M&D: Learnédness (vs. Bornness//as reason for hope?)

[Smoke Teff]

Third time through this book, and I am struck (again) by just how early in
the text the LED comes--as if there should be no question about how many
questions there will be about the world of the book.

But the learnedness is interesting to me. The LED is the most civilized
member of most every group of talking mammals he encounters. The LED's
learnedness is the most foregrounded part of his identity. His civility is
acquired.

And this, some time later, p. 92, amid the rainstorms, the young and
learning Seductrices Vroom, pursuing their "malicious fun," trying to
trigger what we might assume are at least somewhat born-in sexual responses
from our Astronomers (mostly M, though even he may be a more acceptable
substitute for the African boys ("Babies, rather," as Austra reminds and
admonishes the V sisters) they might otherwise be exploiting) as they await
the Transit ...

"[Austra's] blond Procuresses all begin to expostulate at once, and Mason
understands that the vocal assaults of the Vrom Poultry are not inborn, but
rather learn'd in this World from their Owners."

Does ugliness, just like civility or refinement, descend through great
hierarchical chains of ownership?

I think some version of this question underlays the book just like so much
of the political philosophy that background the novel, the Hobbeses and
Lockes and Hamiltons of what is, we are told, the Age of Reason. Isn't it?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20171231/d00ec16f/attachment.html>