Vladimir Nabokov

NABOKV-L post 0010064, Wed, 14 Jul 2004 19:44:10 -0700

Subject
Re: TT-3: shooting drawers with pencils and pawns (ADA)
Date
Body
Message-ID: <D9AF8E06401C470F2694CBE7@[192.168.1.102]>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mail.lsit.ucsb.edu
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER Improper folded header field made up entirely of whitespace (char 00 hex) in message header 'Subject'
^



---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:35 AM +0900
From: Akiko Nakata <a-nakata@courante.plala.or.jp>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Re: TT-3: shooting drawers with pencils and pawns (ADA)
(fwd) (fwd) xXX (fwd) (fwd)

------------------

> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 9:41 PM -0700
> From: Mary Krimmel <mary@krimmel.net>
> To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
> Peter Hayes wrote:
>
>
> > 'Alas, the solid pencil itself as fingered briefly by Hugh
> > Person still somehow eludes us! But *he* won't, oh no.'
> >
> > I'd be interested to hear what anyone else makes of this;
> > my own understanding of it is that 'they' can't manipulate
> > physical objects. That Hugh won't 'elude' them, then, makes
> > them sound oddly sinister.
>
> I agree that this does make them sound oddly sinister. It seems to me,
> though, that this chapter is just what was promised, an illustration of
the
> difficulties of staying in the here and now when they are attending to
> matter, material objects, man-made or natural. But Hugh is not an object.
> In the following chapters the narrator gives us the story of Hugh with
> relative ease. He doesn't need to struggle to keep Hugh in focus. The act
> of attention to the pencil is filled with shots of everything but the
> humble instrument.
>
> Does this make sense? I think they can't manipulate either objects or
> living people, but they can somehow manipulate each other.
>
> Mary Krimmel.
> ---------- End Forwarded Message ---------
> EDNOTE. Yes, it certainly makes sense. While not able to manipulate people
> they do seem to X-ray them NB the final chapter's view of HP's digestive
> process,
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Akiko Nakata

I agree with you that they cannot manipulate objects, but don't they somehow
"direct" living people indirectly? At least, they are trying to induce HP.

The most we can do when steering a favorite in the best direction, in
circumstnces not involving injury to others, is to act as a breath of wind
and to apply the lightest, the most indirect pressure such as *trying* to
induce a dream that we *hope* our favorite will recall as prophetic if a
likely even does actually happen (Ch.24).

What about Hugh's "umbral companion"? ". . . Person was conscious of
something or somebody warning him that he should leave Witt there and then
for Verona, Florence, Rome, Taormina, if Stresa was out. He did not heed his
shadow, and fundamentally he may have been right. . . but after all it was
for him to decide, for him to die, if he wished" (Ch.25).

Akiko Nakata







---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L