Subject
Re: signs and symbols (fwd)
Date
Body
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Roy Johnson <Roy@mantex.demon.co.uk>
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.950403140201.17465C-100000@humanitas.ucsb.edu>
NABOKV-L@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu writes:
> From: JAMES MCSHANE, LL <JAMESMC@QUEENS.LIB.NY.US>
>
> I would like to go on record as disagreeing with the credentialed
> gentleman(of last week), but not with the person who followed him.
Disagree by all means - but produce good reasons for your
interpretation of the story.
> Of course, the ending of "Signs and Symbols" is ambiguous.
Only in a superficial manner. As I have argued, readers are being
left to supply the 'closure' themselves - as they are in many other
modernist stories, including some written by VN.
> However, I think many interpreters are making the mistake of making
> this story autobiographical in more than just a superficial way.
I don't think anyone has suggested that the story is autobiographical.
It merely deals with themes to which VN returns again and again in
his work.
> Ultimately, it does not matter one iota who is on the line the
> third time.
then you lose much of the dramatic impact and the moral significance
of the story
> What does matter, to me, is that I don't find these two people
> very appealing or sympathetic. They both lack imagination and
> spirit. And I believe Nabokov meant them to be seen as such.
They have survived Stalinism, then Nazism, and [unlike other
members of their family] the Holocaust. They are humble, simple
people who have a mentally deranged son.
Hense,
> my feeling that Nabokov would set the son free of them -- if not
> before the third phone call then hopefully sometime soon after.
You are entitled to your opinion. I am prepared to guess
that you are anything up to thirty years younger than me,
and I was born on the day that the Hitler-Stalin Pact was
signed. Work it out.
--
Roy Johnson | Roy@mantex.demon.co.uk
PO Box 100 | Tel: +44 (0)61 432 5811
Manchester M20 6GZ | Fax: +44 (0)61 443 2766
From: Roy Johnson <Roy@mantex.demon.co.uk>
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.950403140201.17465C-100000@humanitas.ucsb.edu>
NABOKV-L@ucsbvm.ucsb.edu writes:
> From: JAMES MCSHANE, LL <JAMESMC@QUEENS.LIB.NY.US>
>
> I would like to go on record as disagreeing with the credentialed
> gentleman(of last week), but not with the person who followed him.
Disagree by all means - but produce good reasons for your
interpretation of the story.
> Of course, the ending of "Signs and Symbols" is ambiguous.
Only in a superficial manner. As I have argued, readers are being
left to supply the 'closure' themselves - as they are in many other
modernist stories, including some written by VN.
> However, I think many interpreters are making the mistake of making
> this story autobiographical in more than just a superficial way.
I don't think anyone has suggested that the story is autobiographical.
It merely deals with themes to which VN returns again and again in
his work.
> Ultimately, it does not matter one iota who is on the line the
> third time.
then you lose much of the dramatic impact and the moral significance
of the story
> What does matter, to me, is that I don't find these two people
> very appealing or sympathetic. They both lack imagination and
> spirit. And I believe Nabokov meant them to be seen as such.
They have survived Stalinism, then Nazism, and [unlike other
members of their family] the Holocaust. They are humble, simple
people who have a mentally deranged son.
Hense,
> my feeling that Nabokov would set the son free of them -- if not
> before the third phone call then hopefully sometime soon after.
You are entitled to your opinion. I am prepared to guess
that you are anything up to thirty years younger than me,
and I was born on the day that the Hitler-Stalin Pact was
signed. Work it out.
--
Roy Johnson | Roy@mantex.demon.co.uk
PO Box 100 | Tel: +44 (0)61 432 5811
Manchester M20 6GZ | Fax: +44 (0)61 443 2766