Subject
Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3386 PALE FIRE
From
Date
Body
----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:00 AM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3386
>
> pynchon-l-digest Thursday, July 10 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3386
>
>
>
> Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
> Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
> (Nabokov-free) VLVL2 epigraph
> Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
> Re: VLVL2 Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
>
> In football you wear a helmet.
>
> In baseball you wear a cap.
>
> http://www.baseball-almanac.com/humor7.shtml
>
> - --- Mondegreen <gwf@greenworldcenter.org> wrote:
> >
> > "I come not to bother, but to annoy."
> > Jesus, in The Gospel According to Saint Eureen
> >
> > The digests of the Pynchon-l list are being posted
> > on the Nabokov-l list for the duration of the Pale
> > Fire discussion, and this intersection of the
> > lists prompts a comparison.
> >
> > The Nabokov list must have a higher ratio of
> > professionals to amateurs, there no doubt being
> > more Nabokov professionals than Pynchon
> > professionals, and so it has more queries and
> > responses of a technical scholarly nature. It also
> > naturally has an international makeup and
> > cosmopolitan flavor.
> >
> > The Nabokov list is moderated, co-moderated
> > actually, by two professionals, i.e. professors of
> > literature, who have Nabokov's writings as a
> > specialty. They're critics. Good ones.
> >
> > The Nabokov forum has a dress code. Being moderated,
> > it has no flames, which is refreshing. (What are
> > all they all about??) But the Nabokov list also
> > lacks free-ranging discussion, and the ambience is
> > therefore more impersonal and uh stiff. No horsing
> > around. No getting to know each other as people
> > over a beer at the end of the day. The
> > professionals are (I think this is fair, yes?)
> > wary and, speaking for myself at least, so
> > therefore are the amateurs. Subscribing is not
> > like sitting around in the neighborhood pub or
> > cafИ, but attending or participating in an academic
> > forum.
> >
> > A significant shortcoming, in my view, of the
> > requirement to keep posts sqarely on-topic is the
> > result that the Nabokov forum cannot function as a
> > civic space. In these parlous times, with
> > intelligent civic discussion systematically
> > excluded from the mass media, and, let's face it,
> > with Big Brother already here, in my opinion we
> > should be using any and every opportunity to
> > nurture and enliven our civic life.
>
> [...]
>
> > Anyway, to summarize: over there, where the average
> > age of the posters is no doubt older than it is
> > here, the ground rules favor more dignity but less
> > fun. AFAIAC both is better.
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:30:53 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
>
> >>>The digests of the Pynchon-l list are being posted on the Nabokov-l
list
> for the duration of the Pale Fire discussion,>>>
>
> And without any censoring thus far.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: (Nabokov-free) VLVL2 epigraph
>
> Meanwhile back at Rancho Netiquette....
>
> As expert as Keith is with his own childish put-downs
> he is indeed qualified to point it out when others do
> it, although it makes him look more than a little
> hypocritical. He can dish it out, but just can't take
> it, I guess.
>
> A-and Big Bird is still as full of shit as a Christmas
> goose, or perhaps he truly doesn't remember that this
> is PYNCHON-L and that the Nabokov reading was marketed
> as a project that would illuminate Pynchon. davemarc's
> sensible suggestions have been more or less ignored.
> Instead, we're getting just what Keith asked for, a
> reading of a Nabokov novel with no particular effort
> to relate it to the raison d'etre (Pynchon) of this
> discussion group. All in good fun, of course, and
> perhaps something interesting about Pynchon will
> eventually emerge from the Nabokov reading.
>
> Meanwhile, this remains the P-list, and if
> Big Bird can't handle people wondering how a
> particular post relates to Pynchon -- well, as they
> say in the Army, "That sounds like a personal problem,
> soldier. Take it to the chaplain." (I don't suppose
> Big Bird and Keith and a few others have ever
> criticized anybody here for posting something they
> thought unrelated to Pynchon? But of course they
> have, and what flaming hypocrites they are.)
>
> Still, it's worth it just to watch Morris try to bluff
> his way through a Nabokov novel he hasn't read. Almost
> as much fun as listening him trying to make sense of
> Pynchon. It's spine-tingling, man.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:33:56 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
>
> >>>In fact, I think the
> last week or so of PF "preliminary" has been one of the better discussions
> we've had in a while. (And again, thanks to Jasper for really getting the
> ball rolling.)<<<
>
> Selah. And the Vineland doggyspeak has been enjoyable as well. The more
> interesting the discussion, the more foolish the silly banter looks.
