Subject
THOUGHTS: 4000 times
From
Date
Body
E M Farrell writes:
Hi, another lurker posting for the first time. I hope I do this correctly
and don't break anything.
laurence hochard wrote:
"Could the inconsistency be deliberate, here as well as about Kinbote's
birthdate? Did VN want to discreetly blur the time landmarks so as to
maintain ambiguity as to the identity of the characters? Or are they simply
mistakes?"
I don't believe they are mistakes by VN. I believe the inconsistencies are
deliberate.
For the surface story, the inconsistencies (including the commentator's
remark about Sybil hating the wind (poem line 656) and his referring to
Shade being sixty in comments to lines 431 and 167) seem to not only to
indicate that the commentator is not writing his story in a linear manner
but he is also pulling information, for his story, from the poem. The
commentator writes three comments to the poem, lines 167, 181 and 431,
about Shade being sixty then, actually reading (?) line 181 of the poem,
corrects only the comment to line 167. Strange he didn't go back to correct
the comments for lines 181 and 431 but maybe, as with line 12, he had "no
time for such stupidities".
If the comments mean anything else or are part of the warp and weft game
the commentator seems to be playing, I don't know. The only thing they
appear to have in common is being written, by Shade, on days the
commentator had an unpleasant experience with the Shades. Line 181 on July
5 (day of the birthday party), line 275 on July 7 (meets Shades in town),
line 431 on July 10-11 (knocks over Shade's garbage can. Vague in poem and
commentary as to exact date) and line 656 on July 15 (meeting in Shade's
kitchen).
laurence hochard wrote:
"Anamorphosis in Pale Fire may be just that: Shade and Kinbote as the
"nonnon" and its mirror, both necessary to reveal the "sensible image".
I'm leaning towards anamorphosis being the commentator and John Shade's
poem. I do believe John Shade is dead when the commentator writes his
version of events, so only Shade's shade, his autobiographical poem, can
contribute to the reveal.
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/
Hi, another lurker posting for the first time. I hope I do this correctly
and don't break anything.
laurence hochard wrote:
"Could the inconsistency be deliberate, here as well as about Kinbote's
birthdate? Did VN want to discreetly blur the time landmarks so as to
maintain ambiguity as to the identity of the characters? Or are they simply
mistakes?"
I don't believe they are mistakes by VN. I believe the inconsistencies are
deliberate.
For the surface story, the inconsistencies (including the commentator's
remark about Sybil hating the wind (poem line 656) and his referring to
Shade being sixty in comments to lines 431 and 167) seem to not only to
indicate that the commentator is not writing his story in a linear manner
but he is also pulling information, for his story, from the poem. The
commentator writes three comments to the poem, lines 167, 181 and 431,
about Shade being sixty then, actually reading (?) line 181 of the poem,
corrects only the comment to line 167. Strange he didn't go back to correct
the comments for lines 181 and 431 but maybe, as with line 12, he had "no
time for such stupidities".
If the comments mean anything else or are part of the warp and weft game
the commentator seems to be playing, I don't know. The only thing they
appear to have in common is being written, by Shade, on days the
commentator had an unpleasant experience with the Shades. Line 181 on July
5 (day of the birthday party), line 275 on July 7 (meets Shades in town),
line 431 on July 10-11 (knocks over Shade's garbage can. Vague in poem and
commentary as to exact date) and line 656 on July 15 (meeting in Shade's
kitchen).
laurence hochard wrote:
"Anamorphosis in Pale Fire may be just that: Shade and Kinbote as the
"nonnon" and its mirror, both necessary to reveal the "sensible image".
I'm leaning towards anamorphosis being the commentator and John Shade's
poem. I do believe John Shade is dead when the commentator writes his
version of events, so only Shade's shade, his autobiographical poem, can
contribute to the reveal.
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/