Many thanks, Mr. or Dr. Nyegaard. I have not read Schiff's biography of Vera, but I may have read a review of it.

Still, I feel obligate to produce the source for my comment regarding Huck Finn. It seems to me that I recalled both the Nabokov's disapproving of Finn, which has always been the more controversial book. It's still regularly banned from the reading list of one school or another, either for blasphemy or, in my view, a mistaken perception of racism.

Make no mistake: I don't find fault in the Nabokov's choice in this matter. Despite their enormous literary knowledge, everyone knows what they want for their kids, and Huck Finn may well be a difficult book for non-American readers to cope with

I'm not sure whose words I'm quoting below, but I'm not at all ready to take back my comment. I'm not sure what discussion the "then it's true" comes from but it's not one to which I was invited.

" if the Nabokovs aired an opinion only on Tom, then it's true that there really is
no comment of theirs anywhere in print about Huck."

Andrew Brown
  

----------
From:   Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of Donald B. Johnson
Reply To:       Vladimir Nabokov Forum
Sent:   Tuesday, March 8, 2005 12:06 PM
To:     NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject:        Fw: VN on Huckleberry Finn?

I think the source can be found in Stacy Schiff's biography Vera. I don't
have a copy at hand, but I'm quite sure that's where I have read about
Vera's dislike of Huck Finn - but what Schiff's source for this was, I
can't recall.

Ole Nyegaard
Aarhus University, Denmark
---------------------------------------------
EDNOTE. Thanks to Ole Nyegaard's sugestion, I located the passage(s) in VERA:
pp. 136, 166, & 200. The Nabokovs had consulted Edmund Wilson for recommended
reading for 12-yr-old Dmitri. Wilson suggested Twain's _Tom Sawyer_. Vera,
according to Wilson, thought that it was "an immoral book that teaches bad
behavior and suggests to little boys the idea of taking an interest in little
girls too young." Schiff repeats the material on pp. 166 & 200. Huck was, of
course, more of a rapscallion than Tom. As a  boy I recall being puzzled by
Tom's (or was it Huck's) observation that the way to tell (disguised?) males
from females. When an object is tossed toward their laps,  men instinctively
close their legs; women open them (so as to catch the object in their dress
folds).
------------------------------------------------------------

Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU> den 8. marts 2005 kl.
01:26 +0000 skrev:
>
>
>
>
>----- Forwarded message from Andrew.Brown@bbdodetroit.com -----
>    Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 18:04:16 -0500
>    From: "Brown, Andrew" <Andrew.Brown@bbdodetroit.com>
>Reply-To: "Brown, Andrew" <Andrew.Brown@bbdodetroit.com>
> Subject: RE: Spam: Re: Fw: VN on Huckleberry Finn?
>      To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>
>
>To Brian Boyd, Care of the VN Forum:
>
>
>It may take me some time to unearth my source for this, but it is in
>print. Both
>VN and Vera disliked the book from when Dmitri was still a child, and
>they were
>paying attention to the literature he might soon be reading. This may
>have been
>when the family first came to the United States, if not earlier.
>
>
>They disapproved of the word used throughout the book to describe the
>slave Jim.
>Clearly, their dislike of this vulgarity was consistent with their
>disgust with
>prejudice and bigotry of all kinds. But it seems, or seemed, not to take
>into
>account the fact that the action of Finn takes place in the slaveholding
>American South of about 1835. I'll do my best to find the source.
>
>
>Andrew
>
>
>
>
>> ----------
>> From:        Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of Donald B. Johnson
>> Reply To:    Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>> Sent:        Monday, March 7, 2005 4:34 PM
>> To:  NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>> Subject:     Spam: Re: Fw: VN on Huckleberry Finn?
>>
>> Where does VN express this opinion of Huckleberry Finn?
>>
>> BB
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum [mailto:NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU] On
>Behalf Of
>> Donald B. Johnson
>> Sent: Tuesday, 8 March 2005 6:26 a.m.
>> To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from as-brown@comcast.net -----
>>     Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:21:53 -0500
>>     From: Andrew Brown <as-brown@comcast.net>
>> Reply-To: Andrew Brown <as-brown@comcast.net>
>>  Subject: Re:      Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and
>petards
>>       To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>>
>> Readers of Richard Ellmann's biography of  Joyce, as well as readers of
>the
>> now-hard-to-find letters Joyce sent Nora from Dublin in December of
>1909 know
>> that Bloom's predelictions and peccadillos are, basically, those of
>Joyce
>> himself.  With respect to the writer of the Lectures on Literature
>quoted
>> below, I demure and suggest instead that in art, which Joyce and
>Nabokov both
>> pursued, in fact, in the modernist tradition formulated by Wilde and
>others,
>> taste and morals mean much less than whether a work is written well or
>badly.
>> Nabokov was a man who could not find it in himself to accept a work like
>> Huckleberry Finn because of what he considered its vulgarity. In this
>matter
>my
>> own views part company with VNs,  in spite of my considering him the
>greatest
>> American writer of the 20th century. When it comes to art (and much
>else,
>> actually), you don't have to agree with anybody, not even your heroes,
>all of
>> the time.
>>
>> Andrew
>>   ----- Original Message -----
>>   From: D. Barton Johnson
>>   To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>>   Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 4:10 PM
>>   Subject: Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>>
>>
>>
>>   ----- Original Message -----
>>   From: Jansy Berndt de Souza Mello
>>   Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 11:45 AM
>>   Subject: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>>
>>
>>   Dear List,
>>
>>   There is an important reference in VN´s lecture on Joyce which I
>couldn´t
>find
>> yesterday but that I can now add:
>>
>>   I´m copying from Fredon Bowers edition of Lectures on Literature,
>page 287:
>>
>>   "Another consideration in relation to Bloom: those so many who have
>written
>so
>> much about "Ulysses" are either very pure men or very depraved men.
>They are
>> inclined to regard Bloom as a very ordinary nature, and apparently Joyce
>> himself intended to portray an ordinary person.  It is obvious,
>however, that
>> in the sexual department Bloom is, if not on the verge of insanity, at
>least a
>> good clinical example of extreme sexual preoccupation and perversity
>with all
>> kinds of curious complications. His case is strictly heterosexual, of
>course -
>> not homosexual as most of the ladies and gentlemen are in Proust (...)
>- but
>> within the wide limits of Bloom´s love for the opposite sex he indulges
>in
>acts>
>> and dreams that are definitely subnormal in the zoological, evolutional
>sense.
>> I shall not bore you with a list of his curious desires, but this I
>will say:
>> in Bloom´s mind and in Joyce´s book the theme of sex is continually
>mixed and
>> intertwined with the theme of the latrine.  God knows I have no
>objection
>> whatsoever to so-called frankness in novels.  On the contrary, we have
>too
>> little of it, and what there is has become in its turn conventional and
>trite,
>> as used by so-called tough writers, the darlings of the book clubs, the
>pets
>of
>> clubwomen.  But I do object to the folowing: Bloom is supposed to be a
>rather
>> orginary citizen.  Now it is not true that the mind of an ordinary
>citizen
>> continuously dwells on physiological things.  I object to the
>continuously,
>not
>> to the disgusting.  All this very special pathological stuff seems
>artificial
>> and unnecessary in this particular context".
>>   ..............................................
>>   There are other comments by VN  about Joyce´s and Bloom´s
>"extraordinariness"
>> which are as vivid as the one here quoted.
>>   Young Eric´s or any Veen or Zemski (explicit)  sexual fantasy should
>not be
>> confused with VN´s own,  to the point of " continuously" permeating his
>novel
>> like a bass background.
>>
>>   VN ( on page 346) writes about Joyce´s parodies :
>>   "We can thus define clichés as bits of dead prose and of rotting
>poetry.
>> However the parody has its interruptions. Now what Joyce does here is
>to cause
>> some of that dead and rotten stuff to reveal here and there its live
>source,
>> its primary freshness (...) Joyce manages to build up something real -
>pathos,
>> pity, compassion - out of the dead formulas which he parodies".
>>
>>   I also think that this very real, compassionate and golden atmosphere
>is
>> something VN achieved in ADA, albeit by other means no less
>"extraordinary".
>> Paradise regained?
>>   Jansy
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>This message and any attachments contain information, which may be
>confidential
>or privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, please refrain
>from any
>disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information.  Please be
