BTZ42Read: Regarding the Zero

[Ian Livingston]

Much has been said about the heavy-hitters in philosophy and literary
theory regarding Pynchon, so I'm regarding the text from one of those other
perspectives Pynchon is known for including in his repertoire. Of course,
gnosticism has been worked pretty hard, too, but most of what I read of
that seems to be as if in contrast and worded as argument contra the mighty
pens, and so on. Pynchon's opening seems to me be setting the stage to read
GR with the most open mind we can muster, so:



“Yea, there is That which is the End-of-understanding, the That which thou
must understand with flower of mind.

“For should’st thou turn thy mind inwards on It, and understand It  as
understanding ‘something,’ thou shalt not understand It.

[…]

Indeed there is no need of strain in understanding This; but thou should’st
have the vision of thy soul in purity, turned from aught else, so as to
make thy mind empty [of all things else], attentive to that End, in order
that thou mayest learn that End-of-understanding; for It subsists beyond
the mind.” G.R.S. Mead, Echoes from the Gnosis, 305-6 (1906, 2006).


This by way of suggesting a both-and, rather than an either-or take on
things as we go.


Pynchon is renowned for his researches into the arcane, according to
speakers in Into the Mind of P, for instance, so is there not some
likelihood he might allude to and maybe even rib Yeats' circle of mystics?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160313/9ada346c/attachment.html>