Subject
Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov from the
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
From
Date
Body
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:08 PM -0400
From: Thomas Bolt <t@tbolt.com>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov from the
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
------------------
The question of whether the person making an argument is
an entity or a non-entity is irrelevant; it is the argument itself
that we must address--first by checking to see if it is a valid
argument (assuming a correct premise), then by evaluating the
premise.
In Peck's case, he has made no valid argument, and there is no
evidence in his writing that he knows how to make one. His
editors do not seem to care, though I would assert that at least
part of an editor's job is to edit for logical soundness and
coherence, as well as to kick the tires of the premise.
I for one am as happy discussing the defects of Nabokov's works
as the many wonders, for even the defects are of great interest.
By the way--where do you suppose Dale Peck picked up his bad
habit of making unsupported pronouncements from on high? He
certainly does seem to have some Strong Opinions!
Cheers,
Tom
PS
VN on Samuel Beckett: "Author of lovely novellas and wretched
plays in the the Maeterlinck tradition." Note that VN labels his
opinions honestly, as Opinions, not "Strong Arguments." The
opinions are also often subtly suggestive when investigated
further.
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:08 PM -0400
From: Thomas Bolt <t@tbolt.com>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov from the
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
------------------
The question of whether the person making an argument is
an entity or a non-entity is irrelevant; it is the argument itself
that we must address--first by checking to see if it is a valid
argument (assuming a correct premise), then by evaluating the
premise.
In Peck's case, he has made no valid argument, and there is no
evidence in his writing that he knows how to make one. His
editors do not seem to care, though I would assert that at least
part of an editor's job is to edit for logical soundness and
coherence, as well as to kick the tires of the premise.
I for one am as happy discussing the defects of Nabokov's works
as the many wonders, for even the defects are of great interest.
By the way--where do you suppose Dale Peck picked up his bad
habit of making unsupported pronouncements from on high? He
certainly does seem to have some Strong Opinions!
Cheers,
Tom
PS
VN on Samuel Beckett: "Author of lovely novellas and wretched
plays in the the Maeterlinck tradition." Note that VN labels his
opinions honestly, as Opinions, not "Strong Arguments." The
opinions are also often subtly suggestive when investigated
further.
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L