AtD, naming

[Bryan Snyder]

The Gnostic Pynchon is still the most mind-opening parsing of Pynchon’s
fiction I’ve ever read... You can find it used on Amazon and it’s worth the
prices... Whatever they may be.

It’s an amazing read, and not all that long either.

B

It will point you to a more important thinker of gnostic-thought (or
anti-gnostic thought): Eric Voegelin... And it’s CLEAR Pynchon read and
understand Voegelin... Arguable that he agrees with Voegelin too, although
Pynchon would never be so explicit...

His silence on Voegelin (across al his works) is similar to the absence of
Einstein in ATD.



On 5/9/08 3:54 PM, "Ian Livingston" <igrlivingston at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Yes, it is not valid to equate the unnamed with the unnameable.  One must be
> mindful, yes?  Especially when investigating the reaches of metaphor in the
> likes of TRP's work.
> 
> What are we talking about when we use the term gnosis?  Here's Wikipedia on
> the term:  
> 
> Gnosis
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> • Learn more about citing Wikipedia
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia>  •
> Jump to: navigation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis#column-one> , search
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis#searchInput>
>  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiktionary-logo-en.png>
> Look up gnosis <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gnosis>  in Wiktionary
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktionary> , the free dictionary.
> This article is about the concept of gnosis.  For the magazine, see Gnosis
> (magazine) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis_%28magazine%29> .
> Gnosis (from the Greek <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language>  word for
> knowledge <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge> , ??????) is used in
> English <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language> to specify the
> spiritual knowledge of a saint or enlightened human being. It is described as
> the direct experiential knowledge of the supernatural or divine. This is not
> enlightenment understood in its general sense of insight or learning (which in
> Greek is ??????????)[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis#cite_note-0>  but
> enlightenment <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment>  that validates the
> existence of the supernatural.
> 
> The Oxford English Dictionary
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_English_Dictionary>  defines gnosis as,
> "A knowledge of spiritual mysteries." From the word gnosis is derived Gnostic
> and Gnosticism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism> , the latter a modern
> construct referring to one of various eastern sectarians
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarian>  flourishing during the early
> Christian era which claimed to have supernatural knowledge. The term being
> Koine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koine>  Greek has, nonetheless, a much
> broader application than being exclusive to any sectarian group. The term
> gnosis is used by Byzantine <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine>  and
> Hellenic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenic>  cultures as a word to mean a
> special knowledge or insight of the supernatural,[2]
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis#cite_note-1>  in some sense mature
> understanding <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apperception>  or knowledge.[3]
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis#cite_note-2>  It refers to the knowledge
> that comes from experience rather than from rational or reasoned thinking.
> Knowledge as in revelation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revelation>  and or
> intuitive <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_%28knowledge%29>  knowledge
> (see gnosiology <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosiology> ).
> 
> 
> 
> This pretty much excludes any of the characters, except, maybe, Cyprian from
> the concept of gnosis, although one might argue for Webb as an intuitively
> enlightened individual.  His death certainly recalls crucifixions
> (cruci-fictions?) of 'enlightened' ones of 'history.'  The point is the naming
> and, I believe, the alluding.  Pynchon builds metaphors at a staggering rate
> and lades them with meanings so rich and textured his feats of mind baffle the
> common imagination.  The whole "V" metaphor is stunning in its range and depth
> by now.  Yet we can't really name it "the 'V' metaphor" because that isn't
> what it is.  It is something beyond naming, but we intuit its presence in the
> work.  We sense it by acclimatization, through the acquisition of experience
> beyond the rational to what we might call mature understanding.  We grok the
> parallaxis subtly.
> 
> So I think it's not that naming is wrong, per se, just inadequate.  The
> potential for knowledge is much greater than what can be contained within the
> limits of language, but language can direct the attention to effects within
> the conceptual range that ignite intuitive lights in the mind trapped in the
> dungeons of reason and rationality, of the exterior inanimates of ideas.
> Gnosis is gnosis, not unnameable and maybe not under the sole proprietorship
> of the 'enlightened.'  I know I'm not enlightened, by there are moments of
> insight I can call by no better name than 'gnostic.'
> 
> -i
> 
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:42 PM, David Payne <dpayne1912 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Ian wrote:
>>> >It is odd how things seem to become what we name them, and how the unnamed
>>> allures.
>> 
>> And Mark asked:
>>> >In Pynchon, is Naming a 'reduction of choices", a reification of amorphous,
>>> anarchic life....?
>> 
>> "When the multiple outcomes of the night were apt to narrow to one in only
>> clock-seconds, engine performance could mean everything" (AtD 464, Frank
>> meditating after staring too long at Vang Feeley's crotch).
>> 
>> But be careful not mistake that which cannot be named with that which is not
>> named, as only three pages later, when Frank's Ma, trapped(?), tries to spare
>> him:
>> 
>> "What's going on?"
>> "Nothin 't'll do you any good to know."
>> 
>> Now I wouldn't know a gnostic from my arse (so go ahead and kick my tail real
>> hard to teach me the difference), but insofar as naming is creation ("things
>> seem to become what we name them"), is the act of naming an act of
>> blundering, confusion, maybe downright evil--and is the gnosis unnameable?
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> With Windows Live for mobile, your contacts travel with you.
>> http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_mob
>> ile_052008
>> 
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20080509/f3ab1394/attachment-0001.html>