Subject
Nabokov's Onegin (fwd)
Date
Body
EDITOR's COMMENT. Yes, I do remember Gerschenkron review as being well
informed. I think all of the participants in the uproar were pretty much
overshadowed by VN & EW. There is a dissertation dealing the matter. You
might take a look at the Zimmer Bibliography on ZEMBLA http:
//www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/nsintro.htm
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 00:11:27 +0300
From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon@pobox.com>
To: nabokv-l@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
I wonder whether something is known about Nabokov's, or anyone else's
reaction to the following review of Nabokov's EO:
Alexander Gerschenkron, "A Manufactured Monument?",
Modern Philology LXIII (1966), p.336.
Unlike, say, Wilson's silly remarks on VN's or Pushkin's Russian,
ridiculed by VN in his "Reply to my critics", Gerschenkron's
article seems to point at some real, rather than imaginary, faults
of VN's translation and commentary. G. certainly appears to be much
more knowledgable about the subject than just about anyone else
who criticized or praised Nabokov's EO.
George Steiner says, in a footnote in "After Babel" (a treatise on philosophy
and phenomenology of translation): " `Nabokovians' tend to never refer
to this decisive article..." I wonder, to what extent is that true?
--
Anatoly Vorobey,
mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton
informed. I think all of the participants in the uproar were pretty much
overshadowed by VN & EW. There is a dissertation dealing the matter. You
might take a look at the Zimmer Bibliography on ZEMBLA http:
//www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/nabokov/nsintro.htm
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 00:11:27 +0300
From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon@pobox.com>
To: nabokv-l@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
I wonder whether something is known about Nabokov's, or anyone else's
reaction to the following review of Nabokov's EO:
Alexander Gerschenkron, "A Manufactured Monument?",
Modern Philology LXIII (1966), p.336.
Unlike, say, Wilson's silly remarks on VN's or Pushkin's Russian,
ridiculed by VN in his "Reply to my critics", Gerschenkron's
article seems to point at some real, rather than imaginary, faults
of VN's translation and commentary. G. certainly appears to be much
more knowledgable about the subject than just about anyone else
who criticized or praised Nabokov's EO.
George Steiner says, in a footnote in "After Babel" (a treatise on philosophy
and phenomenology of translation): " `Nabokovians' tend to never refer
to this decisive article..." I wonder, to what extent is that true?
--
Anatoly Vorobey,
mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton