TCoL49 - relevance - from lithub.com

[Monte Davis]

​KFL > ​we've gone through Eddins & Voegelin debates since a former
millennium again and again

As the archives will remind you, I haven't participated in those debates.
I've never read Voegelin. My "VERY idiosyncratic modern reading" is
shorthand for "I can't judge how well Eddins reads Voegelin, still less how
Voegelin in his time read Gnostic studies -- but from my own understanding
of Gnostic studies, Eddins' POV is very much his own, not a consensus."

That said, Eddins had a greater influence on my own view of GR (the first
three Pynchon novels as a whole, not so much) than any critic since Schaub
and Hite. For me, it brought a useful coherence to what previously seemed
many conflicting and overlapping stances vis-a-vis "Transcendence And How
to Get There...Or Is It a Trap?"

Understand: I DO NOT KNOW AND DO NOT CARE whether Eddins is a
true/legitimate/good expositor of Voegelin, or whether either of them is a
true/legitimate/good expositor of Gnostic scholarship. I like 'The Gnostic
Pynchon' as an insightful reading of GR...period.

PS -- I've nothing to say about the relationship of any of this to
Heidegger, whom I have tried  to read half a dozen times without success.
To me, all of Heidegger -- much of Hegel, too -- is either beyond my
intellectual grasp or incoherent word-spinning, or possibly both. Pity me
as a philistine and pass by.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160709/658666c6/attachment.html>