MDMD2: The Learned English Dog

[Michel Ryckx]

John Bailey wrote, earlier this week:

> I think, too, The L.E.D. is the first example of the kind of super/preter/extranatural thing which
> M&D seems to suggest is denied and subsequently destroyed by the Age of Reason, Enlightenment, Men
> of Science etc, yeah? Would people agree that this is a major theme of the novel? Like, one of the
> 'lines' which the novel suggests should (maybe) not have been drawn is the one between
> myth/magic/fantasy/belief and fact/proof/nature/thought? I'm pretty sure it becomes more explicit
> later on, though I could be recalling wrongly. I have so much trouble sorting out what is in these
> books and what I think about when  reading them. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Perhaps the answer on this question depends on how one evaluates the Age of Reason.  The L.E.D.
gives a perfectly rational account on how he behaves like he does.  He then may be typical of the
Enlightenment.  But of course, things are never what they seem in mr. Pynchon novel.  One could also
argue that we're not any longer able to see how a dog really is, due to the Age of Reason.

In 1761, the Year of the Transit of Venus, W.A. Mozart, age 5, wrote his first piece.  If that isn't
magic, what is?

I wonder why we do not ask the same questions about a mr. Marquez or mr. Rushdie novel, in which we
take magic for granted.

Michel