Blog Post #2

The story, Crying of Lot 49 is quite an eccentric reading. The plot and setting at times can be quite arbitrary and ambiguous, but Pynchon within the ambiguity and arbitriousness uses his many different themes; one specifically being that of sex, sexual authority and gender stratification to convey certain messages-- which show the disparing worldview of the story. The overarching plot is that the main protagonist, Oedipa, ex-boyfriend has passed but has named her the executor of his estate, and with this she feels the duty to execute-- to where she meets the lawyer to whom were the reader is made aware of one of the themes which shows the despaired world view within the story. How this is shown is by the main protagonist lack of authority and or ownership of her own body-- and in general her sexual identity.

When the lawyer (Metzger) showed up and after they had more than a few drinks they decided to have a game/wager on a show that Metzger was apart of when he was a young boy and stated that everytime that Oedipa was wrong on an answer she would have to strip a piece of clothing(and vice versa) and also she placed a wager that everyone on the boat would die. Yet, Oedipa had been suspicious of what Metzge knew and what he had planned-- especially after their initial counter when Oedipa was weary of the knowledge given by Inverarity, but Oedipa had  a “Marvellous idea” as she describes it, that would help her win regardless and so,

“Oedipa skipped into the bathroom, which happened to also to have a walk-in closet, quickly undressed and began putting on as much as she could of the clothing she could of the clothing shed brought with her: six pairs of panties in assorted colors, girdle, three pairs of nylons, three brassieres, two stretch slacks, four half-slips, one black sheath, two summer dresses, half dozen A-line skirts, three sweaters, two two blouses quilted wrapper, baby blue peignoir and old Orlon muu-muu. Bracelets then, scatter pins, earrings, a pendant. It all seemed to take hours to put on and she could hardly walk when she was finished.” (Pynchon: 24)

This initially signifies that the worldview of the story was alluding to a more optimistic- positive stance because it shows Oedipa taking ownership of her body. Oedipa doesn't throw herself at Metzger whom she says she finds handsome; she does the opposite and makes him work for it-- playing hard to get because she is unsure of Metzger as an individual and also because she wants to assert her authority of not only her body but also over Metzger. She could barely even walk after putting on all of that clothing, but her inability to move meant nothing if she could exert her power. She wanted Metzger to understand the power structure in play and that he would have to allow her amendment of the rules of the game for him to even have a possibility of achieving what he set out to do, which he thought was cleaver. Arguably Pynchon thoroughly describes this setting; stating every clothing item because he wants the reader to understand the importance of what Oedipa is doing for she is acting out of many conventional stereotypes of women, during the modern-post modern era, when faced against a man whom they find attractive. Each piece of clothing she put on to possibly irritate Metzger and yearn for something out of his reach and also every piece of clothing acting as act of rebelance.

Yet this is where almost immediately after the dynamic of the world view of the story changes and shows its true countenance of being bleak and or disparaging. Oedipa is winning the game/wager because after finishing adding more clothing to herself in the bathroom to further tease and assert her authority she sees that he is pretty much naked and decides that she wants to have sex with him. This at first it seems that she still is in control but when she found out that the story didn't end well for the protagonist within the story and that they actually had a gruesome ending. So, “Oedipa had leaped to her feet and run across to the other wall to turn and glare at Metzger. “They didn't make it!” She yelled. “You bastard, I won.” (Pynchon: 30) The countenance of disparity now is shown because in response to Oedipus outburst he smiled and stated that she won. And then after Oedipa asked Metzger what Iverarity had told him and he stated, “That you wouldn't be easy.” (Pynchon: 30) So the chapter ends with crying and with Metzger in the end. This truly shows the disparity pertaining to the world view of the text through the theme of sex, sexual authority and gender stratification because in the end even though Oedipa worked so hard to have this complete authority she was deceived and led to believe that she had authority not only of the situation but also her body. She went through an entire process and worked extremely hard to assert the matriarch in that current situation-- going through far lengths-- even not being able to walk from her adding clothes to have control. Yet this control was a fiction. And even though she won the game she still gave herself to Metzger thinking that it was her decision but all along Metzger would have won with either outcome of the game, which was rigged with knowledge and or resource which he possessed. So the solemness of the worldview can be argues that to be solidified by the relaity of Oedpia losing the game.