Subject
Re: On symmetry II
From
Date
Body
Anthony Stadlen wrote: "There is no middle part of Pale Fire, and no evidence as far as I know, apart from Kinbote's unsubstantiated assertion that, in the second part, the poem itself, line 1000 = line 1."
He was answering GS's example on "symmetry" observing that in 'The Circle', "the story flows into itself (as middle part of Pale Fire)".
A full circle suggests the alchemical image of the "ouroboros" ( the snake biting its tail) and a "closure" which I don't think would represent author VN's intentions concerning "Pale Fire".
It has been pointed out that we find symmetry in nature, but that it is seldom perfect.Besides, we have only Kinbote's word that the Fourth Canto was ordered and scanned the way he presented it to the reader. The missing line might even be an amusing allucion at nature's imperfect symmetry,,, In "Ada" we find that Terra and Antiterra are not exact opposites, neither in time nor in space. I wouldn't even seriously consider them as a morphological alegory to "symmetry".
VN invites the reader to make at least two distinct perspectives merge when they simultaneously enjoy the twirl and twist of his "self-referential sentences" ( cf., for example, Alfred Appel Jr's introduction in "The Annotated Lolita" and how he had to extricate himself of his preface) and when the reader dissociates himself ( and the author) from such a trap.
A. Stadlen asked: "As a general rule, is it not crucial not to fall for the symmetries and circularities proposed by self-absorbed narcissists like Hermann and Kinbote? A large part of VN's challenge to the reader is not to be seduced by such unreliable (to put it absurdly mildly) narrators..." I'm curious to learn why A.Stadlen thinks that "symmetries and circularities" are merely the ones we find in VN's "self-absorbed narcissists" ( A.Appel.Jr. discussed this in relation to "an escape from solipsism").
Jansy
----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Stadlen
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [NABOKV-L] On symmetry
In a message dated 27/09/2006 14:00:04 GMT Standard Time, NABOKV-L@HOLYCROSS.EDU writes:
'The Circle' - the story flows into itself (as middle part of Pale Fire)
There is no middle part of Pale Fire, and no evidence as far as I know, apart from Kinbote's unsubstantiated assertion that, in the second part, the poem itself, line 1000 = line 1.
Dmitri Nabokov, answering my question about this some months ago, said that his father had at an early stage pointed out the "round the corner" nature of the last line, but he has not yet answered my question just what he or his father meant by that, or whether that actually implies line 1000 = line 1 in the mind of Shade or of VN (or indeed DN).
I think Susan Elizabeth Sweeney's suggestion for line 1000 (in the great competition at the turn of this last year) was the nicest, but it still lacks the consonne d'appui.
As a general rule, is it not crucial not to fall for the symmetries and circularities proposed by self-absorbed narcissists like Hermann and Kinbote? A large part of VN's challenge to the reader is not to be seduced by such unreliable (to put it absurdly mildly) narrators. It may seem easy not to be seduced, as these narrators are so outrageous, but in fact people do seem to me to accept some of their assertions far too readily (as happened with Humbert too, of course). Such acceptance does not seem to me the mark of what VN called a good reader.
Anthony Stadlen
Search the Nabokv-L archive at UCSB
Contact the Editors
All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both co-editors.
Visit Zembla
View Nabokv-L Policies
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
He was answering GS's example on "symmetry" observing that in 'The Circle', "the story flows into itself (as middle part of Pale Fire)".
A full circle suggests the alchemical image of the "ouroboros" ( the snake biting its tail) and a "closure" which I don't think would represent author VN's intentions concerning "Pale Fire".
It has been pointed out that we find symmetry in nature, but that it is seldom perfect.Besides, we have only Kinbote's word that the Fourth Canto was ordered and scanned the way he presented it to the reader. The missing line might even be an amusing allucion at nature's imperfect symmetry,,, In "Ada" we find that Terra and Antiterra are not exact opposites, neither in time nor in space. I wouldn't even seriously consider them as a morphological alegory to "symmetry".
VN invites the reader to make at least two distinct perspectives merge when they simultaneously enjoy the twirl and twist of his "self-referential sentences" ( cf., for example, Alfred Appel Jr's introduction in "The Annotated Lolita" and how he had to extricate himself of his preface) and when the reader dissociates himself ( and the author) from such a trap.
A. Stadlen asked: "As a general rule, is it not crucial not to fall for the symmetries and circularities proposed by self-absorbed narcissists like Hermann and Kinbote? A large part of VN's challenge to the reader is not to be seduced by such unreliable (to put it absurdly mildly) narrators..." I'm curious to learn why A.Stadlen thinks that "symmetries and circularities" are merely the ones we find in VN's "self-absorbed narcissists" ( A.Appel.Jr. discussed this in relation to "an escape from solipsism").
Jansy
----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Stadlen
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [NABOKV-L] On symmetry
In a message dated 27/09/2006 14:00:04 GMT Standard Time, NABOKV-L@HOLYCROSS.EDU writes:
'The Circle' - the story flows into itself (as middle part of Pale Fire)
There is no middle part of Pale Fire, and no evidence as far as I know, apart from Kinbote's unsubstantiated assertion that, in the second part, the poem itself, line 1000 = line 1.
Dmitri Nabokov, answering my question about this some months ago, said that his father had at an early stage pointed out the "round the corner" nature of the last line, but he has not yet answered my question just what he or his father meant by that, or whether that actually implies line 1000 = line 1 in the mind of Shade or of VN (or indeed DN).
I think Susan Elizabeth Sweeney's suggestion for line 1000 (in the great competition at the turn of this last year) was the nicest, but it still lacks the consonne d'appui.
As a general rule, is it not crucial not to fall for the symmetries and circularities proposed by self-absorbed narcissists like Hermann and Kinbote? A large part of VN's challenge to the reader is not to be seduced by such unreliable (to put it absurdly mildly) narrators. It may seem easy not to be seduced, as these narrators are so outrageous, but in fact people do seem to me to accept some of their assertions far too readily (as happened with Humbert too, of course). Such acceptance does not seem to me the mark of what VN called a good reader.
Anthony Stadlen
Search the Nabokv-L archive at UCSB
Contact the Editors
All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both co-editors.
Visit Zembla
View Nabokv-L Policies
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm