Subject
N/A
From
Date
Body
From: Eric Geissinger <elgeissinger@ucdavis.edu>
I just read for the first time McNeely's ""Lo" and Behold:
Solving the Lolita Riddle" and was very impressed with his well-argued
attempt to re-introduce the concept of "moral judgement" into "Lolita"
criticism, i.e. can one really regard as high art the story of a
pedophile, and if one does where does that leave the critic? I was unable
to discover any rebuttals/responses to McNeely's article (first published
in Studies in the Novel, 1989, volume 21) and was wondering if anyone else
has heard anything about it -- if not, I think the article has been
wrongly ignored.
Not that McNeely has given the final word on the matter, but it
does seem to engage subjects that traditionally (following Nabokov's
loud lead) were anathama to the "intelligent" Nabokov scholar.
--Eric Geissinger
UC-Davis
I just read for the first time McNeely's ""Lo" and Behold:
Solving the Lolita Riddle" and was very impressed with his well-argued
attempt to re-introduce the concept of "moral judgement" into "Lolita"
criticism, i.e. can one really regard as high art the story of a
pedophile, and if one does where does that leave the critic? I was unable
to discover any rebuttals/responses to McNeely's article (first published
in Studies in the Novel, 1989, volume 21) and was wondering if anyone else
has heard anything about it -- if not, I think the article has been
wrongly ignored.
Not that McNeely has given the final word on the matter, but it
does seem to engage subjects that traditionally (following Nabokov's
loud lead) were anathama to the "intelligent" Nabokov scholar.
--Eric Geissinger
UC-Davis