Subject
Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3400 PALE FIRE Poem
From
Date
Body
----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 9:55 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3400
>
> pynchon-l-digest Saturday, July 12 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3400
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> !
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:53:57 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.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.
>
> on 13/7/03 10:35 AM, charles albert wrote:
> >
> > 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....
>
> I can't recall seeing anything specifically relating _Lot 49_ with _Pale
> Fire_ in this way, and I'm not sure the latter really does provide a
"model"
> for the former. But I think it's reasonable to suggest a more general or
> all-pervasive influence, alongside more specific resonances and allusions
> ("Humbert Humbert cats" in 'Serge's Song' in _Lot 49_, Blodgett Waxwing in
> _GR_).
>
> As to the quote from Alvin Kernan, it reminds me of Erik's joke about his
> "inner Kinbote". I think it's true that as readers -- and as humans -- we
> all have something like an "inner Kinbote"; it seems that the difference
is
> that some are just better at keeping this needy little fellow in check
than
> others are.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 22:13:41 -0400
> From: joeallonby <vze422fs@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: VLVL2 (1): Supplementary Materials and Reviews
>
> > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not
understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
>
> - --MS_Mac_OE_3140892822_1109094_MIME_Part
>
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:04:10 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> On
> > Behalf Of Don Corathers
> >
> > Just found this in my inbox--so much for my need for order. Wonderful
> > stuff,
> > Jasper. Thanks for getting this thing rolling so nicely.
> >
> > Don Corathers
> >
> > >
> > > Casting Shade as Kinbote's Boswell (or panegyrist): this is an
> > interesting
> > > dimension to Kinbote, the mirror of the commentator dutifully
gathering
> [etc]
>
> Thanks, yes, I'm liking this approach of germination and evolution of
story
> elements from parts found in the (presumably) "real" story-world. For
> example "Jacob Gradus" evolving from the name of the real killer "Jack
> Grey", an attempted regicide from a real act of violence, a King of Zembla
> invented from an expatriated Russian. Part of what's interesting about
> these examples is that their revelation in the text takes place in reverse
> order -- it's not until the end (assuming a linear reading) that we have
> enough data to see them, although they have been there from the start.
>
> This acceptance of the presence of a real, base story, while the rest is
all
> theatre [an allusion for Doug], makes some assumptions about the narration
> though, and may be undermined by a different reading. Ultimately I think
> they point to Kinbote as narrator who, having experienced a moment of near
> death and the loss of "his poet", has internalized the event so thoroughly
> that its senselessness must be assigned meaning in order to keep it from
> overwhelming him. The shooting becomes a sort of trigger for his acute
> paranoia, warping his past into Zembla and flooding his memories of
> Wordsmith with delusional impressions from the present, resulting in the
> text at hand. I also think there's evidence that Botkin writes this from
an
> asylum (where perhaps his interview with Jack Grey took place, one loony
to
> another), but I'll wait for the reading to point it out. (Implying I
> suppose yet *another* author, more of a compiler as seen in _Lolita_, and
> maybe it was *he* who supplied the epigraph!)
>
> akaJasperFidget
>
>
> ------------------------------
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:35:31 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> On Behalf Of jbor
>
> > 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.
>
> On Behalf Of MalignD@aol.com
> >
> >
> > 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.]
> >
> >
>
> Another way to phrase this concern is by asking whether the poem "Pale
Fire"
> compares well to the novel _Pale Fire_. If removed from the surrounding
> commentary, would "Pale Fire" by John Shade be worth reading? If so,
would
> it be a *great* work? Kinbote's contribution to the poem almost certainly
> gives it greater value than it would have had on its own, which strangely
> fulfills Kinbote's desperate desire to have assisted Shade with it.
>
> Partly at issue here is the question of whether or not Shade wrote the
> commentary (the Shadean approach)-- the two problems are closely linked.
J
> Morris says in his "Genius and Plausibility" essay:
>
> "It is important to notice that, if the poem is indeed second rate,
Shade's
> ability to write as well as 'Kinbote' looks much less likely. True,
> dissatisfaction with the poem could be considered part of Shade's
motivation
> to 'transcend' it, to create a commentary that manages to express what the
> poem could not. But motivation and ability are not the same thing. It is
> implausible that a truly second-rate poet could have produced the
'Kinbote'
> commentaries, however motivated he may have been to do so. If it was VN's
> intention that we accept this, then we must judge the novel, in this
> respect, a failure." (Morris, 2).
