EDNOTE. I'm inclined to agree with your suspicion. "Acerbic"---NOT
"Aseptic." VN was, of course, among those Russians who regard Pushkin in
superlatives--although he faults for the occasional weak line.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur Glass" <goliard@worldnet.att.net>
>
> ----------------- Message requiring your approval (12
lines) ------------------
> I am just getting round to reading the Fall 2003 issue of the peerless
> __Hudson Review__. It contains an excellent  article by Richard Pevear
> called 'The Presence of Pushkin'. Pevear refers to '...the common tendency
> among Russians to speak of Pushkin in superlatives--a feature found not
only
> in the poet's hagiographers, but also in__ the usually aseptic Nabokov
> [please visualize those words as italicized by me], the wry and witty
> Sinyavsky, the judicious D.S. Mirsky.'
>
> Now, I think I understand the point here; VN was rather chary of praise
for
> other writers. But 'aseptic'? That is not a quality I would ever think of
> predicating of VN. 'Acerbic', yes, and perhaps it's a misprint.
>