Subject
A Nabokov evening in Jerusalem (fwd)
Date
Body
EDITOR'S NOTE: NABOKV-L thanks Leona Toker <toker@hum.huji.ac.il> for
the following report. A couple of explanatory notes about the report. I.
Serman is a distinguished scholar of Russian literature, especially the
18th century. Roman Timenchik is one of the leading Russian Nabokov
scholars. Leona Toker is chair of the English Dept. at the Hebrew
University and author of a well-known book and many articles on VN and
other figures. The issue of the dates in LOLITA refers to the current
dispute about the "reality" of the event described after 22 Sept. in the
novel.
______________________________
A NABOKOV EVENING IN JERUSALEM
On Wednesday, May 24, there was a Nabokov evening in the Russian
Immigrants' Club in Jerusalem. It was part of a spontaneously organized
series on Russian writers abroad run by Vladimir Khazan. The
two previous were on Bunin and Khodasevich, the next one will be on
Tsvetayeva.
There were two speakers on the panel, I.Z. Serman and myself. I spoke
about the English and the Russian "Lolita" and the issue of the dates.
Prof. Serman, who is not an unqualified admirer of Nabokov, spoke about
how "The Gift" is an exploration of the causes of literary success and
also about how the protagonist's (or Nabokov's own) supercilious attitude
to Chernyshevski is more a social than a personal phenomenon. I spoke
about the English and the Russia LOLITA and the issue of the dates.
Towards the end there were many statements from from the audience,
including a long one from Roman Timenchik who came to the front, told the
Struve/Ageev story about _A Novel with Cocaine_, and concluded that
whereas the texts of all writers contain all kinds of things, the art of
an individual writer leads to the reader's selective remembering of only
certain particular features.
It was one of the hottest days in the year--we have had a spell of dry
heat which, they say, has been the worst since May 1941. The room was stuffy
and uncomfortable; nevertheless, it was full of people, many of whom knew a
lot about Nabokov. The questions and remarks were good, with none of popular
misconceptions in evidence. The general attitude was everything one might
wish for. The evening lasted and lasted--as if people just did not want to go
home (which might have been true for a whole bunch of reasons). I missed the
former two evenings, but Khazan said that this one was the most successful.
Leona Toker, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
the following report. A couple of explanatory notes about the report. I.
Serman is a distinguished scholar of Russian literature, especially the
18th century. Roman Timenchik is one of the leading Russian Nabokov
scholars. Leona Toker is chair of the English Dept. at the Hebrew
University and author of a well-known book and many articles on VN and
other figures. The issue of the dates in LOLITA refers to the current
dispute about the "reality" of the event described after 22 Sept. in the
novel.
______________________________
A NABOKOV EVENING IN JERUSALEM
On Wednesday, May 24, there was a Nabokov evening in the Russian
Immigrants' Club in Jerusalem. It was part of a spontaneously organized
series on Russian writers abroad run by Vladimir Khazan. The
two previous were on Bunin and Khodasevich, the next one will be on
Tsvetayeva.
There were two speakers on the panel, I.Z. Serman and myself. I spoke
about the English and the Russian "Lolita" and the issue of the dates.
Prof. Serman, who is not an unqualified admirer of Nabokov, spoke about
how "The Gift" is an exploration of the causes of literary success and
also about how the protagonist's (or Nabokov's own) supercilious attitude
to Chernyshevski is more a social than a personal phenomenon. I spoke
about the English and the Russia LOLITA and the issue of the dates.
Towards the end there were many statements from from the audience,
including a long one from Roman Timenchik who came to the front, told the
Struve/Ageev story about _A Novel with Cocaine_, and concluded that
whereas the texts of all writers contain all kinds of things, the art of
an individual writer leads to the reader's selective remembering of only
certain particular features.
It was one of the hottest days in the year--we have had a spell of dry
heat which, they say, has been the worst since May 1941. The room was stuffy
and uncomfortable; nevertheless, it was full of people, many of whom knew a
lot about Nabokov. The questions and remarks were good, with none of popular
misconceptions in evidence. The general attitude was everything one might
wish for. The evening lasted and lasted--as if people just did not want to go
home (which might have been true for a whole bunch of reasons). I missed the
former two evenings, but Khazan said that this one was the most successful.
Leona Toker, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem