Subject
Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3399 PALE FIRE
From
Date
Body
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:21:47 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> on 12/7/03 11:22 AM, Don Corathers wrote:
>
> > All part of Kinbote's delusion. I don't think he should be held
responsible
> > for inconsistency.
>
> Indeed. Kinbote clings with absurd persistence to absolutely any pretext,
> however slender, from Shade's poem to launch into a further recount of the
> life and times of Charles the Beloved (which, it is implied, is pretty
much
> what he did in his walks and talks with Shade as well), to tie in the
> assassin's approach with the timetable of the poem's composition, and to
> confirm his preconceived certainty that Shade would write the poem as a
> tribute to the deposed Charles and Zembla. Shade's mention of a
hypothetical
> future "biographer" (line 887) is one such pretext which affords Kinbote
an
> opportunity to try and convince the reader (and reassure himself?) of his
> importance in Shade's life as the poet was composing his epic. However, in
> the greater scheme of things, the content of the Commentary isn't his
> biography of Shade Ю la Boswell and Johnson at all, and nor does it really
> support the idea that Kinbote perceived himself as standing in that
> relationship to the poet. The note reads more like Kinbote clutching at
yet
> another straw.
>
> All that said, this section of Shade's poem, juxtaposing his ablutions
with
> his poetic pretensions and methods, is a prime example of the poet's
> self-indulgent banality, and thus of Nabokov's satiric intent, imo. (I
think
> it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on the strength
of
> the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that might
be
> Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
is
> cause enough for doubt.)
>
> And I must admit I have real difficulty with the suggestion that the
> Epigraph is Shade's doing, which, I guess, defers to the oft-mentioned
> "Shadean reading" of the novel. I can't see that Shade is anything but
dead
> (i.e. a "shade") at the time when the surrounding portions of the text
were
> composed.
>
> best
>
>
> > If he's crazy enough to believe that a major poet is
> > going to write The Zemblaiad, why is it a stretch to accept that he
believes
> > he's serving Shade's legacy? One of the weird sympathies I have for
Kinbote
> > is that he seems so desperately sincere, even (or especially) when he's
at
> > his most delusional.
> >
> > Don Corathers
> >
> >
> > jbor wrote:
> >
> >> At many other moments, however, Kinbote details how he continually and
> >> deliberately hinted to Shade to compose the poem about his own
alterego,
> >> Charles the Beloved, and in the final piece of commentary to the
missing
> >> Line 1000 he admits his expectation that the poem would be a "kind of
> >> *romaunt* about the King of Zembla", about how disappointed he was to
find
> >> it at first merely an "autobiographical, eminently Appalachian, rather
> >> old-fashioned narrative in a neo-Popian prosodic style", and then how,
on
> >> rereading the poem he did perceive the "dim distant music, those
vestiges
> > of
> >> color in the air" which confirms his original solipsism and generates
much
> >> of the substance of his commentary.
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 17:27:10 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> I'm leaning towards this as the Boswell footnote Kinbote has in his black
> pocketbook:
>
> 3 I had this anecdote from Dr. Adams,
> and Dr. Johnson confirmed it.Bramston,
> in his "Man of Taste," has the same thought:
>
> "Sure, of all blockheads, scholars are the worst."
>
> [Johnson's meaning however, is, that a scholar who is a blockhead, must be
> the worst of all blockheads, because he is without excuse. But Bramston,
in
> the assumed character of an ignorant coxcomb, maintains, that all scholars
> are blockheads, on account of their scholarship. -- J. BOSWELL.]
>
> _________________________________________
>
> The mention of having a Boswell footnote occurs on page 154. In the first
> full paragraph of page 155, some 16 lines later, Shade confirms with an
> "Exactly," Kinbote's suggestion that he regards negative book reviews as
> "the blabber of a blockhead."
>
> On a separate, but related topic, on page 267, Samuel Johnson is listed by
> Shade as one of at least four people he has been said to resemble. Perhaps
> Kinbote is one to have said such, and to have written the epigraph,
> imagining himself to be Shade's Hodge.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:31:54 EDT
> From: MalignD@aol.com
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> - --part1_7a.43fa5f51.2c42027a_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
> Rob Jackson:
>
> > <<(I think it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on
the
> > strength of
> > the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> > reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that
might be
> > Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
is cause
> > enough for doubt.)>>
> >
> Perhaps the time has come to speak to the relative merits of Shade as a
poet.
