Subject
Re: Fwd: Re: Mick Glynn: Dissertation-A novelist of
Delusion:Vladimir Nabokov's Bergsoni
Delusion:Vladimir Nabokov's Bergsoni
From
Date
Body
Interpolating.
Highly educational for me--thanks, Mick!
> EDNOTE. I blush to read parts of this informative item
> (and wish NABOKV-L
> received more material like it). I am somewhat bemused at being
> designated a
> pro-otherworlder although I suppose I am. Nabokov's underlying
> metaphysic can
> be fitted into several conceptual frameworks. I say "bemused" because,
> as I
> recall, from the discussion at Jane Grayson's Cambridge conference, I
> offered
> the thought that supposing the various metaphysical frameworks were in
> fact
> fantasies of the critics--would VN's work be any less brilliant. My
> lurking
> suspicion is "no."
Since I've been talking about how I read _Pale Fire_, I'll say
that I liked it a great deal before I suspected anything supernatural
at all, even the will-o'-wisp's message, but my otherworldly
interpretation (and some information on ghosts from Boyd and
others) makes me like it even better.
> ----- Forwarded message from MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk -----
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:50:06 +0100
> From: MIck Glynn <MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk>
> Reply-To: MIck Glynn <MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk>
> ---------------- Message requiring your approval (118 lines)
> ------------------
> Hi Jerry,
>
> Thanks for your interest.
> As I stated earlier,I personally view Nabokov as an anti-Symbolist
> writer. The observation that an orthodoxy obtains, an orthodoxy
> presenting N as a kind of Symbolist writer, is hardly a controversial
> one.
[snip review of the critical literature from which I'm learning
fast]
> As I seek to demonstrate in my thesis, (and in a
> forthcoming article in European Journal of American Culture: "The word
> is not a Shadow, The Word is a Thing: Nabokov as Anti-Symbolist") the
> most significant and compelling "otherworld" in Nabokov's novels
> is not the transcendental realm but the material world of people and
> things that the deluded mind is not able fully to apprehend. Note how
> deluded Humbert engages not with the material reality that is Dolores
> but with a spurious analogue, Lolita.
Hm. I think one could just as easily argue that Hum engages with
the "material girl", not with her spiritual (whatever that means)
reality. In any case, we agree that Humbert's view of Lolita contains
a lot of his own creation, at her expense, but that seems compatible
with an authorial belief in the "real" supernatural. I'd be more
interested in what you say about Cincinnatus and about Shade.
> I align N with Bergson and
> Shklovsky because these two individuals (dissimilar in myriad ways) also
> conceived of man as a deluded creature who ovwerlooked the material
> reality of people and things. If you're interested, get hold of a copy
> of my thesis available from the BL - it's very readable! Cheers, Mick
> Glynn
I'll look into its availability in America.
Thanks,
Jerry Friedman
> >>> chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu 20/04/2005 15:59:20 >>>
> Dmitri Nabokov commended my removal of "in effect a Symbolist
> writer" from this sentence that I quoted from Mick Glynn's
> dissertation:
>
> "I shall preface my discussion of Nabokov's Bergsonian and
> Shklovskyite affinities by countering the idea, now something of
> a critical orthodoxy, that Nabokov was in effect a Symbolist
> writer concerned with a transcendent, extra-mundane reality."
>
> I was gratified to read Mr. Nabokov's comment, but I should make
> it clear that I deleted those words to express my own view of
> our author's concern with a transcendent, extra-mundane reality
> (at least in _Pale Fire_) and not to criticize Dr. Glynn's
> summary of critical orthodoxy, about which I know hardly
> anything. I'd love to read something of how Dr. Glynn counters
> that orthodoxy that I apparently share, though.
>
> Jerry Friedman
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----- End forwarded message -----
Highly educational for me--thanks, Mick!
> EDNOTE. I blush to read parts of this informative item
> (and wish NABOKV-L
> received more material like it). I am somewhat bemused at being
> designated a
> pro-otherworlder although I suppose I am. Nabokov's underlying
> metaphysic can
> be fitted into several conceptual frameworks. I say "bemused" because,
> as I
> recall, from the discussion at Jane Grayson's Cambridge conference, I
> offered
> the thought that supposing the various metaphysical frameworks were in
> fact
> fantasies of the critics--would VN's work be any less brilliant. My
> lurking
> suspicion is "no."
Since I've been talking about how I read _Pale Fire_, I'll say
that I liked it a great deal before I suspected anything supernatural
at all, even the will-o'-wisp's message, but my otherworldly
interpretation (and some information on ghosts from Boyd and
others) makes me like it even better.
> ----- Forwarded message from MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk -----
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:50:06 +0100
> From: MIck Glynn <MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk>
> Reply-To: MIck Glynn <MGLYNN@pcfe.ac.uk>
> ---------------- Message requiring your approval (118 lines)
> ------------------
> Hi Jerry,
>
> Thanks for your interest.
> As I stated earlier,I personally view Nabokov as an anti-Symbolist
> writer. The observation that an orthodoxy obtains, an orthodoxy
> presenting N as a kind of Symbolist writer, is hardly a controversial
> one.
[snip review of the critical literature from which I'm learning
fast]
> As I seek to demonstrate in my thesis, (and in a
> forthcoming article in European Journal of American Culture: "The word
> is not a Shadow, The Word is a Thing: Nabokov as Anti-Symbolist") the
> most significant and compelling "otherworld" in Nabokov's novels
> is not the transcendental realm but the material world of people and
> things that the deluded mind is not able fully to apprehend. Note how
> deluded Humbert engages not with the material reality that is Dolores
> but with a spurious analogue, Lolita.
Hm. I think one could just as easily argue that Hum engages with
the "material girl", not with her spiritual (whatever that means)
reality. In any case, we agree that Humbert's view of Lolita contains
a lot of his own creation, at her expense, but that seems compatible
with an authorial belief in the "real" supernatural. I'd be more
interested in what you say about Cincinnatus and about Shade.
> I align N with Bergson and
> Shklovsky because these two individuals (dissimilar in myriad ways) also
> conceived of man as a deluded creature who ovwerlooked the material
> reality of people and things. If you're interested, get hold of a copy
> of my thesis available from the BL - it's very readable! Cheers, Mick
> Glynn
I'll look into its availability in America.
Thanks,
Jerry Friedman
> >>> chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu 20/04/2005 15:59:20 >>>
> Dmitri Nabokov commended my removal of "in effect a Symbolist
> writer" from this sentence that I quoted from Mick Glynn's
> dissertation:
>
> "I shall preface my discussion of Nabokov's Bergsonian and
> Shklovskyite affinities by countering the idea, now something of
> a critical orthodoxy, that Nabokov was in effect a Symbolist
> writer concerned with a transcendent, extra-mundane reality."
>
> I was gratified to read Mr. Nabokov's comment, but I should make
> it clear that I deleted those words to express my own view of
> our author's concern with a transcendent, extra-mundane reality
> (at least in _Pale Fire_) and not to criticize Dr. Glynn's
> summary of critical orthodoxy, about which I know hardly
> anything. I'd love to read something of how Dr. Glynn counters
> that orthodoxy that I apparently share, though.
>
> Jerry Friedman
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----- End forwarded message -----