AtD (37) pp.1040 ff. Thoughts on Lew Basnight, detective.

[Mark Kohut]

You must be right on Jung....in ways we have yet to explore......

And, if ATD is a big fat consciousness, maybe it is the author's consciousness or the one who writes the Chums' books? 




--- On Sat, 7/19/08, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: AtD (37) pp.1040 ff. Thoughts on Lew Basnight, detective.
> To: markekohut at yahoo.com, "pynchon -l" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Date: Saturday, July 19, 2008, 3:09 PM
> I have to do a couple of things here I've got used to
> disliking.   First I
> have to backpedal a little on the discussion of flat and
> round characters.
> It occurred to me that it just may be  that my
> identification of the
> relative roundness of Pynchon's characters is largely
> projection.  I see
> them as quite round because I identify them as aspects of
> the psyche,
> therefore they are familiar to me as neighbors, friends,
> lovers and
> enemies.  I know them all intimately and therefore see them
> as round even
> though that may not hold up under textual scrutiny.  That
> said, I have to
> repeat myself concerning the significance of alchemy in
> TRP's entire opus.
> Now half through Jung's *Mysterium Coniunctionis*, and
> having burned through
> *Alchemy and Psychology*, as well as a pair of works on
> alchemy by Mircea
> Eliade it is clear to me that our boy not only read but
> internalized much of
> Jung's work on alchemy.  I see alchemy anchored in *V.*
> and running as a
> strong current throughout Pynchon's works.
> 
> That current is a swollen delta merging into the sea in
> AtD.  It is
> unmistakable and inescapable.  In fact I think the book is
> nearly impossible
> to understand without a working apprehension of Jung's
> work.  With a little
> knowledge it goes from impossible to difficult.  I
> can't guess what a rich
> understanding of alchemy might bear on the work.  This
> reflects on the
> character of Lew Basnight in just what you suggest here,
> Mark, though
> perhaps slightly mediated.  If AtD is, as I suspect, a big,
> fat
> consciousness, an observing perspective engaged in the
> mystery of being,
> then it must have a dominant monad, a central, unifying
> self identity, aka,
> ego.  I think Web Traverse may be that ego and Lew Basnight
> is his
> minister.  Consider the nature of Basnight's
> employment: a spiritual
> detective in search of the mysterious bomber.  What does
> the self do in
> reality?  It blasts reality into digestible pieces and
> lovingly devours
> those pieces.  Sorry I can't recollect who it was among
> you suggested that
> the Traverse siblings were elements of Web.  I do heartily
> agree.  In the
> section "The Personification of the Opposites" in
> the *Mysterium*, Jung
> suggests that draco might be identified with Osiris who is
> cut up and strewn
> around the world for Isis to gather together, reconstruct
> and revivify.  He
> is the god of the ebb and flow of the Nile, thus he is
> associated with the
> sea, which is chaos.  Does anyone else sense an association
> between chaos
> and anarchy, or am I alone in this?  One is a condition,
> the other a
> conviction, but both reflect similar virtues.  The role of
> chaos is
> fundamental in alchemy.  It is the dark night in which
> salvation gestates.
> The sea is the primordial chaos.  Think of Kit's
> crossing.  Then, what does
> Lew eventually accomplish?  I'll remain silent on that
> until the time is
> right, but for those who have read ahead, Lew's
> significance seems great.
> 
> I know this is an incomplete offering, but I have to go
> work for a while.
> Someone is waiting on me.  Perhaps I can carve out some
> more time later.
> 
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Mark Kohut
> <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Against the Day, p. 1040ff
> >
> >  Why is he in AtD? He threads through from the
> beginning in Chicago. I
> > suggest he is the major anchor of reality/search for
> truth in AtD.
> >
> > As in any novel, we have to get the author's
> perspective on the various
> > characters, their actions and utterances. In a satiric
> work, as is (most of)
> > TRPs, and in AtD, where so much is "mediated'
> reality, often not Reality,
> > the author needs to ground us through his satiric
> vision (I offer much o the
> > maths stuff as the best example of difficulty in
> 'getting' how TRP means
> > much of it).
> >
> > The Detective: Overview
> >
> > The detective in fiction (largely) started in the 19th
> Century a bit before
> > the time when ATD begins. E. A. Poe is often credited
> with its origins, as
> > well as a Frenchman I'm too lazy to look up.
> Sherlock Holmes is, maybe, the
> > first touchstone of achievement in detective fiction.
> He figures everything
> > out amidst all the confusions of life.
> >
> > When the writer is TRP exploring, among so much else,
> the meaning of
> > History, 20th Century America, modernity, is he[TRP}
> like the detective
> > figure? From a recent Guardian blog---which is
> similarly expressed
> > elsewhere:
> >
> > "The detective is a metaphor for the writer: the
> isolated figure trying to
> > comprehend a disordered world, constructing a
> narrative that makes sense,
> > and trying to persuade others to believe in his or her
> account."
> >
> > We know TRP has used the detective-like form
> before---V. and especially C
> > of Lot 49, usually to frustrate any solving of
> "the mystery"...
> >
> > Is it the same in AtD, or in this work are we given
> some/more answers?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >