I couldn't see the point of them, and I would have preferred not to have them in the book.
I also couldn't see the point of the Duck. If anyone can explain what it represented, I will be very glad! I thought it was just an absurdity, and I found it annoying.
5. Mason is an astronomer, Dixon a surveyor. But the opposing natures of their characters go much deeper than that. "Mason is Gothickally depressive, as Dixon is Westeringly manic" (p. 680). "Mason and Dixon would like to stay, one to fuss and the other to flirt" (p.27). Account for all the ways their natures are divergent. How does this serve the narrative throughout the novel?
The interplay between Mason and Dixon was the one thing that I really enjoyed and appreciated in this novel. The way that their relationship deepened through the book and yet appeared to remain superficial and jokey, I thought was masterly. Because of this, I have given the book 3 stars.
Rosemary wrote: "I also had to stop trying to read it quickly and switch to scheduling 25 pages a day. I want to finish it this month because next month I plan to read Young Joseph, the second part of the annual bo..."CONGRATULATIONS for finishing! I am 1/3 through. Not sure how I'm going to make it.
Hi All -- I stumbled across this M&D wiki page that provides annotation by page and an alphabetical index. It has saved me a lot of time googling names/terms. Wish I had found it sooner!https://masondixon.pynchonwiki.com/wi...
I am reading it - slower than usual for me, due to interruptions that didn't allow for any reading.Anyhow, I seem to be the outlier again! I am enjoying it. Although, I am about to start Ch 25 and am ready for them to get to America. I've read enough of their time in the UK between trips ha, ha. So far (the important proviso) I am also finding the story relatively easy to follow. I do wonder if this is because the first Pynchon I read was Gravity’s Rainbow - and I spent most of that book not knowing what was going on!
1. "Snow-Balls have flown their Arcs, starr'd the Sides of Outbuildings, as of Cousins, carried Hats away into the brisk Wind off Delaware, -- " It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?
For me, Pynchon's choice to write this way really helps place the events of the Mason + Dixon story in the era it occurred. I have not found it difficult to read.
Jane wrote: "Hi All -- I stumbled across this M&D wiki page that provides annotation by page and an alphabetical index. It has saved me a lot of time googling names/terms. Wish I had found it sooner!https://m..."
Thanks for this, Jane. I have been referring to it since you shared!
I have listened to an Audible version but I have found it very challenging to concentrate and I have taken to reading a synopsis after each chapter to make sure I have understood what is going on! I discovered the annotation, but think I will wait until I am home again to tackle that. I have realised that there are many allusions I have missed. I am heartened that others have found it hard going too. Up to chapter 42 now. I have been listening while travelling by bus on holiday.
I'm nearly 2/3 of the way through! I will be done before/by the end of May.6. Pynchon is nothing if not playful with language. Any reading of his work is more enjoyable if you keep your eyes open for allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more. Share and discuss your discoveries with fellow readers, and try to determine whether they serve the narrative or simply display the author's sense of literary playfulness.
I am sure there are many that I have missed. However, I just came across two funny ones - one referring to Star Trek (Dr. Spock specifically) and the other to Popeye. Both were unexpected and funny.
I'm done! I am both glad and sad to be finished. I really liked this book and am glad it was a quarterly read. There is no question it is genius in the amount of imagination and research Pynchon put in, along with the beautiful writing. Because I felt that Part One dragged on a little too long I don't think I will give the novel a 5*.2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks?
3. There are actually two narratives taking place simultaneously in Mason & Dixon: the story of Mason and Dixon and the framing narrative, set in the LeSparks' living room many years later, as the Reverend Cherrycoke tells his tale. How does the framing narrative serve the novel? How do the discussions, comments, and arguments by the framing characters affect the relation of the narrative? What undercurrents of tension can you identify in the framing narrative? How do they affect the "storytelling"?
Reverend Cherrycoke!
Firstly, how fun is that name! It is so American.
Using Cherrycoke as the tale teller of the Mason & Dixon story makes complete sense here. The narrative flows, as any oral history would being told after the fact. Of course we are never really sure how much he really knows about large chunks of the story - but that is the genius of this framing device. It doesn't matter because this is an epic tale of his telling. Aside from telling a story that is interesting to him (Cherrycoke) he wants to tell a long, long story that will encourage his relatives to see the value of having him by the fireside. As far as we know, he did spend quite a bit of time with them on the line and it seems to me he is the type of person who would always have an ear to the ground. I quite liked the interludes with his relatives, they were like a chance to sit up and take a breath after being completely immersed in the slog of making the line. Some details - talking dogs and clocks may have been added for the sake of amusing his audience. The duck was a real though. It is called 'Digesting Duck' on Wikipedia. It was created by Jacques de Vaucanson in 1764. Of course, the real duck did not attain consciousness (ha, ha..)!
Mod
Mod
Mod
Did anyone listen to the drinking song? the Anacreon in Heaven? pg 262. The link is in the annotated notes. It is very good and I did not know that Francis Scot Key just rewrote a song to come up with the Star Spangled Banner.
Mod
3. The two narratives taking place simultaneously just confused me.
6. I noticed quickly that he inserts a poem into each chapter. I did not find his work enjoyable to read with all the “allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more”. Nothing was straightforward. I fall into the camp that his writing “simply display the author’s sense of literary playfulness.”
7. I knew this was not going to be a conventional novel when the talking dog showed up. And I agree with Rosemary, what’s with the duck?
9. Why does Captain Zhang declare that the line's feng shui is the "worst I ever saw" (p. 542)?
Mason says “No one intends to live directly upon the Visto. The object being, that the people shall set their homes to one side or another. That it be a Boundary, nothing more.” Captain Zhang says “Everywhere else on earth, Boundaries follow Nature, - coast-lines, ridge-tops, river-banks, - so honoring the Dragon or Shan within, from which Land-Scape ever takes it form.” I think Zhang saw the line as being arbitrary and going against the laws of nature.
1. "Snow-Balls have flown their Arcs, starr'd the Sides of Outbuildings, as of Cousins, carried Hats away into the brisk Wind off Delaware, -- " It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?The fact that Pynchon, living and writing in modern times, makes a choice to write in what could be seen as an archaic style, would be considered modern in that it forces the reader to participate in the construction of the novel by having to constantly decipher meaning from words and sentence constructs that are not in the reader's common usage. It also places the story firmly in an historical time in which an educated man's written communication was not the succinct communication of our texts but meant to convey multiple things including social class.
2 and 3.
I was not that appreciative of the framing mechanism of the Reverend Cherrycoke's narrative. It did allow the author to tell a straight through chronological story such as one would narrate verbally to an audience and some ability to change perspective to after the revolution, but it mostly just complicated the story. I don't think the talking dogs, clocks or ducks were for the benefit of the children. I think Pynchon introduced them because he liked talking dogs, clocks and ducks. The fact that Mason and Dixon had their "Boswell" gives something to the novel but clearly this Boswell was not reliable, often not there and was simply filling in. I found that it didn't largely matter to me what was "true" (per Cherrycoke) or not true as the whole novel existed in another dimension.
4. Perhaps I was not tuned into the nature of this question as I was reading, but I didn't think that Pynchon limited himself to just two eras when he was writing. Obviously, Pynchon lives in one era, his primary characters lived in another and his narrator lived longer into a third and therefore those were the three main timeframes but Pynchon's metaphysical world and his deviations into science and philosophy did not seem to keep themselves so cleanly framed.
5. For me, this is what made the novel. Mason was conservative and dour while Dixon was jollification entire and yet they represented together much of what was good in their world. The were both daring in their way and open minded in their way and they came to recognize aspects of each other's character that complimented their own.
The whole novel is about "lines" and crossing lines and comparing the nature of things that have been separated by human distinctions and Mason and Dixon are very distinct and yet work together.
6. Yes, Pynchon is full of play and it made much of the otherwise ponderous reading engaging. One does think that all of Pynchon's writing is mostly about his own love of writing and that he writes largely for himself and the lucky reader who dedicates herself to reading and rereading his books. I suspect his editors do little for him.
7. Science and aliens and ghosts exist side by side in today's popular culture world, it would seem even more likely that they lived side by side in a world where so little was known. It is part of the story telling tradition and the hunger of humans to have answers for everything that they do not understand.
9. The Mason-Dixon Line is seemingly insignificant, merely "Five degrees. Twenty minutes of a day's Turn," as Dixon notes (p. 629). But, as later events testify, it becomes symbolic of much more than
that, -- the division of a country. Do the characters have any sense of the significance of what they are creating? Mason asks, "Shall wise Doctors one day write History's assessment of the Good resulting from this Line, vis-à-vis the not-so-good? I wonder which list would be longer" (p. 666). Why does Captain Zhang declare that the line's feng shui is the "worst I ever saw" (p. 542)? What moral implications do Mason and Dixon face as they create the line? What other lines and boundaries are there in the novel?
The book is full of lines and boundaries, of the classes, of nations, of beliefs. The lines between the living and dead, the practical and the fanciful are shown to be very porous in Pynchon's world. Captain Zhang calls out the Mason - Dixon line as being the worst as it respected no natural boundaries such as ridge tops and rivers but cut across all of nature's terrain. Even as they were marking the line, Mason and Dixon were aware that there was something wrong about marking a boundary between William Penn's and Lord Baltimore's land given that most of the land was still owned by natives or being lived on by settlers who had allegiance to neither gentlemen but only to their own survival. The line's legacy as being the dividing line between two legal rulings regarding the ownership of slaves was also rightly called out in this book as there were slaves in the north and free men in the south.
