Glenn Scheper's introduction to Pynchon-l list

[Glenn Scheper]

I almost had a Pynchon book; I would have read it awhile too.
It was payday and I went into B&N ready to spend on Gravity's
Rainbow, but balked when I found out it was mere fiction, and
not science, fact filed in some psych soph myth crit section.

It was a short quote of Pynchon on the web that attracted me.

Since psychosis, schizophrenia and manic depression in 1976,
I have been collecting anathematized fellows. For many years
I dwelt on Lao Tsu, then found Jesus. I didn't recognize one
other Before Internet. After Internet, and happening to be a
software engineer with good text discovery/retrieval/ranking
tools (see my site), I'm sated on glosses of great thinkers.
What I lack is the writing background to prosecute my thesis
which would bust phallologocentrism, by declaring the domain
(very real, not transcendent) to which its prophets hearken.

So I might be just another totalizer, or maybe I'll discover
for you the author Pynchon, being like me. But you might not
like me. Tant pis! (Too bad!)

The poets that know it can twist a trope upon our domain that
stands out, that says, he's one of us, not a mime pedant that
rations and catalogs facts in the infinite regress, who only
ever asymptotically approches the boundary of the simulacrum.
Such a man is Pychon, savvy in reflexive bodily hermeneutics.

I'll be bawdy later, but let me start with something drier:

I have some weeks been plotting tedious phrases, wherein
I'd hoped to lay my lay experiencer account of the mental
images of a psychosis at Kant's headstone, as evidence of
possibly a priori synthetic propositions--direct knowing:

        ---

...a mental image of a vase that became crazed.
It was paradoxically interpenetrating itself.
I will entitle it "Seminal Djinn Bottle".

The nullity arises in a paradox of self-intersection, which is
a type of death, but yields the metamorphosis or transcendence.
It appears that not-not, which is, is a more fundamental being
than the contingent being of everyday people. It may be useful
as a category, or interface to transgress arbitrary boundaries.

That image of the crack-pot came with several other ideas
that were introjected non-linguistically, and can only be
recovered discursively by interpreting various actings-out
during my psychosis, in light of the body of all human myth.

These include: telling my father I thought I had to kill him;
grabbing and shaking my mother due to an insane rape mandate;
tormenting my brother to type, and trying to decode a message
in the gibberish, indeed even in the weave pattern of a sofa;
being about to blow up the universe; first asking about, then
believing I am Jesus Christ; expecting an imminent reversal:
I was to become retarded, and my Down's Syndrome brother was
to become a genius (but my then understanding of brother was
already a loss of fidelity of the meaning: my usurper was to
be the newly indwelling spirit); anointing my eyes with eggs;
trying to become small (as rock, pebble, grain...) and still
(to cease vibrating) to escape divine notice and punishment.

These are the anecdotal evidence for transcendental idealism:
a priori non-analytical propositions, hope of which Kant took
for his epitaph, that we might establish a "moral law within".

        ---

I think you'll enjoy the bawdy stuff better....

Yours truly,
Glenn Scheper
scheper at antelecom.net
http://www.antelecom.net/~scheper/
Copyleft(!) Forward freely.