Subject
Fw: Re Maxim Shrayer, DN, & Nikolai Mel'nikov
From
Date
Body
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vladimir Mylnikov" <vmylnikov@yahoo.com>
>
> ----------------- Message requiring your approval (85
lines) ------------------
>
> Dear Anatoly Vorobey,
>
> Ne lukav'te (simply do not pretend)- the essay,
> written by N.Mel'nikov on M.Shrayer's book', is very
> biazed and quite weak, as the matter of fact. First of
> all, he does not say why the book is bad and the
> arguments are not really arguments - just words filled
> with attitudes. Mr. Mel'nikov jumps from one point to
> another without establishing reliable view on the
> subject. This style can not be called "academic", but
> this is not the point.
> Yes, Mr. Mel'nikov does not say openly about his anti
> -semitic perspectives, but they are definitely there.
> I am not sure if you want to reread the essay. One can
> write "four letter word" on the wall and one can say
> "four letter word" without pronouncing it using it as
> euphemism, let's say, and that was Mel'nikov's
> approach - "tongue in cheek."
> The last essay "kak possorilis'..." suffers from the
> same stylistic weakness. I am appalled to know that it
> was published in "Novyi Mir." First of all, Nabokov
> did not "ssorislia" s gospodinom Zverevym. Why should
> he?
> And if for some reason gospodin Zverev "ssorilsia" s
> Nabokovym, to ikh "possoril" tot zhe Mel'nikov.
>
> I think Dimitri is very right using the - word - had -
> been-talked - and - trampled - a -lot - about. Piracy
> is really activity that deserves such a term. It is a
> moral issue and I believe it was the right word.
>
> Take care,
>
> Vladimir Mylnikov
>
>
>
> Anatoly Vorobey comments:
>
> There is no anti-Semitism in Melnikov's review
> (available in
> Russian at http://nlo.magazine.ru/archive/267.html ),
> though I'd
> grant that there is a lot of "anti-Shrayerism" there.
> Why would anyone
> want to confuse the latter with the former, or to
> endorse DN's choice
> of
> epithets (I omit my true opinion thereof at the
> request of the
> moderator),
> is a question I'd rather not speculate about.
>
> [P.S. I don't know anything about Melnikov beyond
> having read these
> two
> articles of him - the review of Shrayer's book at
> http://nlo.magazine.ru/archive/267.html, and the
> review of Zverev's
> book at
> http://magazines.russ.ru/novyi_mi/2003/7/meln.html.
> For all I know he
> may be
> all that DN says, but these two items certainly don't
> qualify as
> evidence
> for that.]
>
> > --
> > Anatoly Vorobey,
> > my journal (in Russian):
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/avva/
> > mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
>
> > "Angels can fly because they take themselves
> lightly" -
> G.K.Chesterton
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
From: "Vladimir Mylnikov" <vmylnikov@yahoo.com>
>
> ----------------- Message requiring your approval (85
lines) ------------------
>
> Dear Anatoly Vorobey,
>
> Ne lukav'te (simply do not pretend)- the essay,
> written by N.Mel'nikov on M.Shrayer's book', is very
> biazed and quite weak, as the matter of fact. First of
> all, he does not say why the book is bad and the
> arguments are not really arguments - just words filled
> with attitudes. Mr. Mel'nikov jumps from one point to
> another without establishing reliable view on the
> subject. This style can not be called "academic", but
> this is not the point.
> Yes, Mr. Mel'nikov does not say openly about his anti
> -semitic perspectives, but they are definitely there.
> I am not sure if you want to reread the essay. One can
> write "four letter word" on the wall and one can say
> "four letter word" without pronouncing it using it as
> euphemism, let's say, and that was Mel'nikov's
> approach - "tongue in cheek."
> The last essay "kak possorilis'..." suffers from the
> same stylistic weakness. I am appalled to know that it
> was published in "Novyi Mir." First of all, Nabokov
> did not "ssorislia" s gospodinom Zverevym. Why should
> he?
> And if for some reason gospodin Zverev "ssorilsia" s
> Nabokovym, to ikh "possoril" tot zhe Mel'nikov.
>
> I think Dimitri is very right using the - word - had -
> been-talked - and - trampled - a -lot - about. Piracy
> is really activity that deserves such a term. It is a
> moral issue and I believe it was the right word.
>
> Take care,
>
> Vladimir Mylnikov
>
>
>
> Anatoly Vorobey comments:
>
> There is no anti-Semitism in Melnikov's review
> (available in
> Russian at http://nlo.magazine.ru/archive/267.html ),
> though I'd
> grant that there is a lot of "anti-Shrayerism" there.
> Why would anyone
> want to confuse the latter with the former, or to
> endorse DN's choice
> of
> epithets (I omit my true opinion thereof at the
> request of the
> moderator),
> is a question I'd rather not speculate about.
>
> [P.S. I don't know anything about Melnikov beyond
> having read these
> two
> articles of him - the review of Shrayer's book at
> http://nlo.magazine.ru/archive/267.html, and the
> review of Zverev's
> book at
> http://magazines.russ.ru/novyi_mi/2003/7/meln.html.
> For all I know he
> may be
> all that DN says, but these two items certainly don't
> qualify as
> evidence
> for that.]
>
> > --
> > Anatoly Vorobey,
> > my journal (in Russian):
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/avva/
> > mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
>
> > "Angels can fly because they take themselves
> lightly" -
> G.K.Chesterton
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com