10. The conspiracy theory that appears most modern in the novel is the one that reflects unknown political operatives whereby everything that goes wrong is the result of scheming and conniving done by one's enemies rather than because the world is a perilous place. In the book, these are largely named as Jesuits but these Jesuits seem to be in contact with a number of forces that are not of this world.
11. Clearly the whole of the book is: "a great disorderly Tangle of Lines, long and short, weak and strong, vanishing into the Mnemonick Deep."
13. Dixon in particular realizes he must do something about this slavery in his face even if it is largely an act of deviance for his own sense of self. Mason sees this act as heroic and becomes more impressed with Dixon as a result. Pynchon's illumination of slavery is that not only of the African's brought over in chains but any people subjugating another with the flesh traders of the Americas being the worst example.
14. The west is toward potential and promise, to the native indigenous people's "heaven" (a white man's word), to the unknown and even the unknowable. One would like to think that our two intrepid line drawers would vote for that alternative but they realize that they need to go back to family and careers and a society that is more understandable (if only slightly).
1. It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?The language of the novel roots it in the period so that even modern ideas can be linked with the archaic way they are expressed, making it easier to see the overlapping and cyclical nature of history. It also highlights the social hierarchies and structures of the time. For me, it was an enhancement and I enjoyed the archaic spellings, capital letters, and abridged verbs. The verses and songs that were inserted often had a more modern feel, they reminded me of music hall or vaudeville at times.
2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks?
Cherrycoke adds humour and a link between the period when events happened and the narration. He claims to have been present at key times, such as sea voyages, but also gains second hand knowledge. He is a very irreverent Reverend, not an orthodox figure, which gives him freedom in his way of seeing things. I think the adventurous nature of the stories is aimed at the children, the more risqué parts at the potential young lovers, but mostly he’s telling a story to entertain and keep his place in the household.
5. Mason is an astronomer, Dixon a surveyor. But the opposing natures of their characters go much deeper than that…… Account for all the ways their natures are divergent. How does this serve the narrative throughout the novel?
I agree with Gail that this is a real strength of the novel. Physically and temperamentally they are different - the way they dress (love Dixon’s red coat!), their views on religion, their attitudes to women and pleasure, even one likes tea and the other coffee. They bicker about everything but come to understand each other. Dixon wants to stay in America, but ends up tied to family in England, and Mason wants to leave but eventually returns with his new family.
6. Pynchon is nothing if not playful with language. Any reading of his work is more enjoyable if you keep your eyes open for allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more. Share and discuss your discoveries with fellow readers, and try to determine whether they serve the narrative or simply display the author's sense of literary playfulness.
There was plenty of word play and puns, sometimes these were very clever and sometimes quite childish. I think there was quite a lot of sexual innuendo/double entendres as well. I’m sure many of the references went over my head while I was caught up in the story. The group of Indians had mainly biblical names, except Hanenhereyowagh, which sounds like a mangled English phrase! I think this was mainly Pynchon’s literary playfulness.
7. "Mason, pray You, -- 'tis the Age of Reason . . . we're Men of Science," states Dixon (p. 27). How, then, do they account for ghostly visitations, giant beets, and talking dogs?
These men have been raised in a time when religion still has a strong influence, and in rural areas where myth and superstition are powerful. So they can apply their science to the job of surveying while still personally being influenced by the supernatural. I did find Dixon’s childhood flying lady and his own flights rather bewildering, but I liked his hollow earth theory that infuriated Mason.
10. Conspiracies abound in Pynchon's oeuvre, and Mason & Dixon is no exception. Identify the conspiracies, real and imagined, in the novel. Are they rooted in paranoid speculation or in real events? Do they find any echoes in modern conspiracy theories?
There are individual conspiracies, such as the political manoeuvring of Maskelyne, Bradshaw and the RS, and widespread ones such as the Jesuits and the plotters against the King in Philadelphia. They are rooted in real events but distorted for comic effect or to illuminate the actions of Mason & Dixon. As in modern conspiracy theories, these are seen as more widespread and influential than they are.
11. On pages 349–352, Cherrycoke and Uncle Ives argue about the nature of history. To understand history, Ives says, "You look at the evidence. The testimony. The whole Truth" (p.352). Cherrycoke, in contrast, sees history as "a great disorderly Tangle of Lines, long and short, weak and strong, vanishing into the Mnemonick Deep." Which definition do you think Pynchon credits? Which do you? Who, according to Cherrycoke, is best able to convey history?
As a storyteller, I think Pynchon favours Cherrycoke. Events overlap, recur, are retold by different parties at different times. Then they are interpreted and retold according to others’ perspectives. Details are discovered at a later date. I kind of agree, but I do feel historians (rather than writers) should gather evidence - interpretation of the evidence is of course more difficult.
13. How do the surveyors respond to slavery throughout the book? Do their awareness and their response change?
In the Cape, they are more accepting of slavery as part of the environment they have entered, but the presence of Aurora and her reappearance later in the story seems to indicate a kind of discomfort around how she is treated. Later comes a more direct awareness that culminates in Dixon’s attack on the slave driver. This may partly be due to the awareness of how their own position has been manipulated and exploited.
