NABOKV-L post 0020844, Thu, 7 Oct 2010 09:34:12 -0400

Re: THOUGHT: the whole codology
Besides James Twiggs I'd really like to apologize to Piers Smith. His
comments, which prompted my sermonette in defense of large grain
literary analyses with respect to Pale Fire, were obviously occasioned
by my unfortunate misuse of the word codology, which apparently means
a great jesting or deception. I'd like to apologize to the whole list
for that. My intended meaning was to describe a reading that seeks to
clarify or comprehend most of the main issues, problems, ambiguities,
residing in Pale Fire, such as Hodge's epigram, Botkin's role, the
Rose Court, the overall relation of New Wye to Kinbote's Zembla. The
work is a piece of fiction. In fact it's a fiction about a man writing
a set of fictitious notes. As such, I suppose, the whole work may be
considered a codology; almost trivially, and yet a pleasant trope
perhaps. But my intention was to acclaim a fairly comprehensive
reading of the whole codology.

your humble cod,
Search archive with Google:

Contact the Editors:,
Visit Zembla:
View Nabokv-L policies:
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:"

Manage subscription options: