Subject
Re: Fw:Reading Lolita in...
From
Date
Body
Re: [NABOKV-L] Fw:Reading Lolita in...Stan K-B writes on my posting about "Reading Lolita in Washington": "a sea shanty in my repertoire says: "The best of intentions, they never go far/ After forty-two days on the floor of a bar."
Isn't there an Arab proverb about "the path to hell is paved with roses" and another that states "Hell is paved with good intentions"? I fear dangerous ideological tamperings never stop on the floor of a bar.
You mentioned LOW TQ ( translation quotient) from Hebrew to Greek Septuagint. Umberto Eco wondered about how did God address Adam and what language did Adam speak after his encounter. If a "Perfect Language" existed we would have no Low TQ's since it would serve as a golden referent - but I fear we would then derive no pleasure discussing Nabokov in our Lists: polysemic generation of simultaneous contrasting paths in a novel would become a thing of the past.
I loved to follow the contours of your wooly blue hat - even if often missing the main thread of its... syllogistic implications?
You asked: "Does this fact vitiate the JS/CK unification hypothesis? A sane 'atheist ' (or maybe 'agnostic'?) poet vs a deranged Deist (Defender of the Faith!) commentator?" and offered a brief summary in the end: "JS and CK can never agree - because, being neighbours, they are arguing from DIFFERENT PREMISES!".
So, as it looks to me, we got nowhere concerning the "unification hypothesis". Except, of course, that we all must divided be ( like St. Augustine's with body and soul, like Shakespeare and his beloved, like Narcissus and his image or Pascal between reason's reasons and his heart's) and that no exception welds JS's torn provincial garden to CK's premises. Would a Perfect Language also spirit away all the Logicians?
Jansy
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
Isn't there an Arab proverb about "the path to hell is paved with roses" and another that states "Hell is paved with good intentions"? I fear dangerous ideological tamperings never stop on the floor of a bar.
You mentioned LOW TQ ( translation quotient) from Hebrew to Greek Septuagint. Umberto Eco wondered about how did God address Adam and what language did Adam speak after his encounter. If a "Perfect Language" existed we would have no Low TQ's since it would serve as a golden referent - but I fear we would then derive no pleasure discussing Nabokov in our Lists: polysemic generation of simultaneous contrasting paths in a novel would become a thing of the past.
I loved to follow the contours of your wooly blue hat - even if often missing the main thread of its... syllogistic implications?
You asked: "Does this fact vitiate the JS/CK unification hypothesis? A sane 'atheist ' (or maybe 'agnostic'?) poet vs a deranged Deist (Defender of the Faith!) commentator?" and offered a brief summary in the end: "JS and CK can never agree - because, being neighbours, they are arguing from DIFFERENT PREMISES!".
So, as it looks to me, we got nowhere concerning the "unification hypothesis". Except, of course, that we all must divided be ( like St. Augustine's with body and soul, like Shakespeare and his beloved, like Narcissus and his image or Pascal between reason's reasons and his heart's) and that no exception welds JS's torn provincial garden to CK's premises. Would a Perfect Language also spirit away all the Logicians?
Jansy
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