On
02/07/2008 14:22, "George Shimanovich" <gshiman@OPTONLINE.NET> wrote:
Speaking
of consistency I would like to quote from Fyodor’s dialog with
Koncheyev which IMO is central piece of Dar (chapter 5). After
listening to Koncheev’s critique of his works (“First, an excessive
trust in words … Fifthly and finally, you sometimes say things chiefly
calculated to prick your contemporaries, but any woman will tell you
…”) Fyodor says this in his reply:
“But besides the defects you have noted in my book, I am aware of at
least three more – they, perhaps, are the most important of all. Only
I’ll never tell you them – and they won’t be there in my next book.”
To accuse VN in lack of consistency without proof is worse then
professing writer’s admiration beyond his merit. Consistency is not a
whim but form of addiction practiced by better writers.
Speaking of VN and “defects” I would love someone to write of how VN’s
style evolved from “The Gift” to “Ada”. Or, may be, I should just
reread both.
- George Shimanovich
-------
By George, you've got it! Wonderful citations that remind us of VN's
blistering genius _as a novelist_. One of the hallmarks is the ability
to create "convincing" characters who may or may not "agree" with the
writer's current opinions. And, do recognize that a sign of wisdom is
the ability and courage to change one's judgements! It's not
"inconsistent" to replace or refurbish your opinions in the light of
new evidence or fresh pondering. Au contraire, that's central to the
rational intellect embodied in the "scientific method."
Novelists/dramatists, more so than poets, perhaps, have the luxury
(duty?) of inventing "mouths" through which opinions can be mooted and
bandied pro'n'con.
Stan Kelly-Bootle