> God knows it's interesting, as it brings into question VN's intentions
and
> his own qualities as a poet. And it opens into the wider question,
raised
> first, I think, by Richard Rorty, as to how to assess the quality of
writing of
> both Kinbote and Shade in a novel which asks, at least according to Rorty,
> that such questions be considered.
>
> [to Ms. Bell: this is the part that relates to Nick Carroway.]
>
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:35:15 -0400
> From: "charles albert" <calbert@hslboxmaster.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> > It might be as
> > Malignd said, "that VN intended this sort of unknowing", that
> > indeterminacies such as this have been deliberately inscribed by Nabokov
> > into his text (cf. Pynchon again), or, indeed, that he was happy enough
to
> > let rather more unintentional ambiguities persist once they had arisen.
>
>
> Hi, sport.....
>
> From Alvin Kernan's - Reading Zemblan: The Audience Disappears in Pale
Fire:
>
> " Nabokov has, of course, purposely placed his readers in a most difficult
> position, forcing them to face the fact than any reading of his work may
be
> simply a reflection of the readers own subjective needs from within a
prison
> house of self as confined as Shade's or Kinbote's......By setting up the
> Kinbote misreading of the Shade poem, Nabokov involves us as readers in an
> awareness of the full extent of human subjectivity and it's causes, and at
> the same time warns us against detective story types of interpretations
> which arrive at some absolute truth to the exclusion of all other
> possibilities."
>
> Surely no-one would suggest that COL49 offers a "resolution" in any
orthodox
> sense........Have you found any COL49 criticism which cites PF as a
possible
> model - I have heard references to Borges' Aleph and a novel often
referred
> to here - the name of which I have forgotten, but not PF....
>
>
> love,
> cfa
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:05:45 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon and Nabokov at Cornell
>
> Thanks to David and Malignd for taking the time to post these two cites.
The
> Pynchon/Nabokov connections seem pretty rock solid to me, and it was
> disturbing to see it insinuated that Vera Nabokov might have lied.
>
> I guess the other pertinent quote is Pynchon's comment in the _SL_ Intro:
>
> I think, looking back, that there might have been a general
> nervousness in the whole college-age subculture. A tendency
> to self-censorship. It was also the era of _Howl_, _Lolita_,
> _Tropic of Cancer_, and all the excesses of law enforcement
> that such works provoked. (p. 6)
>
> The reference comes in the context of an assessment of the preciousness of
> his own writing when depicting the sexual encounter in 'The Small Rain',
his
> "first published story" and one which appeared in the _Cornell Writer_ of
> March 1959. I think it is implied in the passage above that Pynchon read
the
> three mentioned works while part of a "college-age subculture", i.e.,
while
> he was at Cornell. If not, it certainly states that he was alert to the
> controversies surrounding and the bans applied to the three texts he
> mentions. (It also reiterates his ongoing disdain for "excesses of law
> enforcement".) That Nabokov was actually lecturing at Cornell at this time
> makes it seem incredibly unlikely that Pynchon wouldn't have sat in on
some
> of the then-notorious author's lectures if he was able to, even if he
wasn't
> actually enrolled in his courses (but I've seen nothing definitive to say
> that he didn't and, again, I'm pretty certain Pynchon would have taken the
> opportunity to study under Nabokov if it was at all possible for him to do
> so). Finally, there seems no reason to doubt Jules Siegel's anecdote in
his
> 1977 'Playboy' piece, where he recalls Pynchon telling him that Nabokov's
> "Russian accent was so thick he could hardly understand what he was
saying":
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=9505&msg=1496
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=9505&msg=1497
>
> I'd say that it's pretty obvious that, despite the accent, Pynchon
> persevered and did in fact "understand" quite a lot of what Professor
> Nabokov said.
>
> best
>
> on 13/7/03 4:00 AM, MalignD@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > reported in a more authoritative source: Alfred Appel's interviews
with the
> > Nabokovs in September 1966 at Montreux. The pertinent question and
answer in
> > full:
> >
> > Appel:
> >
> > What is your opinion of Joyce's parodies? Do you see any difference in
the
> > artistic effect of scenes such as the maternity hospital and the beach
> > interlude with Gerty Macdowell? Are you familiar with the work of
younger
> > American writers who have been influenced by both you and Joyce, such as
> > Thomas Pynchon (A Cornellian, Class of '59, who surely was in Literature
312),
> > and do you have any opinion on the current ascendancy of the so-called
> > parody-novel (John Barth, for instance)?
> >
> > VN:
> >
> > The literary parodies in the Maternal Hospital chapter are on the whole
> > jejunish. Joyce seems to have been hampered by the general sterilized
tone
> > he chose for that chapter, and this somehow dulled and monotonized the
inlaid
> > skits. On the other hand, the frilly novelette parodies in the
Masturbation
> > scene are highly successful; and the sudden junction of its cliches with
the
> > fireworks and tender sky of real poetry is a feat of genius. I am not
> > familiar with the works of the two other writers you mention.*
> >
> > To which Appel adds the following footnote:
> >
> > Mrs. Nabokov, who graded her husband's examination papers, did remember
> > Pynchon, but only for his "unusual" handwriting: half printing, half
script.
> >
> > It is, of course, possible that Vera was mistaken; it was many years
later and
> > there were many student papers. But what she said was that she
remembered
> > Pynchon, not "someone, perhaps Pynchon."
>
> on 12/7/03 5:59 AM, David Morris wrote:
>
> > He [TRP] graduated from Oyster Bay High School in 1953 at the age of
> > sixteen, salutatorian of his class and winner of the Julia L. Thurston
award
> > for "the senior attaining the highest average in the study of English."
A
> > scholarship to Cornell University and enrollment in the division of
> > Engineering
> > Physics followed. At the end of his sophomore year [1955 - the year
Lolita was
> > pulblished when Pynchon was then 18 years old] he left Cornell for
service in
> > the Navy.
> > He returned to Cornell in the fall of 1957 transferring to the College
of
> > Arts an Sciences [where at that time Nabokov was a "celebrity" professor
> > because of Lolita's success] from which he would attain his degree in
English.
> > During this time, he was on the editorial staff of the The Cornell
Writer ,
> > and
> > also published his first short story: "The Small Rain" (The Cornell
Writer,
> > March 1959). He received his B.A. in June of 1959 with "distinction in
all
> > subjects."
> >
> > http://www.pynchon.pomona.edu/bio/facts.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Correction from the N-list
>
> In the meantime, a 10 July posting by D. Nabokov and
> susequent reposting by D. Morris asserts that I assert
> that '"VИra," as in VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in
> Russian.' Wrong. Never said anything about Russian.
> I was indeed thinking along Latinate lines ...
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0307&msg=82538&sort=date
>
> But thanks anyway, another clipping for the scrapbook.
> Chicks dig guys with citations ...
>
> - --- David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dmitri Nabokov offers the following note to you all.
> >
> > In Digest V2 installment #3379 on PF, a 7 July
> > posting by David Monroe asserts that "VИra," as in
> > VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in Russian. Wrong. The
> > word, and the name, mean "faith." Mr. Monroe may
> > have been thinking of Italian, where "vera" is a
> > feminine singular adjectival form of "true." The
> > feminine noun "vera," by extension, means "wedding
> > ring." A dose of "speranza" ("hope") helps.
>
> .... and interesting nonetheless, esp. as I can't help
> but think of Vera Meroving now ...
>
> > It is entertaining to look in on a forum conducted
> > in, shall we say, a lighter tone, and to see such
> > interest in Pale Fire.
>
> But, hey, thanks for the patronization. Perhaps I
> should meet and greet this Mr. Nabokov ...
>
> http://espn.go.com/nhl/profiles/profile/1555.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:20:59 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> Thanks for seeking out these possibilities and posting them along. I
thought
> the one about the duck anecdote and the "fanciful reflections" of Miss
> Seward had a lot going for it too, particularly the final couple of
> sentences: "This is so beautifully imagined, that I would not suppress it.
> But, like many other theories, it is deduced from a supposed fact, which
is,
> indeed, a fiction."
>
> But you make a good case for this "blockhead" footnote (and the footnote
> within a footnote!) as well. And Kinbote certainly expresses strong
opinions
> about those "scholars" who he sees as "blockheads".
>
> best
>
> on 13/7/03 10:27 AM, s~Z wrote:
>
> > I'm leaning towards this as the Boswell footnote Kinbote has in his
black
> > pocketbook:
> >
> > 3 I had this anecdote from Dr. Adams,
> > and Dr. Johnson confirmed it.Bramston,
> > in his "Man of Taste," has the same thought:
> >
> > "Sure, of all blockheads, scholars are the worst."
> >
> > [Johnson's meaning however, is, that a scholar who is a blockhead, must
be
> > the worst of all blockheads, because he is without excuse. But Bramston,
in
> > the assumed character of an ignorant coxcomb, maintains, that all
scholars
> > are blockheads, on account of their scholarship. -- J. BOSWELL.]
