NABOKV-L post 0015777, Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:40:48 -0200

Re: Brief afterthoughts (VN's geographies and EROS)
Mary Krimmel wrote in response to Matt Roth [ "Given the energetic current of "strong opinions" swirling through The List these days--a good thing, in my opinion--I've been thinking about how we approach novels like Pale Fire. In particular, I've been thinking . . ."] : Good thinking, all of it. Thank you.
Alexey wrote: As to the EROS series, I forgot two other possibilities: ERO + S and PROSE - P (ERO is Dr Ero, who is pursued by the Invisible Albino in one of the greatest novels of English literature). ALBINO = ALBION.

Jansy: M.R's invited readers to join in each other's wild goose chases according to sense of play & humor, wild intuitions, common-sense, aso. Roth departed, here in the list, from VN's SM passage about chess. If I understood some of Alexey's recent messages it seems he is suggesting that we also consider special "scrabble-game" series as yielding instrumental clues.
Yesterday, while I was googling entries about "infinity and eternity", LATH came into view (!!!). I was so puzzled by its opening paragraph that I felt motivated enough to bring it up here:
I met the first of my three or four successive wives in somewhat odd circumstances, the development of which resembled a clumsy conspiracy, with
nonsensical details and a main plotter who not only knew nothing of its real object but insisted on making inept moves that seemed to preclude the
slightest possibility of success. Yet out of those very mistakes he unwittingly wove a web, in which a set of reciprocal blunders on my part
caused me to get involved and fulfill the destiny that was the only aim of the plot.

The dis-oriented narrator blames the "main plotter" for his inept moves and yet, after he recognizes a "web" (albeit an "unwittingly woven" one), a mysterious "set of reciprocal blunders" of his gets him involved in "his life" to fulfill a destiny that had been already set down by the "main plotter" from the beginning. Unfortunately I know almost nothing about chess, but it seems that there must be a recognizable chess-move being "plotted" and described by these lines.
The indeterminacy of writing down "three or four" is marvellous, the more so when seen in contrast to the very definite series of "successive" (wives).
Any ideas?

Search the archive:
Search archive with Google:

Contact the Editors:,
Visit Zembla:
View Nabokv-L policies: