Subject
LOLITA film and NABOKV-L
Date
Body
>From Christopher Berg (Tentender@aol.com)
I must say it is hard to disagree with Peter Kartsev's view that it would be
NICE if the list could get back to reconsidering at least OCCASIONALLY some
aspect of the literary art. Yes, Ms. James's review of the film of we-all-
know-what is lovely, but I'm afraid that her less-than-adulatory opinion of
the NOVEL on which it is based is a good indication of just how little this
list is gaining from consideration of the film and (especially) all the
publicity surrounding it.
Especially when such interesting titbits as the revelation of the identity of
the Tsar's physician (SURELY no accident, but to what purpose exactly -- isn't
that worth a little thought?).
Not to flame the list, but since it includes so many truly engaged, active and
fine minds, isn't this all a bit of a waste of time? And wouldn't Our Hero be
rather ashamed of our being so easily distracted?
Christopher Berg
Tentender@aol.com
I must say it is hard to disagree with Peter Kartsev's view that it would be
NICE if the list could get back to reconsidering at least OCCASIONALLY some
aspect of the literary art. Yes, Ms. James's review of the film of we-all-
know-what is lovely, but I'm afraid that her less-than-adulatory opinion of
the NOVEL on which it is based is a good indication of just how little this
list is gaining from consideration of the film and (especially) all the
publicity surrounding it.
Especially when such interesting titbits as the revelation of the identity of
the Tsar's physician (SURELY no accident, but to what purpose exactly -- isn't
that worth a little thought?).
Not to flame the list, but since it includes so many truly engaged, active and
fine minds, isn't this all a bit of a waste of time? And wouldn't Our Hero be
rather ashamed of our being so easily distracted?
Christopher Berg
Tentender@aol.com