>aware
>that such actions are prohibited.  If you have received this transmission
>in
>error, kindly notify us by calling 1-800-262-4723 or e-mail to
>helpdesk@bbdo.com. We appreciate your cooperation.
>
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
>To Brian Boyd, Care of the VN Forum:
>
>It may take me some time to unearth my source for this, but it is in
>print. Both VN and Vera disliked the book from when Dmitri was still a
>child, and they were paying attention to the literature he might soon be
>reading. This may have been when the family first came to the United
>States, if not earlier.
>
>They disapproved of the word used throughout the book to describe the
>slave Jim. Clearly, their dislike of this vulgarity was consistent with
>their disgust with prejudice and bigotry of all kinds. But it seems, or
>seemed, not to take into account the fact that the action of Finn takes
>place in the slaveholding American South of about 1835. I'll do my best
>to find the source.
>
>Andrew
>
>
>
>
>----------
>From:   Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of Donald B. Johnson
>Reply To:       Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>Sent:   Monday, March 7, 2005 4:34 PM
>To:     NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>Subject:        Spam: Re: Fw: VN on Huckleberry Finn?
>
>Where does VN express this opinion of Huckleberry Finn?
>
>BB
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum [[ mailto:NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>]mailto:NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU] On Behalf Of
>Donald B. Johnson
>Sent: Tuesday, 8 March 2005 6:26 a.m.
>To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>Subject: Re: Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Forwarded message from as-brown@comcast.net -----
>    Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:21:53 -0500
>    From: Andrew Brown <as-brown@comcast.net>
>Reply-To: Andrew Brown <as-brown@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re:      Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>      To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>
>Readers of Richard Ellmann's biography of  Joyce, as well as readers of
>the
>now-hard-to-find letters Joyce sent Nora from Dublin in December of 1909
>know
>that Bloom's predelictions and peccadillos are, basically, those of Joyce
>himself.  With respect to the writer of the Lectures on Literature quoted
>below, I demure and suggest instead that in art, which Joyce and Nabokov
>both
>pursued, in fact, in the modernist tradition formulated by Wilde and
>others,
>taste and morals mean much less than whether a work is written well or
>badly.
>Nabokov was a man who could not find it in himself to accept a work like
>Huckleberry Finn because of what he considered its vulgarity. In this
>matter my
>own views part company with VNs,  in spite of my considering him the
>greatest
>American writer of the 20th century. When it comes to art (and much else,
>actually), you don't have to agree with anybody, not even your heroes,
>all of
>the time.
>
>Andrew
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: D. Barton Johnson
>  To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
>  Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 4:10 PM
>  Subject: Fw: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Jansy Berndt de Souza Mello
>  Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 11:45 AM
>  Subject: VN speaks for himself to on pets,peats and petards
>
>
>
>
>  Dear List,
>
>  There is an important reference in VN´s lecture on Joyce which I
>couldn´t find
>yesterday but that I can now add:
>
>  I´m copying from Fredon Bowers edition of Lectures on Literature, page
>287:
>
>  "Another consideration in relation to Bloom: those so many who have
>written so
>much about "Ulysses" are either very pure men or very depraved men.  They
>are
>inclined to regard Bloom as a very ordinary nature, and apparently Joyce
>himself intended to portray an ordinary person.  It is obvious, however,
>that
>in the sexual department Bloom is, if not on the verge of insanity, at
>least a
>good clinical example of extreme sexual preoccupation and perversity with
>all
>kinds of curious complications. His case is strictly heterosexual, of
>course -
>not homosexual as most of the ladies and gentlemen are in Proust (...) -
>but
>within the wide limits of Bloom´s love for the opposite sex he indulges
>in acts
>and dreams that are definitely subnormal in the zoological, evolutional
>sense.
>I shall not bore you with a list of his curious desires, but this I will
>say:
>in Bloom´s mind and in Joyce´s book the theme of sex is continually mixed
>and
>intertwined with the theme of the latrine.  God knows I have no objection
>whatsoever to so-called frankness in novels.  On the contrary, we have
>too
>little of it, and what there is has become in its turn conventional and
>trite,
>as used by so-called tough writers, the darlings of the book clubs, the
>pets of
>clubwomen.  But I do object to the folowing: Bloom is supposed to be a
>rather
>orginary citizen.  Now it is not true that the mind of an ordinary
>citizen
>continuously dwells on physiological things.  I object to the
>continuously, not
>to the disgusting.  All this very special pathological stuff seems
>artificial
>and unnecessary in this particular context".
>  ..............................................
>  There are other comments by VN  about Joyce´s and Bloom´s
>"extraordinariness"
>which are as vivid as the one here quoted.
>  Young Eric´s or any Veen or Zemski (explicit)  sexual fantasy should
>not be
>confused with VN´s own,  to the point of " continuously" permeating his
>novel
>like a bass background.
>
>  VN ( on page 346) writes about Joyce´s parodies :
>  "We can thus define clichés as bits of dead prose and of rotting
>poetry.
>However the parody has its interruptions. Now what Joyce does here is to
>cause
>some of that dead and rotten stuff to reveal here and there its live
>source,
>its primary freshness (...) Joyce manages to build up something real -
>pathos,
>pity, compassion - out of the dead formulas which he parodies".
>
>  I also think that this very real, compassionate and golden atmosphere
>is
>something VN achieved in ADA, albeit by other means no less
>"extraordinary".
>Paradise regained?
>  Jansy
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
>
>
>This message and any attachments contain information, which may be
>confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>refrain from any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this
>information. Please be aware that such actions are prohibited. If you
>have received this transmission in error, kindly notify us by calling
>1-800-262-4723 or e-mail to helpdesk@bbdo.com. We appreciate your
>cooperation.
>

----- End forwarded message -----