1. “Snow-Balls have flown their Arcs, starr’d the Sides of Outbuildings, as of Cousins, carried Hats away into the brisk Wind off Delaware, -- “It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?The writing style definitely impedes my reading of the novel. It was like learning another language, what with the strange vocabulary, grammar, punctuation. I am not sure why he chose to write this way, except as a challenge to himself. Although the style of writing is archaic, the exchanges (between Mason & Dixon and the Cherrycoke family) often have a modern “tone” – i.e., there’s a lot of sarcasm and trash talking.
2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks?
It's sometimes easy to forget he’s narrating it, as Mason & Dixon carry on private conversations and get into all sorts of messes when he’s nowhere near them. By his own admission, he was on his way to India while they were returning to England after their time in Cape Town. At the beginning of ch. 14, the twins call him out for knowing the contents of a letter that Mason wrote to Dixon but never sent. He may have been present for some of the events, but he’s taking liberties with others and making others up out of whole cloth, whether to glorify his own history or to entertain the boys or to create a lesson. He’s playing fast and loose with details, as is Pynchon; even though this is a historical novel, one doesn’t get the sense that he cares too much about who the men actual were, what they were like, or the actual details of their journeys. In short, I don’t think Cherrycoke or Pynchon are reliable narrators.
3. There are actually two narratives taking place simultaneously in Mason & Dixon: the story of Mason and Dixon and the framing narrative, set in the LeSparks’ living room many years later, as the Reverend Cherrycoke tells his tale. How does the framing narrative serve the novel? How do the discussions, comments, and arguments by the framing characters affect the relation of the narrative? What undercurrents of tension can you identify in the framing narrative? How do they affect the “storytelling”?
There seems to be tension between the nephew Ethelmer, who is questioning the tenets of Christianity, if not the belief in God, and the older generation.
4. Pynchon’s works tend to spill over the edge of their pages into the real world, pulling in science, history, philosophy, and the arcane nature of popular culture. In Mason & Dixon, he has two worlds to flood into: the world of the eighteenth-century, and the modern world. Does he limit himself to the eighteenth-century? Is there a macrocosm -- or two macrocosms -- imbedded in the microcosm of Mason & Dixon?
To quote the incomparable Lucille Bluth, “I don’t understand the question and I won’t answer.”
5. Mason is an astronomer, Dixon a surveyor. But the opposing natures of their characters go much deeper than that. "Mason is Gothickally depressive, as Dixon is Westeringly manic" (p. 680). "Mason and Dixon would like to stay, one to fuss and the other to flirt" (p.27). Account for all the ways their natures are divergent. How does this serve the narrative throughout the novel?
Dixon: Quaker or former Quaker; drinks beer and coffee; flirts and sleeps with a bunch of women; when asks to toast to what is most important to him, he states, “the pursuit of happiness”; late in the book, the ghost of Elizabeth describes him as “beaming and cheery temperament, a Boy who would be ever off to play.”
Mason: a widower; drinks wine and tea; remains chaste; the ghost of Elizabeth tells him that he thinks too much, and he later admits, “…whatever I do imagine as Fun invariably produces Misery.”
They often resemble Laurel and Hardy, as when Dixon says to Mason, “Another bonny gahn-on tha’ve got us into.” He is described as gaining weight across their journey, so I take it that Dixon is Hardy and Mason is Laurel.
6. Pynchon is nothing if not playful with language. Any reading of his work is more enjoyable if you keep your eyes open for allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more. Share and discuss your discoveries with fellow readers, and try to determine whether they serve the narrative or simply display the author’s sense of literary playfulness.
They simply displays his “literary playfulness,” I believe. I don’t think Pynchon cares about the reader’s understanding of anything or about serving a narrative or theme. He is just having fun. And we are the fools who pay for it.
His humor is often juvenile, as when Mason asks Dixon how he’s finding the time to hang out with Dolly and Molly: “How are you fitting that in among all the Obs and Social Visits?”“Fitting whah’ in…? Dixon staring in comick Dismay down toward his Penis.” Or on p. 383 when the chef Armand asks a woman if she’s eaten beaver :(
He is also no stranger to a pun, as when Dixon refers to, “A tight-fisted Bunch… tha must open their Grip upon it with a Prying-Bar…” And Mason replies, “Must be why they call it ‘Prize’ money.”
I did enjoy his description of the mechanical duck’s speech as “inflected heavily with lingo-beccal Fricatives, issuing in a fine Mist of some digestive liquid…” Basically, it’s Daffy Duck.
7. “Mason, pray You, -- ‘tis the Age of Reason . . . we're Men of Science,” states Dixon (p. 27). How, then, do they account for ghostly visitations, giant beets, and talking dogs?
They seem to take it as a matter of course. Like,“Of course, these things happen. They may be rare, but they happen.”
