who's Christian?

[jbor]

----------
>From: MalignD at aol.com
>

> It's perfectly possible that all we're doing here is tripping over the word
> "religious" and it's application.

Possibly, though I think that everyone understood the difference between
"religious writer" and "writer who writes about religion". To try and
conflate the two into one was indeed bizarre.

I think there is general agreement now that Pynchon writes about religions,
however, that this does not make him necessarily a "religious writer" (i.e.
someone whose work is designed to endorse or promote a religious worldview).
It is a simple point, as you said, and much in the way that the point was
contested has been dishonest.

>From my reading of the texts it is apparent to me that Pynchon doesn't
endorse or promote any single religious creed or response to human
existence, nor even that he valorises "religion", at least as it has been
conceptualised in Western thought, as an epistemic system over ... I guess
the implicit binary there would be "non-religion", or secular, or profane.
This, I suspect, is where a movement from epistemological to ontological
concerns comes into play.

best