Subject
[THOUGHTS ]Coates review of Krushcheva's
From
Date
Body
Dear List,
Here, at the dead center of the year, we find VN's readers (&, as G.Shimanovich reminds us, as VN's very lively fictions), evolving like like potatoes around his works and opinions - along with Kinbote's own noisy merry-go-rounds.
I'm a little ashamed because it took me so long to conclude that VN was not undervaluing the "social" significance of art ( "A work of art has no importance whatever to society"), he was simply stressing that a true artist should not aim his work at something as vague as a philosopher's conceptualization of "society" (Aisenberg's "received wisdom"), but at society's very constituents: citiziens, artists, readers, and his "fictions" ("It is only important to the individual, and only the individual reader is important to me.").
I'm honored to share this discussion with you all and, in particular, I want to congratulate our EDS for their patience and creativity to encourage our "symposium".
Below a summary of some issues presented today:
J. Aisenberg re to Khrushcheva and Studdard: clearly for the woman to have made remarks like those above about Nabokov's contempt for common folks, as opposed to say "received wisdom", seems like the mark of a shallow reader. And Nabokov's contempt for the tradition of socially minded literature (itself a complicated matter) was, I thought, a healthy response to those solemn types who go around putting all sorts of "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" on everything and everybody, types embarrassed that literature might be fun or amusing, that it might not seem to be "respectably employed"; who inist the only serious literature builds houses for the homeless and frees the world of slavery, itself a kind of grim ignoble slavery (it's funny that Nabokov's liberated view of art should somehow have been turned around by so many concerned critics and made to seem constrictive and inhuman, when it's plaster the great busts and frowning sanctimony he was fleeing). "Heartless"? Poor Dolores Haze is hardly the invention a heartless arrogant brute[...] K's taking Nabokov to task for his physical cowardice and flogging him with his survival of history, unlike Mandelshtam, is particularly annoying and offensive.[...]Unlike Studdard I think its great fun to read Nabokov taking pot shots at "great" writers.
Laurence Hochard ( To J.STuddard) as far as I know, VN never played the prophet, nor vied with Jesus Christ! it is Khrushcheva who says he is one and then anoints him with vitriol.As for her reproaches, they are very similar to those addressed to S Knight by Mr Goodman [...]In other words, VN uses parody and satire to ridicule and get rid of sham, shallow, hypocritical so-called deep feelings and concerns so as to really address "serious emotion".
G.Shimanovich: her Dad [K's], as one recalls, patronized arts and took artists to task for being ... not socially minded. All the while VN's lineage is consistently unordinary in cultural sense. Isn't it why he remains a sore eye for some ordinary folk (this invented group isn't so numerous) and closed minded members of writers guilt (quite ordinary minded, numerous and self-appointed speakers for "ordinary" - to inflate their speaking value)...
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/
Here, at the dead center of the year, we find VN's readers (&, as G.Shimanovich reminds us, as VN's very lively fictions), evolving like like potatoes around his works and opinions - along with Kinbote's own noisy merry-go-rounds.
I'm a little ashamed because it took me so long to conclude that VN was not undervaluing the "social" significance of art ( "A work of art has no importance whatever to society"), he was simply stressing that a true artist should not aim his work at something as vague as a philosopher's conceptualization of "society" (Aisenberg's "received wisdom"), but at society's very constituents: citiziens, artists, readers, and his "fictions" ("It is only important to the individual, and only the individual reader is important to me.").
I'm honored to share this discussion with you all and, in particular, I want to congratulate our EDS for their patience and creativity to encourage our "symposium".
Below a summary of some issues presented today:
J. Aisenberg re to Khrushcheva and Studdard: clearly for the woman to have made remarks like those above about Nabokov's contempt for common folks, as opposed to say "received wisdom", seems like the mark of a shallow reader. And Nabokov's contempt for the tradition of socially minded literature (itself a complicated matter) was, I thought, a healthy response to those solemn types who go around putting all sorts of "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" on everything and everybody, types embarrassed that literature might be fun or amusing, that it might not seem to be "respectably employed"; who inist the only serious literature builds houses for the homeless and frees the world of slavery, itself a kind of grim ignoble slavery (it's funny that Nabokov's liberated view of art should somehow have been turned around by so many concerned critics and made to seem constrictive and inhuman, when it's plaster the great busts and frowning sanctimony he was fleeing). "Heartless"? Poor Dolores Haze is hardly the invention a heartless arrogant brute[...] K's taking Nabokov to task for his physical cowardice and flogging him with his survival of history, unlike Mandelshtam, is particularly annoying and offensive.[...]Unlike Studdard I think its great fun to read Nabokov taking pot shots at "great" writers.
Laurence Hochard ( To J.STuddard) as far as I know, VN never played the prophet, nor vied with Jesus Christ! it is Khrushcheva who says he is one and then anoints him with vitriol.As for her reproaches, they are very similar to those addressed to S Knight by Mr Goodman [...]In other words, VN uses parody and satire to ridicule and get rid of sham, shallow, hypocritical so-called deep feelings and concerns so as to really address "serious emotion".
G.Shimanovich: her Dad [K's], as one recalls, patronized arts and took artists to task for being ... not socially minded. All the while VN's lineage is consistently unordinary in cultural sense. Isn't it why he remains a sore eye for some ordinary folk (this invented group isn't so numerous) and closed minded members of writers guilt (quite ordinary minded, numerous and self-appointed speakers for "ordinary" - to inflate their speaking value)...
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/