Subject
Re: THOUGHTS: Reply to Joseph Aisenberg on the supernatural in
/Pale Fire/]
/Pale Fire/]
From
Date
Body
J.Friedman: I think I understand what Nabokov meant, but I don't even try to apply it to my life.But I realize that in even bringing up the possibility of what he meant, I'm denying a large part of the twentieth century [...]And one fact--about the book, not our reality--is that Shade is right. Nabokov is the higher being, and Aunt Maud at least has a life after death. [...]. I'd say you and I, not believing in the supernatural, can see Nabokov's beliefs as we like, but we have to see Shade's beliefs as true in the fiction. Unless again you deny the author's meaning[...]
JM: There's a correction to my posting to J.Aisenberg.
I wrote: For J. A "no afterlife can be explained in living terms" and yet, he employs words, such as "beyond the veil", just as J.Friedman...". -
I should have written instead: " As J.A pointed out, for VN "no afterlife can be explained in living terms" and yet, when describing instances about VN's hereafter, he employs words such as "beyond the veil"...
Like J.Friedman now discusses ( or so it seems to me), VN's "mysticism" is not the theme (he was so very reticent about his real beliefs), only how his mysticism affects his style to the point of satire.
I didn't understand J.F's sentence:" I realize that in even bringing up the possibility of what he meant, I'm denying a large part of the twentieth century." Perhaps because I often see VN straddling the XIXth unto the early XXth (nostalgia, childhood favorite authors, later contempts: Freud...)
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/
JM: There's a correction to my posting to J.Aisenberg.
I wrote: For J. A "no afterlife can be explained in living terms" and yet, he employs words, such as "beyond the veil", just as J.Friedman...". -
I should have written instead: " As J.A pointed out, for VN "no afterlife can be explained in living terms" and yet, when describing instances about VN's hereafter, he employs words such as "beyond the veil"...
Like J.Friedman now discusses ( or so it seems to me), VN's "mysticism" is not the theme (he was so very reticent about his real beliefs), only how his mysticism affects his style to the point of satire.
I didn't understand J.F's sentence:" I realize that in even bringing up the possibility of what he meant, I'm denying a large part of the twentieth century." Perhaps because I often see VN straddling the XIXth unto the early XXth (nostalgia, childhood favorite authors, later contempts: Freud...)
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/