There also seems to be some conflation between the spiritual and the scientific. E.g. they are astronomers who also practice and believe in astronomy. And Dixon’s mentor Emerson believes that scientific inventions and discoveries like the telescope and logarithms) have allowed him to understand God’s design.
8. The Reverend Cherrycoke says, “As to journey west . . . in the same sense of the Sun, is to live, raise Children, grow older, and die, carried along by the stream of the Day, -- whilst to turn Eastward, is somehow to resist time and age, to work against the Wind, seek ever the dawn, even, as who can say, defy Death” (p. 263). How does this observation resonate throughout the novel during Mason and Dixon's travels?
On p. 314 Mason muses that he is in exile from Scotland, his homeland – first to England, then the Cape, now America, each time a step further. Dixon asks, “Away? Away from…?” Mason responds, “Perhaps not away, Dixon. No. perhaps toward.” In that sense, America is the future, “the dream” of Britannia: “…all that can’t happen in civilized lands, can happen there. And all kind of legends may yet prove to be true.” (see p. 345). In one of the final chapters, Dixon dreams of going back to America, which he describes as, “Abundance, impossible to reach the end of in one lifetime – hence, from the Mortal point of view, infinite.” It is not unlike myths perpetuated by Western movies; there is danger yet freedom in the unknown, the unsettled. Whereas in the east (Europe) everything is already discovered and civilized and, in that sense, frozen in time.
9. The Mason-Dixon Line is seemingly insignificant, merely "Five degrees. Twenty minutes of a day's Turn," as Dixon notes (p. 629). But, as later events testify, it becomes symbolic of much more than that, -- the division of a country. Do the characters have any sense of the significance of what they are creating? Mason asks, "Shall wise Doctors one day write History's assessment of the Good resulting from this Line, vis-à-vis the not-so-good? I wonder which list would be longer" (p. 666). Why does Captain Zhang declare that the line's feng shui is the "worst I ever saw" (p. 542)? What moral implications do Mason and Dixon face as they create the line? What other lines and boundaries are there in the novel?
In the opening of ch. 55, Zhang says boundaries follow nature – coastlines, rivers, mountains, and therefore honor Dragon. He believes the Mason-Dixon line is a violation of this. It is also bad Feng-Shui because they are making a right angle and there are no right angles in nature. (As a side note, the lay lines of Emerson as wells as the paths of the Native Americans seem to be “natural,” following magnetics of the earth…?)
Zhang also warns the explorers that drawing a line through the midst of a people will create Bad History, to create a distinction among them – war and devastation will surely follow (Ch. 63). Dixon argues that the provinces are already different, but Mason disagrees, pointing out that Negro slavery is practiced on one side and not the other. Zhang, however, argues that there have been slaves as long as there have been humans.
10. "Whom are we working for, Mason?" inquires Dixon (p. 347). Later, he says, ". . . Something invisible's going on, tha must feel it, smell it . . . ?" (p. 478). Conspiracies abound in Pynchon's oeuvre, and Mason & Dixon is no exception. Identify the conspiracies, real and imagined, in the novel. Are they rooted in paranoid speculation or in real events? Do they find any echoes in modern conspiracy theories?
In this context, Dixon seems to be wondering what kind of people Americans are. Both men have just been to the site of a mass slaughter of innocent Native Americans – children, women, the elderly – by white settlers. Dixon in particular feels like he’s never seen/heard anything like it, even at the Cape, and what he saw there (public executions, whippings) shocked him.
However, there are other meanings.
In chapter 21, Rebekah says, “This sounds like Politics… I thought you gaz’d at Stars, and thought higher thoughts, you people.” And Mason responds that Astronomy is at the hands of the Pelhamites and “Place-jobbery.” As far as I can tell, Pelham refers to a prime minister or a British statesman and “jobbery” is the practice of making money out of a political appointment. So basically, Rebekah is right. Scientific discoveries are commodified and/or politicized. Bradley’s discovery of the aberration of light and “the longitude” are important as well. And while the science is beyond my understanding, it seems related to determining the best shipping routes. So even if Mason and Dixon are just doing it for the pleasure of scientific discovery, someone is funding it. As Mason says before they depart for America, “The Business of the World is Trade and Death, and you must engage with that unpleasantness as the price of you not-at-all-assur’d Moment of Purity.”
(continued)
11. On pages 349–352, Cherrycoke and Uncle Ives argue about the nature of history. To understand history, Ives says, "You look at the evidence. The testimony. The whole Truth" (p.352). Cherrycoke, in contrast, sees history as "a great disorderly Tangle of Lines, long and short, weak and strong, vanishing into the Mnemonick Deep." Which definition do you think Pynchon credits? Which do you? Who, according to Cherrycoke, is best able to convey history?As discussed above, Pynchon isn’t trying to present an accurate historical account of the men or their mission, so he likely believes in the Rev’s description of history. According to Cherrycoke, history should never be in the hands of those in power and/or politics, as it will simply be exploited for their own ends. This is why you should leave it in the hands of “fabulists and counterfeiters, Ballad Mongers and Cranks of ev’ry Radius.” Their versions of history may be “inaccurate,” but they are lying for entertainment (like Pynchon), not for political gain.
