Subject
Re: Fw: MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS FROM DN #2
From
Date
Body
----- Forwarded message from STADLEN@aol.com -----
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:40:59 EST
From: STADLEN@aol.com
In a message dated 23/11/2004 20:21:54 GMT Standard Time, chtodel@cox.net
writes:
> "Conjectured" by whom? I recognize none of my father's traits here except
> his genius. Of course he may have been preoccupied with his writing as opposed
> to faculty meetings, or the kind of boozy "interaction" some writers have
> been famous for, but he is remembered for the dashing, witty figure he cut on
> private and public occasions, and for the kind of interaction that counts most
> -- with his students, audiences, interviewers, and family. He was anything
> but clumsy and awkward, but a graceful tennis and soccer player, and precise
> in his movements, say, when working under the microscope on miniature
> lepidopterological organs. Repetitive? Of course -- genius is, above all,
discipline.
> Restricted interests? It was his wealth of interests and knowledge that
> enabled him to write with Nabokovian richness.
>
> I have come across this dim-witted diagnosis before. It accompanies the
> low-brow notion that, to be considered sane and healthy, one must fit some
kind
> of moronic mould, while genius is, by definition, deviant.
>
As a psychotherapist, I endorse one hundred per cent Dmitri Nabokov's
dismissal of this absurd, defamatory and, as he says, "dim-witted" "diagnosis".
Anthony Stadlen
----- End forwarded message -----