>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3386
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:00 AM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3386
>
> pynchon-l-digest Thursday, July 10 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3386
>
>
>
> Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
> Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
> (Nabokov-free) VLVL2 epigraph
> Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
> Re: VLVL2 Preliminary: The Epigraph
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
>
> In football you wear a helmet.
>
> In baseball you wear a cap.
>
> http://www.baseball-almanac.com/humor7.shtml
>
> - --- Mondegreen <gwf@greenworldcenter.org> wrote:
> >
> > "I come not to bother, but to annoy."
> > Jesus, in The Gospel According to Saint Eureen
> >
> > The digests of the Pynchon-l list are being posted
> > on the Nabokov-l list for the duration of the Pale
> > Fire discussion, and this intersection of the
> > lists prompts a comparison.
> >
> > The Nabokov list must have a higher ratio of
> > professionals to amateurs, there no doubt being
> > more Nabokov professionals than Pynchon
> > professionals, and so it has more queries and
> > responses of a technical scholarly nature. It also
> > naturally has an international makeup and
> > cosmopolitan flavor.
> >
> > The Nabokov list is moderated, co-moderated
> > actually, by two professionals, i.e. professors of
> > literature, who have Nabokov's writings as a
> > specialty. They're critics. Good ones.
> >
> > The Nabokov forum has a dress code. Being moderated,
> > it has no flames, which is refreshing. (What are
> > all they all about??) But the Nabokov list also
> > lacks free-ranging discussion, and the ambience is
> > therefore more impersonal and uh stiff. No horsing
> > around. No getting to know each other as people
> > over a beer at the end of the day. The
> > professionals are (I think this is fair, yes?)
> > wary and, speaking for myself at least, so
> > therefore are the amateurs. Subscribing is not
> > like sitting around in the neighborhood pub or
> > cafИ, but attending or participating in an academic
> > forum.
> >
> > A significant shortcoming, in my view, of the
> > requirement to keep posts sqarely on-topic is the
> > result that the Nabokov forum cannot function as a
> > civic space. In these parlous times, with
> > intelligent civic discussion systematically
> > excluded from the mass media, and, let's face it,
> > with Big Brother already here, in my opinion we
> > should be using any and every opportunity to
> > nurture and enliven our civic life.
>
> [...]
>
> > Anyway, to summarize: over there, where the average
> > age of the posters is no doubt older than it is
> > here, the ground rules favor more dignity but less
> > fun. AFAIAC both is better.
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:30:53 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: Pynchon-l and Nabokv-l lists
>
> >>>The digests of the Pynchon-l list are being posted on the Nabokov-l
list
> for the duration of the Pale Fire discussion,>>>
>
> And without any censoring thus far.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: (Nabokov-free) VLVL2 epigraph
>
> Meanwhile back at Rancho Netiquette....
>
> As expert as Keith is with his own childish put-downs
> he is indeed qualified to point it out when others do
> it, although it makes him look more than a little
> hypocritical. He can dish it out, but just can't take
> it, I guess.
>
> A-and Big Bird is still as full of shit as a Christmas
> goose, or perhaps he truly doesn't remember that this
> is PYNCHON-L and that the Nabokov reading was marketed
> as a project that would illuminate Pynchon. davemarc's
> sensible suggestions have been more or less ignored.
> Instead, we're getting just what Keith asked for, a
> reading of a Nabokov novel with no particular effort
> to relate it to the raison d'etre (Pynchon) of this
> discussion group. All in good fun, of course, and
> perhaps something interesting about Pynchon will
> eventually emerge from the Nabokov reading.
>
> Meanwhile, this remains the P-list, and if
> Big Bird can't handle people wondering how a
> particular post relates to Pynchon -- well, as they
> say in the Army, "That sounds like a personal problem,
> soldier. Take it to the chaplain." (I don't suppose
> Big Bird and Keith and a few others have ever
> criticized anybody here for posting something they
> thought unrelated to Pynchon? But of course they
> have, and what flaming hypocrites they are.)
>
> Still, it's worth it just to watch Morris try to bluff
> his way through a Nabokov novel he hasn't read. Almost
> as much fun as listening him trying to make sense of
> Pynchon. It's spine-tingling, man.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:33:56 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
>
> >>>In fact, I think the
> last week or so of PF "preliminary" has been one of the better discussions
> we've had in a while. (And again, thanks to Jasper for really getting the
> ball rolling.)<<<
>
> Selah. And the Vineland doggyspeak has been enjoyable as well. The more
> interesting the discussion, the more foolish the silly banter looks.
>
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3386
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.