12. In chapter 53 (p. 511), the novel embarks on an entirely new narrative, that of Eliza, a novitiate in the Widows of Christ, and Captain Zhang, the feng shui expert who rescues her. The source of the new narrative turns out to be a bawdy book that Tenebrae and Ethelmer secretly read in ‘Brae’s bedroom. However, the new narrative soon melds into the one being told by Cherrycoke. How does Pynchon account for this? How is it resolved? What does this tell us about the nature of storytelling and writing?
Pynchon might be accounting for this in the next chapter when Zhang says that Mason and Dixon are not the Principle Personae and their line is just a stage setting, no more real than Castle Elsinore in Hamlet. But I also think he would say that he doesn’t have to account for it. He’s the author of both The Ghastly Fop and Mason & Dixon, so if he wants to combine the books, he can.
13. A Quaker reminds Mason and Dixon that the sugar they enjoy is "bought... with the lives of African slaves, untallied black lives broken upon the greedy engines of the Barbadoes" (p. 329). Dixon later declares, ". . . we lived with Slavery in our faces, -- more of it at St. Helena, -- and now here we are again, in another Colony, this time having drawn them a Line between their Slave-Keepers, and their Wage-Payers, as if doom'd to re-encounter thro' the World this public Secret, this shameful Core . . ." (p. 692). How do the surveyors respond to slavery throughout the book? Do their awareness and their response change?
They witness it but do not respond to while they are in Africa. The first mention of it I recall is Ch. 31, p. 306 when they hear of the massacre of captured Indians by white settlers (Paxton Boys): “They saw white Brutality enough, at the Cape of Good Hope. They can no better understand it now, than then… Whites in both places are become the very Savages of their own worst Dreams, far out of measure to any Provocation.” In Ch 57, Dixon notes that Quakers object to the treatment of Black slaves and Native Americans, and he eventually takes action against the slave trader, taking his whip and freeing his captives.
I find it ironic that that the American battle song (Ch 58 p. 571) ends with the line, “Slaves never again.” This recitation is followed by a description of Native Americans trying to escort their tribe to a safe haven and their concerns about being massacred. George Washington also complains that the English want to enslave all Americans, presuming they are “another kind of N---.” So slavery is only bad if it’s a white person being victimized.
14. Pynchon offers up an alternative ending, sending the surveyors farther and farther west, ". . . away from the law, into the savage Vacancy ever before them . . ." (p.709). What purpose does this false ending serve? What do Mason and Dixon discover as they voyage on?
Not sure what purpose it serves, but here’s what they discover: towns and people “from elsewhere, i.e., people coming from the West to the East, such as the Mexican, Chinese, etc. They also discover Uranus, a new planet at the time. This discovery (and maybe the scale of the mountains) makes them turn back, although they are never able to completely return to England. They settle in the middle of the ocean in a mythical island.
Mod
1. "Snow-Balls have flown their Arcs, starr'd the Sides of Outbuildings, as of Cousins, carried Hats away into the brisk Wind off Delaware, -- " It is clear from the first sentence that Pynchon has abandoned modern syntax for eighteenth-century prose, an ambitious undertaking. How does this serve the themes and action of the novel? Why do you think the author has chosen to write this way? Does it impede or enhance your reading of the novel? Which elements of the prose and language can be identified as archaic, and which elements can be termed modern?
I think the decision to write this book in syntax of the 18th century made it more real and I enjoyed that aspect. I did need to read both the book and listen to the audible and the notes from Pynchon Wiki: Mason & Dixon, really helped a lot
2. The events of the novel are narrated by the Reverend Wicks Cherrycoke, who tells the story of Mason and Dixon after dinner for the entertainment of his family. How does he gain access to the details of the events? How does he fill in the gaps of events he doesn't actually witness? Do his perspective and morality color the narrative? Is he reliable? Does the fact that he is trying to entertain a youthful audience account for the appearance of talking dogs, conversing clocks, and mechanical ducks? He is not reliable but memory and history are not reliable either.
3. There are actually two narratives taking place simultaneously in Mason & Dixon: the story of Mason and Dixon and the framing narrative, set in the LeSparks' living room many years later, as the Reverend Cherrycoke tells his tale. How does the framing narrative serve the novel? How do the discussions, comments, and arguments by the framing characters affect the relation of the narrative? What undercurrents of tension can you identify in the framing narrative? How do they affect the "storytelling"?
I didn't mind the framing technique though it really wasn't something I paid attention to, either. It makes the story unreliable and allows for error in the telling.
4. Pynchon's works tend to spill over the edge of their pages into the real world, pulling in science, history, philosophy, and the arcane nature of popular culture. In Mason & Dixon, he has two worlds to flood into: the world of the eighteenth-century, and the modern world. Does he limit himself to the eighteenth-century? Is there a macrocosm -- or two macrocosms -- imbedded in the microcosm of Mason & Dixon?
No he doesn't limit himself.
5. Mason is an astronomer, Dixon a surveyor. But the opposing natures of their characters go much deeper than that. "Mason is Gothickally depressive, as Dixon is Westeringly manic" (p. 680). "Mason and Dixon would like to stay, one to fuss and the other to flirt" (p.27). Account for all the ways their natures are divergent. How does this serve the narrative throughout the novel?
6. Pynchon is nothing if not playful with language. Any reading of his work is more enjoyable if you keep your eyes open for allusions, illusions, tricky metaphors, symbols, puns, pop-cultural references, and more. Share and discuss your discoveries with fellow readers, and try to determine whether they serve the narrative or simply display the author's sense of literary playfulness.
Reading Pynchon requires a slow careful approach. It is more like studying or solving a puzzle that simply reading a novel.
7. "Mason, pray You, -- 'tis the Age of Reason . . . we're Men of Science," states Dixon (p. 27). How, then, do they account for ghostly visitations, giant beets, and talking dogs?
8. The Reverend Cherrycoke says, "As to journey west . . . in the same sense of the Sun, is to live, raise Children, grow older, and die, carried along by the stream of the Day, -- whilst to turn Eastward, is somehow to resist time and age, to work against the Wind, seek ever the dawn, even, as who can say, defy Death" (p. 263). How does this observation resonate throughout the novel during Mason and Dixon's travels?
Interesting. They go west, then they go east, then west, etc.
9. The Mason-Dixon Line is seemingly insignificant, merely "Five degrees. Twenty minutes of a day's Turn," as Dixon notes (p. 629). But, as later events testify, it becomes symbolic of much more than
that, -- the division of a country. Do the characters have any sense of the significance of what they are creating? Mason asks, "Shall wise Doctors one day write History's assessment of the Good resulting from this Line, vis-à-vis the not-so-good? I wonder which list would be longer" (p. 666). Why does Captain Zhang declare that the line's feng shui is the "worst I ever saw" (p. 542)? What moral implications do Mason and Dixon face as they create the line? What other lines and boundaries are there in the novel?
10. "Whom are we working for, Mason?" inquires Dixon (p. 347). Later, he says, ". . . Something invisible's going on, tha must feel it, smell it . . . ?" (p. 478). Conspiracies abound in Pynchon's oeuvre, and Mason & Dixon is no exception. Identify the conspiracies, real and imagined, in the novel. Are they rooted in paranoid speculation or in real events? Do they find any echoes in modern conspiracy theories?
There is one that they are spies for Britain. This is prerevolution. We often here of spies in our daily life as well.
11. On pages 349–352, Cherrycoke and Uncle Ives argue about the nature of history. To understand history, Ives says, "You look at the evidence. The testimony. The whole Truth" (p.352). Cherrycoke, in contrast, sees history as "a great disorderly Tangle of Lines, long and short, weak and strong, vanishing into the Mnemonick Deep." Which definition do you think Pynchon credits? Which do you? Who, according to Cherrycoke, is best able to convey history?
The tangled one, the one that isn't chronological because I think "History" is unreliable
12. In chapter 53 (p. 511), the novel embarks on an entirely new narrative, that of Eliza, a novitiate in the Widows of Christ, and Captain Zhang, the feng shui expert who rescues her. The source of the new narrative turns out to be a bawdy book that Tenebrae and Ethelmer secretly read in 'Brae's bedroom. However, the new narrative soon melds into the one being told by Cherrycoke. How does Pynchon account for this? How is it resolved? What does this tell us about the nature of storytelling and writing?
13. A Quaker reminds Mason and Dixon that the sugar they enjoy is "bought . . . with the lives of African slaves, untallied black lives broken upon the greedy engines of the Barbadoes" (p. 329). Dixon later declares, ". . . we lived with Slavery in our faces, -- more of it at St. Helena, -- and now here we are again, in another Colony, this time having drawn them a Line between their Slave-Keepers, and their Wage-Payers, as if doom'd to re-encounter thro' the World this public Secret, this shameful Core . . ." (p. 692). How do the surveyors respond to slavery throughout the book? Do their awareness and their response change?
They finally act, attack the slave trader, let the slaves go, then they must escape.
14. Pynchon offers up an alternative ending, sending the surveyors farther and farther west, ". . . away from the law, into the savage Vacancy ever before them . . ." (p.709). What purpose does this false ending serve? What do Mason and Dixon discover as they voyage on?
Freedom, away from law
I like this, Kristel: 'Reading Pynchon requires a slow careful approach. It is more like studying or solving a puzzle that simply reading a novel.' You hit the nail on the head with that assessment!