> >
> > _________________________________________
> >
> > The mention of having a Boswell footnote occurs on page 154. In the
first
> > full paragraph of page 155, some 16 lines later, Shade confirms with an
> > "Exactly," Kinbote's suggestion that he regards negative book reviews as
> > "the blabber of a blockhead."
> >
> > On a separate, but related topic, on page 267, Samuel Johnson is listed
by
> > Shade as one of at least four people he has been said to resemble.
Perhaps
> > Kinbote is one to have said such, and to have written the epigraph,
> > imagining himself to be Shade's Hodge.
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 21:12:58 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> No argument with any of that. I was really just trying to explore the
> question of whether the epigraph should be read as Kinbote's illumination
of
> the text, or the more distanced author's--a question that, as others have
> suggested, probably cannot be resolved.
>
> Feel like we're having a nice cup of tea under a mortar barrage here.
>
> Don Corathers
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 8:21 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
>
> > on 12/7/03 11:22 AM, Don Corathers wrote:
> >
> > > All part of Kinbote's delusion. I don't think he should be held
> responsible
> > > for inconsistency.
> >
> > Indeed. Kinbote clings with absurd persistence to absolutely any
pretext,
> > however slender, from Shade's poem to launch into a further recount of
the
> > life and times of Charles the Beloved (which, it is implied, is pretty
> much
> > what he did in his walks and talks with Shade as well), to tie in the
> > assassin's approach with the timetable of the poem's composition, and to
> > confirm his preconceived certainty that Shade would write the poem as a
> > tribute to the deposed Charles and Zembla. Shade's mention of a
> hypothetical
> > future "biographer" (line 887) is one such pretext which affords Kinbote
> an
> > opportunity to try and convince the reader (and reassure himself?) of
his
> > importance in Shade's life as the poet was composing his epic. However,
in
> > the greater scheme of things, the content of the Commentary isn't his
> > biography of Shade Ю la Boswell and Johnson at all, and nor does it
really
> > support the idea that Kinbote perceived himself as standing in that
> > relationship to the poet. The note reads more like Kinbote clutching at
> yet
> > another straw.
> >
> > All that said, this section of Shade's poem, juxtaposing his ablutions
> with
> > his poetic pretensions and methods, is a prime example of the poet's
> > self-indulgent banality, and thus of Nabokov's satiric intent, imo. (I
> think
> > it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on the strength
> of
> > the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> > reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that
might
> be
> > Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
> is
> > cause enough for doubt.)
> >
> > And I must admit I have real difficulty with the suggestion that the
> > Epigraph is Shade's doing, which, I guess, defers to the oft-mentioned
> > "Shadean reading" of the novel. I can't see that Shade is anything but
> dead
> > (i.e. a "shade") at the time when the surrounding portions of the text
> were
> > composed.
> >
> > best
> >
> >
> > > If he's crazy enough to believe that a major poet is
> > > going to write The Zemblaiad, why is it a stretch to accept that he
> believes
> > > he's serving Shade's legacy? One of the weird sympathies I have for
> Kinbote
> > > is that he seems so desperately sincere, even (or especially) when
he's
> at
> > > his most delusional.
> > >
> > > Don Corathers
> > >
> > >
> > > jbor wrote:
> > >
> > >> At many other moments, however, Kinbote details how he continually
and
> > >> deliberately hinted to Shade to compose the poem about his own
> alterego,
> > >> Charles the Beloved, and in the final piece of commentary to the
> missing
> > >> Line 1000 he admits his expectation that the poem would be a "kind of
> > >> *romaunt* about the King of Zembla", about how disappointed he was to
> find
> > >> it at first merely an "autobiographical, eminently Appalachian,
rather
> > >> old-fashioned narrative in a neo-Popian prosodic style", and then
how,
> on
> > >> rereading the poem he did perceive the "dim distant music, those
> vestiges
> > > of
> > >> color in the air" which confirms his original solipsism and generates
> much
> > >> of the substance of his commentary.
> >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:32:03 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: Correction from the N-list
>
> >>>In the meantime, a 10 July posting by D. Nabokov and
> susequent reposting by D. Morris asserts that I assert
> that '"VИra," as in VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in
> Russian.' Wrong. Never said anything about Russian.
> I was indeed thinking along Latinate lines ...<<<
>
> And Latin given names were all the rage in Russia at the turn of the
> century.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
> ------------------------------
>>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3399
> ********************************
>
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> on 12/7/03 11:22 AM, Don Corathers wrote:
>
> > All part of Kinbote's delusion. I don't think he should be held
responsible
> > for inconsistency.
>
> Indeed. Kinbote clings with absurd persistence to absolutely any pretext,
> however slender, from Shade's poem to launch into a further recount of the
> life and times of Charles the Beloved (which, it is implied, is pretty
much
> what he did in his walks and talks with Shade as well), to tie in the
> assassin's approach with the timetable of the poem's composition, and to
> confirm his preconceived certainty that Shade would write the poem as a
> tribute to the deposed Charles and Zembla. Shade's mention of a
hypothetical
> future "biographer" (line 887) is one such pretext which affords Kinbote
an
> opportunity to try and convince the reader (and reassure himself?) of his
> importance in Shade's life as the poet was composing his epic. However, in
> the greater scheme of things, the content of the Commentary isn't his
> biography of Shade Ю la Boswell and Johnson at all, and nor does it really
> support the idea that Kinbote perceived himself as standing in that
> relationship to the poet. The note reads more like Kinbote clutching at
yet
> another straw.
>
> All that said, this section of Shade's poem, juxtaposing his ablutions
with
> his poetic pretensions and methods, is a prime example of the poet's
> self-indulgent banality, and thus of Nabokov's satiric intent, imo. (I
think
> it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on the strength
of
> the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that might
be
> Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
is
> cause enough for doubt.)
>
> And I must admit I have real difficulty with the suggestion that the
> Epigraph is Shade's doing, which, I guess, defers to the oft-mentioned
> "Shadean reading" of the novel. I can't see that Shade is anything but
dead
> (i.e. a "shade") at the time when the surrounding portions of the text
were
> composed.
>
> best
>
>
> > If he's crazy enough to believe that a major poet is
> > going to write The Zemblaiad, why is it a stretch to accept that he
believes
> > he's serving Shade's legacy? One of the weird sympathies I have for
Kinbote
> > is that he seems so desperately sincere, even (or especially) when he's
at
> > his most delusional.
> >
> > Don Corathers
> >
> >
> > jbor wrote:
> >
> >> At many other moments, however, Kinbote details how he continually and
> >> deliberately hinted to Shade to compose the poem about his own
alterego,
> >> Charles the Beloved, and in the final piece of commentary to the
missing
> >> Line 1000 he admits his expectation that the poem would be a "kind of
> >> *romaunt* about the King of Zembla", about how disappointed he was to
find
> >> it at first merely an "autobiographical, eminently Appalachian, rather
> >> old-fashioned narrative in a neo-Popian prosodic style", and then how,
on
> >> rereading the poem he did perceive the "dim distant music, those
vestiges
> > of
> >> color in the air" which confirms his original solipsism and generates
much
> >> of the substance of his commentary.
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 17:27:10 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> I'm leaning towards this as the Boswell footnote Kinbote has in his black
> pocketbook:
>
> 3 I had this anecdote from Dr. Adams,
> and Dr. Johnson confirmed it.Bramston,
> in his "Man of Taste," has the same thought:
>
> "Sure, of all blockheads, scholars are the worst."
>
> [Johnson's meaning however, is, that a scholar who is a blockhead, must be
> the worst of all blockheads, because he is without excuse. But Bramston,
in
> the assumed character of an ignorant coxcomb, maintains, that all scholars
> are blockheads, on account of their scholarship. -- J. BOSWELL.]
>
> _________________________________________
>
> The mention of having a Boswell footnote occurs on page 154. In the first
> full paragraph of page 155, some 16 lines later, Shade confirms with an
> "Exactly," Kinbote's suggestion that he regards negative book reviews as
> "the blabber of a blockhead."
>
> On a separate, but related topic, on page 267, Samuel Johnson is listed by
> Shade as one of at least four people he has been said to resemble. Perhaps
> Kinbote is one to have said such, and to have written the epigraph,
> imagining himself to be Shade's Hodge.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:31:54 EDT
> From: MalignD@aol.com
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> - --part1_7a.43fa5f51.2c42027a_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
> Rob Jackson:
>
> > <<(I think it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on
the
> > strength of
> > the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> > reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that
might be
> > Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
is cause
> > enough for doubt.)>>
> >
> Perhaps the time has come to speak to the relative merits of Shade as a
poet.
> God knows it's interesting, as it brings into question VN's intentions
and
> his own qualities as a poet. And it opens into the wider question,
raised
> first, I think, by Richard Rorty, as to how to assess the quality of
writing of
> both Kinbote and Shade in a novel which asks, at least according to Rorty,
> that such questions be considered.
>
> [to Ms. Bell: this is the part that relates to Nick Carroway.]
>
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:35:15 -0400
> From: "charles albert" <calbert@hslboxmaster.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> > It might be as
> > Malignd said, "that VN intended this sort of unknowing", that
> > indeterminacies such as this have been deliberately inscribed by Nabokov
> > into his text (cf. Pynchon again), or, indeed, that he was happy enough
to
> > let rather more unintentional ambiguities persist once they had arisen.
>
>
> Hi, sport.....
>
> From Alvin Kernan's - Reading Zemblan: The Audience Disappears in Pale
Fire:
>
> " Nabokov has, of course, purposely placed his readers in a most difficult
> position, forcing them to face the fact than any reading of his work may
be
> simply a reflection of the readers own subjective needs from within a
prison
> house of self as confined as Shade's or Kinbote's......By setting up the
> Kinbote misreading of the Shade poem, Nabokov involves us as readers in an
> awareness of the full extent of human subjectivity and it's causes, and at
> the same time warns us against detective story types of interpretations
> which arrive at some absolute truth to the exclusion of all other
> possibilities."
>
> Surely no-one would suggest that COL49 offers a "resolution" in any
orthodox
> sense........Have you found any COL49 criticism which cites PF as a
possible
> model - I have heard references to Borges' Aleph and a novel often
referred
> to here - the name of which I have forgotten, but not PF....
>
>
> love,
> cfa
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:05:45 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon and Nabokov at Cornell
>
> Thanks to David and Malignd for taking the time to post these two cites.
The
> Pynchon/Nabokov connections seem pretty rock solid to me, and it was
> disturbing to see it insinuated that Vera Nabokov might have lied.
>
> I guess the other pertinent quote is Pynchon's comment in the _SL_ Intro:
>
> I think, looking back, that there might have been a general
> nervousness in the whole college-age subculture. A tendency
> to self-censorship. It was also the era of _Howl_, _Lolita_,
> _Tropic of Cancer_, and all the excesses of law enforcement
> that such works provoked. (p. 6)
>
> The reference comes in the context of an assessment of the preciousness of
> his own writing when depicting the sexual encounter in 'The Small Rain',
his
> "first published story" and one which appeared in the _Cornell Writer_ of
> March 1959. I think it is implied in the passage above that Pynchon read
the
> three mentioned works while part of a "college-age subculture", i.e.,
while
> he was at Cornell. If not, it certainly states that he was alert to the
> controversies surrounding and the bans applied to the three texts he
> mentions. (It also reiterates his ongoing disdain for "excesses of law
> enforcement".) That Nabokov was actually lecturing at Cornell at this time
> makes it seem incredibly unlikely that Pynchon wouldn't have sat in on
some
> of the then-notorious author's lectures if he was able to, even if he
wasn't
> actually enrolled in his courses (but I've seen nothing definitive to say
> that he didn't and, again, I'm pretty certain Pynchon would have taken the
> opportunity to study under Nabokov if it was at all possible for him to do
> so). Finally, there seems no reason to doubt Jules Siegel's anecdote in
his
> 1977 'Playboy' piece, where he recalls Pynchon telling him that Nabokov's
> "Russian accent was so thick he could hardly understand what he was
saying":
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=9505&msg=1496
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=9505&msg=1497
>
> I'd say that it's pretty obvious that, despite the accent, Pynchon
> persevered and did in fact "understand" quite a lot of what Professor
> Nabokov said.
>
> best
>
> on 13/7/03 4:00 AM, MalignD@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > reported in a more authoritative source: Alfred Appel's interviews
with the
> > Nabokovs in September 1966 at Montreux. The pertinent question and
answer in
> > full:
> >
> > Appel:
> >
> > What is your opinion of Joyce's parodies? Do you see any difference in
the
> > artistic effect of scenes such as the maternity hospital and the beach
> > interlude with Gerty Macdowell? Are you familiar with the work of
younger
> > American writers who have been influenced by both you and Joyce, such as
> > Thomas Pynchon (A Cornellian, Class of '59, who surely was in Literature
312),
> > and do you have any opinion on the current ascendancy of the so-called
> > parody-novel (John Barth, for instance)?
> >
> > VN:
> >
> > The literary parodies in the Maternal Hospital chapter are on the whole
> > jejunish. Joyce seems to have been hampered by the general sterilized
tone
> > he chose for that chapter, and this somehow dulled and monotonized the
inlaid
> > skits. On the other hand, the frilly novelette parodies in the
Masturbation
> > scene are highly successful; and the sudden junction of its cliches with
the
> > fireworks and tender sky of real poetry is a feat of genius. I am not
> > familiar with the works of the two other writers you mention.*
> >
> > To which Appel adds the following footnote:
> >
> > Mrs. Nabokov, who graded her husband's examination papers, did remember
> > Pynchon, but only for his "unusual" handwriting: half printing, half
script.
> >
> > It is, of course, possible that Vera was mistaken; it was many years
later and
> > there were many student papers. But what she said was that she
remembered
> > Pynchon, not "someone, perhaps Pynchon."
>
> on 12/7/03 5:59 AM, David Morris wrote:
>
> > He [TRP] graduated from Oyster Bay High School in 1953 at the age of
> > sixteen, salutatorian of his class and winner of the Julia L. Thurston
award
> > for "the senior attaining the highest average in the study of English."
A
> > scholarship to Cornell University and enrollment in the division of
> > Engineering
> > Physics followed. At the end of his sophomore year [1955 - the year
Lolita was
> > pulblished when Pynchon was then 18 years old] he left Cornell for
service in
> > the Navy.
> > He returned to Cornell in the fall of 1957 transferring to the College
of
> > Arts an Sciences [where at that time Nabokov was a "celebrity" professor
> > because of Lolita's success] from which he would attain his degree in
English.
> > During this time, he was on the editorial staff of the The Cornell
Writer ,
> > and
> > also published his first short story: "The Small Rain" (The Cornell
Writer,
> > March 1959). He received his B.A. in June of 1959 with "distinction in
all
> > subjects."
> >
> > http://www.pynchon.pomona.edu/bio/facts.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Correction from the N-list
>
> In the meantime, a 10 July posting by D. Nabokov and
> susequent reposting by D. Morris asserts that I assert
> that '"VИra," as in VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in
> Russian.' Wrong. Never said anything about Russian.
> I was indeed thinking along Latinate lines ...
>
> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0307&msg=82538&sort=date
>
> But thanks anyway, another clipping for the scrapbook.
> Chicks dig guys with citations ...
>
> - --- David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dmitri Nabokov offers the following note to you all.
> >
> > In Digest V2 installment #3379 on PF, a 7 July
> > posting by David Monroe asserts that "VИra," as in
> > VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in Russian. Wrong. The
> > word, and the name, mean "faith." Mr. Monroe may
> > have been thinking of Italian, where "vera" is a
> > feminine singular adjectival form of "true." The
> > feminine noun "vera," by extension, means "wedding
> > ring." A dose of "speranza" ("hope") helps.
>
> .... and interesting nonetheless, esp. as I can't help
> but think of Vera Meroving now ...
>
> > It is entertaining to look in on a forum conducted
> > in, shall we say, a lighter tone, and to see such
> > interest in Pale Fire.
>
> But, hey, thanks for the patronization. Perhaps I
> should meet and greet this Mr. Nabokov ...
>
> http://espn.go.com/nhl/profiles/profile/1555.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:20:59 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> Thanks for seeking out these possibilities and posting them along. I
thought
> the one about the duck anecdote and the "fanciful reflections" of Miss
> Seward had a lot going for it too, particularly the final couple of
> sentences: "This is so beautifully imagined, that I would not suppress it.
> But, like many other theories, it is deduced from a supposed fact, which
is,
> indeed, a fiction."
>
> But you make a good case for this "blockhead" footnote (and the footnote
> within a footnote!) as well. And Kinbote certainly expresses strong
opinions
> about those "scholars" who he sees as "blockheads".
>
> best
>
> on 13/7/03 10:27 AM, s~Z wrote:
>
> > I'm leaning towards this as the Boswell footnote Kinbote has in his
black
> > pocketbook:
> >
> > 3 I had this anecdote from Dr. Adams,
> > and Dr. Johnson confirmed it.Bramston,
> > in his "Man of Taste," has the same thought:
> >
> > "Sure, of all blockheads, scholars are the worst."
> >
> > [Johnson's meaning however, is, that a scholar who is a blockhead, must
be
> > the worst of all blockheads, because he is without excuse. But Bramston,
in
> > the assumed character of an ignorant coxcomb, maintains, that all
scholars
> > are blockheads, on account of their scholarship. -- J. BOSWELL.]
> >
> > _________________________________________
> >
> > The mention of having a Boswell footnote occurs on page 154. In the
first
> > full paragraph of page 155, some 16 lines later, Shade confirms with an
> > "Exactly," Kinbote's suggestion that he regards negative book reviews as
> > "the blabber of a blockhead."