>
> Morris (J not D) goes on to say that he believes VN didn't think "Pale
Fire"
> a second rate poem (VN read Canto Two aloud at Harvard's Poetry Room in
> 1964 and allowed it to be recorded and distributed), and perhaps the best
of
> his ability to produce given he was not a great poet. In _Strong
Opinions_
> VN refers to "Pale Fire" as the "the hardest stuff I ever had to compose"
> (55), and refers to Shade as "by far the greatest of *invented* poets"
(59).
>
>
> Is "Pale Fire" worth the commentary Kinbote devotes to it? Surely it's
not
> Pushkin, but "worth" is a difficult thing to appraise when it comes to
> something like poetry (and there's all kinds of critical work dedicated to
> terrible literature), so it's certainly *conceivable* that somebody like
> Kinbote would write a commentary to something like "Pale Fire".
>
> Also, consider the possibility that "Pale Fire" is simply not as good as
> some of Shade's earlier work. Shade is ranked as a great poet in
> Pale-Fire-Land, "one oozy footstep behind Robert Frost" (48) and worthy of
> having the name of Main Hall at Wordsmith changed to honor him after his
> death.
>
> The counterpoint question here of course concerns Kinbote: is there any
> reasonable reason for us to believe that someone with Kinbote's claimed or
> implied background would be capable of writing something as impressive as
> the Commentary? Morris says "Charles Kinbote, if he exists, is either a
> deposed Zemblan monarch, an insane Zemblan scholar, or an extremely insane
> Russian scholar. None of these back-stories seems likely to produce the
> astonishing literary gifts apparent in the commentary." (3).
>
> If Kinbote is presumed to be the author, then we probably must also assume
> that the hints pointing to his true identity as Vseslav Botkin are not red
> herrings. For this, Morris makes a particularly compelling attack on the
> Kinbotean theory:
>
> "The problem lies in the relationship between Shade and Kinbote/Botkin if
> [we] view Kinbote/Botkin as an existing personage and not a creation of
> Shade himself. Thorny questions abound: Is it Botkin with whom Shade is
> friendly, Botkin who flees to Utana with the manuscript of 'Pale Fire'?
> Would that mean that all of Shade's and 'Kinbote's' give-and-take about
> Zembla recounted in the commentary is false? Has Botkin translated
whatever
> actual relationship he had with Shade into a fictional version? Are we to
> understand that Botkin urged Shade to write a poem about Russia? That he
> wished to show him a photograph of the Royal Palace in Moscow? et cetera.
> These suppositions rob Pale Fire of much of its magic, and much of its
> integrity as a narrative. They are one trapdoor too many."
>
> Ultimately Morris decides the Shadean interpretation is the most
plausible;
> see the article for his insightful evaluation in full, findable here:
>
> http://www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/morris1.htm
>
>
> akaJasperFidget
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 05:36:08 +0200
> From: "Otto" <ottosell@yahoo.de>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon and Nabokov at Cornell
>
> Think I've told this before.
>
> Michael Naumann has been asked in that famous radio-discussion about the
> Cornell-connection; that Nabokov could not remember if Pynchon has been
one
> of his students or not. According to Naumann he had asked Pynchon the same
> thing and Pynchon's humorous answer had been that he couldn't remember
> having attended Nabokov's courses.
>
> Otto
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 3:05 AM
> 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: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:57:07 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> on 13/7/03 1:35 PM, Jasper Fidget wrote:
>
> > Another way to phrase this concern is by asking whether the poem "Pale
Fire"
> > compares well to the novel _Pale Fire_. If removed from the surrounding
> > commentary, would "Pale Fire" by John Shade be worth reading? If so,
would
> > it be a *great* work? Kinbote's contribution to the poem almost
certainly
> > gives it greater value than it would have had on its own, which
strangely
> > fulfills Kinbote's desperate desire to have assisted Shade with it.
> [...]
> > Ultimately Morris decides the Shadean interpretation is the most
plausible;
> > see the article for his insightful evaluation in full, findable here:
> >
> > http://www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/morris1.htm
> >
>
> From that essay:
>
> But one will search in vain for any direct statement from VN
> as to the ultimate literary value of "Pale Fire." His reading
> of part of Canto Two at Harvard thus must serve as an indirect
> statement: It was a poem he was proud of, and was willing to
> record for the ages.
>
> I don't know that this is a particularly convincing argument. I'm sure
that
> Alexander Pope was proud of his 'The Rape of the Lock' as well, and that
he
> read it aloud on occasion; and it's worth recalling the prominence of Pope
> throughout all facets of the text of _Pale Fire_. A satiric poem such as
> Pope's can be, and certainly is regarded as, a "great" one, and it's not
at
> all inconsistent or implausible to imagine that Nabokov put much creative
> effort into the composition of the poem by his "invented" poet, and that
he
> was pleased with the results, but that he still intended it to be a
satire.
>
> The other thing which doesn't quite gel for me is the assumption that
> Nabokov was trying to conceal the fact of his own overall authorship of
the
> novel, his ultimate "control" over the fiction. Plainly, he wasn't. The
> puzzles of the text, and their ultimate answerability, answerabilities or
> unanswerability, are intentional ones. I think that in this respect
Nabokov
> himself, and _Pale Fire in particular, probably stand at one of those cusp
> points between Modernism and postmodernism (see eg. McHale 1987, 1992),
and
> that Nabokov still perceived the author's position -- his own position --
in
> respect to the text as one of preeminence, even though, admittedly, the
> themes and structural complexities within the text do challenge and
> problematise that whole relationship between "authorship" and "authority".
I
> don't think Nabokov sees this paradox as an issue. Thus, the question of
> whether Shade or Kinbote or any other character could write "as well as"
> Nabokov seems to me to be irrelevant. It is Nabokov who can write as well
as
> Nabokov: his characters are the *products* of his writing, not the
> producers. Certainly, however, I can imagine his bemusement at the
critical
> controversies surrounding the "authorship" of _Pale Fire_, and I can
imagine
> his tongue firmly planted in his cheek when in interviews and memoirs he
> subsequently referred to Kinbote or Shade as if they were real people.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3400
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 9:55 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3400
>
> pynchon-l-digest Saturday, July 12 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3400
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> !
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:53:57 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.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.
>
> on 13/7/03 10:35 AM, charles albert wrote:
> >
> > 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....
>
> I can't recall seeing anything specifically relating _Lot 49_ with _Pale
> Fire_ in this way, and I'm not sure the latter really does provide a
"model"
> for the former. But I think it's reasonable to suggest a more general or
> all-pervasive influence, alongside more specific resonances and allusions
> ("Humbert Humbert cats" in 'Serge's Song' in _Lot 49_, Blodgett Waxwing in
> _GR_).
>
> As to the quote from Alvin Kernan, it reminds me of Erik's joke about his
> "inner Kinbote". I think it's true that as readers -- and as humans -- we
> all have something like an "inner Kinbote"; it seems that the difference
is
> that some are just better at keeping this needy little fellow in check
than
> others are.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 22:13:41 -0400
> From: joeallonby <vze422fs@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: VLVL2 (1): Supplementary Materials and Reviews
>
> > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not
understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
>
> - --MS_Mac_OE_3140892822_1109094_MIME_Part
>
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:04:10 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: NPPF Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> On
> > Behalf Of Don Corathers
> >
> > Just found this in my inbox--so much for my need for order. Wonderful
> > stuff,
> > Jasper. Thanks for getting this thing rolling so nicely.
> >
> > Don Corathers
> >
> > >
> > > Casting Shade as Kinbote's Boswell (or panegyrist): this is an
> > interesting
> > > dimension to Kinbote, the mirror of the commentator dutifully
gathering
> [etc]
>
> Thanks, yes, I'm liking this approach of germination and evolution of
story
> elements from parts found in the (presumably) "real" story-world. For
> example "Jacob Gradus" evolving from the name of the real killer "Jack
> Grey", an attempted regicide from a real act of violence, a King of Zembla
> invented from an expatriated Russian. Part of what's interesting about
> these examples is that their revelation in the text takes place in reverse
> order -- it's not until the end (assuming a linear reading) that we have
> enough data to see them, although they have been there from the start.
>
> This acceptance of the presence of a real, base story, while the rest is
all
> theatre [an allusion for Doug], makes some assumptions about the narration
> though, and may be undermined by a different reading. Ultimately I think
> they point to Kinbote as narrator who, having experienced a moment of near
> death and the loss of "his poet", has internalized the event so thoroughly
> that its senselessness must be assigned meaning in order to keep it from
> overwhelming him. The shooting becomes a sort of trigger for his acute
> paranoia, warping his past into Zembla and flooding his memories of
> Wordsmith with delusional impressions from the present, resulting in the
> text at hand. I also think there's evidence that Botkin writes this from
an
> asylum (where perhaps his interview with Jack Grey took place, one loony
to
> another), but I'll wait for the reading to point it out. (Implying I
> suppose yet *another* author, more of a compiler as seen in _Lolita_, and
> maybe it was *he* who supplied the epigraph!)
>
> akaJasperFidget
>
>
> ------------------------------
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:35:31 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> On Behalf Of jbor
>
> > 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.
>
> On Behalf Of MalignD@aol.com
> >
> >
> > 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.]
> >
> >
>
> Another way to phrase this concern is by asking whether the poem "Pale
Fire"
> compares well to the novel _Pale Fire_. If removed from the surrounding
> commentary, would "Pale Fire" by John Shade be worth reading? If so,
would
> it be a *great* work? Kinbote's contribution to the poem almost certainly
> gives it greater value than it would have had on its own, which strangely
> fulfills Kinbote's desperate desire to have assisted Shade with it.
>
> Partly at issue here is the question of whether or not Shade wrote the
> commentary (the Shadean approach)-- the two problems are closely linked.
J
> Morris says in his "Genius and Plausibility" essay:
>
> "It is important to notice that, if the poem is indeed second rate,
Shade's
> ability to write as well as 'Kinbote' looks much less likely. True,
> dissatisfaction with the poem could be considered part of Shade's
motivation
> to 'transcend' it, to create a commentary that manages to express what the
> poem could not. But motivation and ability are not the same thing. It is
> implausible that a truly second-rate poet could have produced the
'Kinbote'
> commentaries, however motivated he may have been to do so. If it was VN's
> intention that we accept this, then we must judge the novel, in this
> respect, a failure." (Morris, 2).
>
> Morris (J not D) goes on to say that he believes VN didn't think "Pale
Fire"
> a second rate poem (VN read Canto Two aloud at Harvard's Poetry Room in
> 1964 and allowed it to be recorded and distributed), and perhaps the best
of
> his ability to produce given he was not a great poet. In _Strong
Opinions_
> VN refers to "Pale Fire" as the "the hardest stuff I ever had to compose"
> (55), and refers to Shade as "by far the greatest of *invented* poets"
(59).
>
>
> Is "Pale Fire" worth the commentary Kinbote devotes to it? Surely it's
not
> Pushkin, but "worth" is a difficult thing to appraise when it comes to
> something like poetry (and there's all kinds of critical work dedicated to
> terrible literature), so it's certainly *conceivable* that somebody like
> Kinbote would write a commentary to something like "Pale Fire".
>
> Also, consider the possibility that "Pale Fire" is simply not as good as
> some of Shade's earlier work. Shade is ranked as a great poet in
> Pale-Fire-Land, "one oozy footstep behind Robert Frost" (48) and worthy of
> having the name of Main Hall at Wordsmith changed to honor him after his
> death.
>
> The counterpoint question here of course concerns Kinbote: is there any
> reasonable reason for us to believe that someone with Kinbote's claimed or
> implied background would be capable of writing something as impressive as
> the Commentary? Morris says "Charles Kinbote, if he exists, is either a
> deposed Zemblan monarch, an insane Zemblan scholar, or an extremely insane
> Russian scholar. None of these back-stories seems likely to produce the
> astonishing literary gifts apparent in the commentary." (3).
>
> If Kinbote is presumed to be the author, then we probably must also assume
> that the hints pointing to his true identity as Vseslav Botkin are not red
> herrings. For this, Morris makes a particularly compelling attack on the
> Kinbotean theory:
>
> "The problem lies in the relationship between Shade and Kinbote/Botkin if
> [we] view Kinbote/Botkin as an existing personage and not a creation of
> Shade himself. Thorny questions abound: Is it Botkin with whom Shade is
> friendly, Botkin who flees to Utana with the manuscript of 'Pale Fire'?
> Would that mean that all of Shade's and 'Kinbote's' give-and-take about
> Zembla recounted in the commentary is false? Has Botkin translated
whatever
> actual relationship he had with Shade into a fictional version? Are we to
> understand that Botkin urged Shade to write a poem about Russia? That he
> wished to show him a photograph of the Royal Palace in Moscow? et cetera.
> These suppositions rob Pale Fire of much of its magic, and much of its
> integrity as a narrative. They are one trapdoor too many."
>
> Ultimately Morris decides the Shadean interpretation is the most
plausible;
> see the article for his insightful evaluation in full, findable here:
>
> http://www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/morris1.htm
>
>
> akaJasperFidget
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 05:36:08 +0200
> From: "Otto" <ottosell@yahoo.de>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon and Nabokov at Cornell
>
> Think I've told this before.
>
> Michael Naumann has been asked in that famous radio-discussion about the
> Cornell-connection; that Nabokov could not remember if Pynchon has been
one
> of his students or not. According to Naumann he had asked Pynchon the same
> thing and Pynchon's humorous answer had been that he couldn't remember
> having attended Nabokov's courses.
>
> Otto
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 3:05 AM
> 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: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:57:07 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF: Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> on 13/7/03 1:35 PM, Jasper Fidget wrote:
>
> > Another way to phrase this concern is by asking whether the poem "Pale
Fire"
> > compares well to the novel _Pale Fire_. If removed from the surrounding
> > commentary, would "Pale Fire" by John Shade be worth reading? If so,
would
> > it be a *great* work? Kinbote's contribution to the poem almost
certainly
> > gives it greater value than it would have had on its own, which
strangely
> > fulfills Kinbote's desperate desire to have assisted Shade with it.
> [...]
> > Ultimately Morris decides the Shadean interpretation is the most
plausible;
> > see the article for his insightful evaluation in full, findable here:
> >
> > http://www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/morris1.htm
> >
>
> From that essay:
>
> But one will search in vain for any direct statement from VN
> as to the ultimate literary value of "Pale Fire." His reading
> of part of Canto Two at Harvard thus must serve as an indirect
> statement: It was a poem he was proud of, and was willing to
> record for the ages.
>
> I don't know that this is a particularly convincing argument. I'm sure
that
> Alexander Pope was proud of his 'The Rape of the Lock' as well, and that
he
> read it aloud on occasion; and it's worth recalling the prominence of Pope
> throughout all facets of the text of _Pale Fire_. A satiric poem such as
> Pope's can be, and certainly is regarded as, a "great" one, and it's not
at
> all inconsistent or implausible to imagine that Nabokov put much creative
> effort into the composition of the poem by his "invented" poet, and that
he
> was pleased with the results, but that he still intended it to be a
satire.
>
> The other thing which doesn't quite gel for me is the assumption that
> Nabokov was trying to conceal the fact of his own overall authorship of
the
> novel, his ultimate "control" over the fiction. Plainly, he wasn't. The
> puzzles of the text, and their ultimate answerability, answerabilities or
> unanswerability, are intentional ones. I think that in this respect
Nabokov
> himself, and _Pale Fire in particular, probably stand at one of those cusp
> points between Modernism and postmodernism (see eg. McHale 1987, 1992),
and
> that Nabokov still perceived the author's position -- his own position --
in
> respect to the text as one of preeminence, even though, admittedly, the
> themes and structural complexities within the text do challenge and
> problematise that whole relationship between "authorship" and "authority".
I
> don't think Nabokov sees this paradox as an issue. Thus, the question of
> whether Shade or Kinbote or any other character could write "as well as"
> Nabokov seems to me to be irrelevant. It is Nabokov who can write as well
as
> Nabokov: his characters are the *products* of his writing, not the
> producers. Certainly, however, I can imagine his bemusement at the
critical
> controversies surrounding the "authorship" of _Pale Fire_, and I can
imagine
> his tongue firmly planted in his cheek when in interviews and memoirs he
> subsequently referred to Kinbote or Shade as if they were real people.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3400
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.