I have finally finished - and what a slog! I listened to an Audible version, read episode summaries to see what I had missed and finally looked at the annotations, so I believe I gave it considerable attention. But now my question is why did I bother? I hope that answering the questions will enlighten me.1. Was Pynchon trying to emulate an eighteenth century style in order to make it seem authentic to a modern reader, or was he just doing it to amuse himself? By listening I missed the capitalisations and the archaic spellings but I was hyper aware of the convoluted sentences with subsidiary clauses all over the place. I found it an exercise in concentration. It subtracted from my enjoyment.
2. The Reverend Cherrycoke was attempting to justify his prolonged stay in the house of relatives by amusing the children by retelling the adventures of Mason and Dixon. He was present when they left on the Seahorse, but I do not remember him being present in The Cape settlement nor on St Helena. He is there again when they are surveying the state boundaries in America, but not when they are back in England, so how much was he (and Pynchon) making up? Because it sometimes seems he is just making stuff up to amuse, sometimes he seems to have historically accurate information, but the framing story intruding on the story was not helpful to my appreciation of the book.
4. Pynchon seems to like showing off his knowledge of the movers and shakers of eighteenth century England and the concerns of the Royal Society, for example, but he also delves into determinism, colonialism, slavery, scientific exploration and power. For example the subplot about Jesuits has the reader contemplating conspiracy theories, then and now, and the Visto, the path cleared through the forest is symbolic of the encroachment of Europeans on indigenous lands, which is very much a contemporary issue in New Zealand.
5. Pynchon accentuates the difference between Mason’s introspection and methodical scientific approach and Dixon’s more extrovert and pragmatic personality to explore the tension between tradition and innovation, the nature of scientific inquiry and the development of friendship and partnership.
6. I don’t think I appreciated his puns, allusions, and neologisms. For example, the humour in Cherrycoke’s name eludes me. But I did find some of the annotations interesting, in that phrases or historical events were explained that I would have considered self evident.
7.I am not a fan of magic realism but I am trying to understand Pynchon’s juxtaposition of scientific enquiry with ghosts and talking dogs (and that duck) as accentuating the importance of imagination and myth making in human endeavour.
8. This is such an ethnocentric question: although the establishment of the Mason-Dixon Line is an example of “progress“, the tension between tradition and innovation is symbolising America as progress and England as tradition. Although this is the compass of the novel, ignoring the north-south dichotomy of the Cape, the world is much more than the U.S. and Britain. To me East means the Far East!
9. The line that Mason and Dixon created began with practical considerations of terrain and property, but they did consider their rôle in instigating colonial power and displacing the indigenous inhabitants. They could not know the significance their line would later acquire as the demarkation between north and south in the civil war. Captain Zhang saw the disruption the Visto caused, which offended the principles of Feng Shui, which emphasises using natural terrain and contours and not imposing straight lines as an unnatural boundary. The various lines and boundaries between peoples and places that Pynchon describes, are seen as social constructs, often arbitrary, that emphasise that scientific exploration can result in unintended or misunderstood consequences.
10. I have already mentioned how the distrust of Jesuits in the eighteenth century has modern parallels in the mad conspiracy theories of MAGA in the USA and other right wing groups around the world. The mechanical duck is presumably referencing technological espionage, a modern equivalent of which is the idea that some malevolent force was brainwashing people with COVID vaccinations. Mason and Dixon speculate about whether they are themselves being manipulated, showing some paranoia.
11. Pynchon uses this discussion to emphasise that objective, linear historical research does not reflect the chaotic and subjective nature of human experience. The Reverend Cherrycoke favours storytelling, which blends the known facts of primary sources with multiple perspectives, personal memories and creative invention. Pynchon clearly is in the Cherrycoke camp, often critiquing linear narratives as being too prescriptive, and playing with imaginative stories to convey the complexity of understanding the past.
12. This inclusion is an example of my discussion in question 11. Pynchon is drawing attention to the nature of storytelling, the interconnectedness of different narratives as he weaves it back into the framing story.
13. The story of how their hostess in the Cape Colony deliberately encourages her daughters to excite Mason so that he will sleep with their slave and hopefully impregnate her, is an example of Pynchon’s attitude to slavery. The light skinned offspring could then be sold at a good price! Dixon is shocked but pragmatic. In America he is goaded into action against a cruel slave driver, no longer able to tolerate the inequities.
14. I think he includes this relentless westward expansion as a criticism of the frontier myth that there are limitless possibilities beyond established society. This ending devolves into fantasy, which I, personally, do not enjoy. I apologise for all these separate answers. I am away from home and using my phone, so I have had to scroll back to see the questions. Having answered them as best I could, I have not much more appreciation for this book than before!
Reading 1001
Books mentioned in this topic
Gravity’s Rainbow (other topics)Gulliver’s Travels (other topics)
http://masondixon.pynchonwiki.com/wik...