-------- Original Message --------
To David Golemboski: I'm convinced that you're right--it is a
reference to the Hatfields and the McCoys. I don't know much
about /Lolita/, though, and almost nothing about the
secondary literature other than Appel's notes, so I can't tell
you whether other people have mentioned it.
(I've noticed that when I come up with a brilliant observation
that's been made before, nobody says anything on the list, so
silence isn't the best possible sign.)
To Matt Roth: That's amazing. But what could it mean? The only
connection I can think of is that E. Darwin's work is often cited
as really bad poetry that should never have been poetry in the
first place. Could Nabokov be telling us that that's what
"Pale Fire" is, or is not?
Jerry Friedman