Nothing Happening = Boring

When Oedipa rents an Impala and drives to San Narciso a very elaborated description of the city is employed. The description has sort of like a mocking tone which clearly starts by the name "San Narciso". This is a paradox because being a narcissist involves thinking that you are great but it is mentioned that "Nothing was happening" (p. 13). When nothing happens, it usually lacks of fun or it simply is boring, to find a general rule, it lacks of interest.

San Narciso was described like if it was a "compilation" of house, buildings or other types of constructions united by pure coincidence, apparently like the rest of the region it is located. Pynchon says, "But if there was any vital difference between it and the rest of Southern California, it was invisible on first glance" (p. 14). This previous passage evokes the feeling in the reader that there is a difference between San Narciso and the rest of Southern California because the author considers it. The last two words of the passage give more of an enigmatic and confusing image of the city because if the difference isn´t seen on first glance, it means that it requires more insight and this is backed up later when Oedipa is looking downwards to the city and it reminds her of the first printed circuit she saw when she opened a transistor radio (http://cl49.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chapter_2). I like the suggested metaphor because a printed circuit is something that is apparently organized but no one understands how it is organized.

Life´s a Competition

Individuals in any kind of species compete for nearly everything that is gotten in their lives. When you are trying to get something to eat, seem it or not, you are competing for it. Even when food is handed to you as easily as in a supermarket, you are competing for it to a certain degree. You might say that this is just in humans or in certain species but no, this is in every species and for every resource. Dawkins says that your biggest competition is in your own species because you know what you need for living and everybody in the species needs it so you have to compete for it to a certain degree. And there is an even bigger competition if who you are competing with is of the same sex because they will compete for the opposite sex´s attention.

What I like about this book is that every time after I read it I start thinking and reflecting. Besides, it is very interesting. For example, I had never thought of this before and how everybody you share your life with is a competition, but now that this idea has been proposed to my mind, I really agree with it. I agree with most of the theories of this book but there are some that completely interfere with my beliefs, especially religious ones. Dawkins presents an excellent example of this competition, he says, "Moles and blackbirds may compete for worms but blackbirds and blackbirds compete with each other for worms and everything else" (p. 67)

Muscles and Engines, Alike?

In reading The Selfish Gene there was a talk in which Dawkins was comparing the speed of plants and animals and how they were faster. When talking about how animals got their speed he said, "The gadget that animals evolved to achieve rapid movement is muscle" (p. 49). In his following points I found a very interesting metaphor that compares engines to muscles. Dawkins talks about muscles and engines (talking about the steam engine) and mentions a few similarities, he says that they both use energy stored in chemical fuel to exert mechanical movement, the only difference is that when making sudden force, the muscle creates tension and the engine creates steam pressure.

I personally liked the metaphor because I had always wondered how muscles worked. People had given me very complex explanations so I just understood the basics. In my mind it wasn't clear how muscles worked and whenever I asked people wouldn't know how to fully explain how muscles worked on exerting the force. Everybody knows that muscles are the organs in the body that exert the force but nobody really knows how they do that. So I was missing this question until I read this metaphor and description.

Thinking, Reflecting, Daydreaming: Which one is it?

As I started reading The Crying of Lot 49 I noticed that Oedipa is the kind of person that reflects a lot and goes far from the world thinking and wondering about life, she´s like a daydreamer. The very firts part of the book she receives a letter that mentions that hey ex-boyfriend has passed away and that she is the rightful owner of one of his houses. I suppose the house has the appearance of Pablo Escobar's farm, (off course not as exagerated) because it was once great and pretty but due to life situations, sometimes things get abandoned. Both houses were great and belonged to wealthy men but one of them got practically broke and the other got killed. Pierce had lost 2 million dolars in a business that didn't turn out as expected so he didn't even have money to pay for minor maintenance of a house. I suppose this house is good for Oedipa because it doesn't seem like her husband and her have a very good economic situation. Her husband worked as a sales man for used cars and now works as a DJ for a radio station.

The impression I'm getting from this firts bit of the book is that Oedipa is one of those persons who have not done always what they desire because of what people might think. She is a socially oppressed person. What makes me think this is that she thinks a lot and when people thinnk a lot about what they are going to do, they ussualy think of the expectations that society has for them. For example, towards the end of the chapter, when the doctor propose to escape she keeps thinking that she always wanted to escape through her relationship with Pierce, but now she doesn't even know whta she wanted to escape from! There it is, she thought so much about insignificant things that she forgot the most basic question of the topic. Maybe she just wanted to try something new, given the fact that she had never escaped before.