TCoL49 - relevance - from lithub.com

[Mark Kohut]

The Reading is all. The readings are all. You never did---the Kenosha, kid? 

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 9, 2016, at 2:25 PM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> ​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/20160710/9e8c34c1/attachment.html>