> >
> > On a separate, but related topic, on page 267, Samuel Johnson is listed
by
> > Shade as one of at least four people he has been said to resemble.
Perhaps
> > Kinbote is one to have said such, and to have written the epigraph,
> > imagining himself to be Shade's Hodge.
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 21:12:58 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> No argument with any of that. I was really just trying to explore the
> question of whether the epigraph should be read as Kinbote's illumination
of
> the text, or the more distanced author's--a question that, as others have
> suggested, probably cannot be resolved.
>
> Feel like we're having a nice cup of tea under a mortar barrage here.
>
> Don Corathers
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 8:21 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
>
> > on 12/7/03 11:22 AM, Don Corathers wrote:
> >
> > > All part of Kinbote's delusion. I don't think he should be held
> responsible
> > > for inconsistency.
> >
> > Indeed. Kinbote clings with absurd persistence to absolutely any
pretext,
> > however slender, from Shade's poem to launch into a further recount of
the
> > life and times of Charles the Beloved (which, it is implied, is pretty
> much
> > what he did in his walks and talks with Shade as well), to tie in the
> > assassin's approach with the timetable of the poem's composition, and to
> > confirm his preconceived certainty that Shade would write the poem as a
> > tribute to the deposed Charles and Zembla. Shade's mention of a
> hypothetical
> > future "biographer" (line 887) is one such pretext which affords Kinbote
> an
> > opportunity to try and convince the reader (and reassure himself?) of
his
> > importance in Shade's life as the poet was composing his epic. However,
in
> > the greater scheme of things, the content of the Commentary isn't his
> > biography of Shade Ю la Boswell and Johnson at all, and nor does it
really
> > support the idea that Kinbote perceived himself as standing in that
> > relationship to the poet. The note reads more like Kinbote clutching at
> yet
> > another straw.
> >
> > All that said, this section of Shade's poem, juxtaposing his ablutions
> with
> > his poetic pretensions and methods, is a prime example of the poet's
> > self-indulgent banality, and thus of Nabokov's satiric intent, imo. (I
> think
> > it's a stretch to nominate Shade as a "major poet", both on the strength
> of
> > the poetry itself and in terms of the details of his career and work's
> > reception which are sprinkled throughout the text, even though that
might
> be
> > Kinbote's evaluation of him. In fact, *because* that's Kinbote's opinion
> is
> > cause enough for doubt.)
> >
> > And I must admit I have real difficulty with the suggestion that the
> > Epigraph is Shade's doing, which, I guess, defers to the oft-mentioned
> > "Shadean reading" of the novel. I can't see that Shade is anything but
> dead
> > (i.e. a "shade") at the time when the surrounding portions of the text
> were
> > composed.
> >
> > best
> >
> >
> > > If he's crazy enough to believe that a major poet is
> > > going to write The Zemblaiad, why is it a stretch to accept that he
> believes
> > > he's serving Shade's legacy? One of the weird sympathies I have for
> Kinbote
> > > is that he seems so desperately sincere, even (or especially) when
he's
> at
> > > his most delusional.
> > >
> > > Don Corathers
> > >
> > >
> > > jbor wrote:
> > >
> > >> At many other moments, however, Kinbote details how he continually
and
> > >> deliberately hinted to Shade to compose the poem about his own
> alterego,
> > >> Charles the Beloved, and in the final piece of commentary to the
> missing
> > >> Line 1000 he admits his expectation that the poem would be a "kind of
> > >> *romaunt* about the King of Zembla", about how disappointed he was to
> find
> > >> it at first merely an "autobiographical, eminently Appalachian,
rather
> > >> old-fashioned narrative in a neo-Popian prosodic style", and then
how,
> on
> > >> rereading the poem he did perceive the "dim distant music, those
> vestiges
> > > of
> > >> color in the air" which confirms his original solipsism and generates
> much
> > >> of the substance of his commentary.
> >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:32:03 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: Correction from the N-list
>
> >>>In the meantime, a 10 July posting by D. Nabokov and
> susequent reposting by D. Morris asserts that I assert
> that '"VИra," as in VИra Nabokov, means "truth" in
> Russian.' Wrong. Never said anything about Russian.
> I was indeed thinking along Latinate lines ...<<<
>
> And Latin given names were all the rage in Russia at the turn of the
> century.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
> ------------------------------
>>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3399
> ********************************
>