Subject
Re: Reliability / Intentionality: VN / Spokespeople (fwd)
Date
Body
Beaver College, just outside Philadelphia, attempts the same suppression.
And fails. The sale of Beaver College tee shirts is nation wide and brisk.
And the college makes money from this. But they pretend to have no idea
why.
Beaver, I think, originally meant a beard, and then, by extension, a pubic
beard. In Dr. Strangelove, the president's name is Merkin (a pubic wig)
Muffley. Probably not by accident.
Cheers, DRS
>From: "J. A. Rea" <JAREA@UKCC.uky.edu>
>
>It might be fun, if we are well girded, to chat about how far we as "gentle
>readers" must be bound in our reading of VN's texts by a) his own insistent
>pronouncements (on thinks of his encounter with Professor Wade!), and,
>by pronouncements on his behalf by critics, commentators, kinfolk, etc.
>
>Just as a less impolite example than more recent instances might be,
>I note that in his first edition of _The Annotated Lolita_, AA for page
>91 note 2 says, "Beaver eaters: a portmanteau of "Beefeaters" (the
>yeomen of the British royal guard) <I might not have capitalized just
>that way had it been my note: J.Rea> and their Beaver hats." But in his
>"Revised and Updated" edition of the same, he adds, "Some have seen this
>as an obvious obscene joke, but Nabokov did not intend one...." I note
>that AA doesn't actually say, "Nabokov says that he did not intend one."
>
>It may perhaps of interest in enlightening the "innocent" that the "obscene"
>reading here would be the one mentioned in the OED II, section 2.a.
>"The female genitals or the pubic area in general," and gives citations as
>early as 1927, including, indeed, one from Joyce's _Finnegans Wake_!
>(Meaning 2.b. is a derivative one, "Hence, a girl or woman, esp. one who
>is sexually attractive." -- <dare I assume this to be an example of
>synecdoche, i.e. taking the part for the (w)hole?>)
>
>Now to the question. Does this pronouncement of the Appel-ate court of the
>new annotated L reqire us to suppress such a meaning. As a poor philologer,
>I get frightfully perplexed by such imponderables as "intentional fallacy"
>"reader response" and would love for someone to clearly draw the lines for me.
>
>Awaiting the perspicuous, benevolent response of the List, I remain,
>
> J. A. Rea
>
>Ki semenat ispinaza, non andet iskultsu!
>
>J. A. Rea jarea@ukcc.uky.edu
David R. Slavitt-- Phone: (215) 382-3994; fax: (215) 382- 8837
And fails. The sale of Beaver College tee shirts is nation wide and brisk.
And the college makes money from this. But they pretend to have no idea
why.
Beaver, I think, originally meant a beard, and then, by extension, a pubic
beard. In Dr. Strangelove, the president's name is Merkin (a pubic wig)
Muffley. Probably not by accident.
Cheers, DRS
>From: "J. A. Rea" <JAREA@UKCC.uky.edu>
>
>It might be fun, if we are well girded, to chat about how far we as "gentle
>readers" must be bound in our reading of VN's texts by a) his own insistent
>pronouncements (on thinks of his encounter with Professor Wade!), and,
>by pronouncements on his behalf by critics, commentators, kinfolk, etc.
>
>Just as a less impolite example than more recent instances might be,
>I note that in his first edition of _The Annotated Lolita_, AA for page
>91 note 2 says, "Beaver eaters: a portmanteau of "Beefeaters" (the
>yeomen of the British royal guard) <I might not have capitalized just
>that way had it been my note: J.Rea> and their Beaver hats." But in his
>"Revised and Updated" edition of the same, he adds, "Some have seen this
>as an obvious obscene joke, but Nabokov did not intend one...." I note
>that AA doesn't actually say, "Nabokov says that he did not intend one."
>
>It may perhaps of interest in enlightening the "innocent" that the "obscene"
>reading here would be the one mentioned in the OED II, section 2.a.
>"The female genitals or the pubic area in general," and gives citations as
>early as 1927, including, indeed, one from Joyce's _Finnegans Wake_!
>(Meaning 2.b. is a derivative one, "Hence, a girl or woman, esp. one who
>is sexually attractive." -- <dare I assume this to be an example of
>synecdoche, i.e. taking the part for the (w)hole?>)
>
>Now to the question. Does this pronouncement of the Appel-ate court of the
>new annotated L reqire us to suppress such a meaning. As a poor philologer,
>I get frightfully perplexed by such imponderables as "intentional fallacy"
>"reader response" and would love for someone to clearly draw the lines for me.
>
>Awaiting the perspicuous, benevolent response of the List, I remain,
>
> J. A. Rea
>
>Ki semenat ispinaza, non andet iskultsu!
>
>J. A. Rea jarea@ukcc.uky.edu
David R. Slavitt-- Phone: (215) 382-3994; fax: (215) 382- 8837