NABOKV-L post 0012205, Sat, 10 Dec 2005 12:08:32 -0800

Subject
Fwd: Re: Brian Boyd respons to John Ridland's critique of poem
"Pale Fire"
Date
Body


----- Forwarded message from STADLEN@aol.com -----
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:34:55 EST
From: STADLEN@aol.com
Reply-To: STADLEN@aol.com
Subject: Re: Brian Boyd respons to John Ridland's critique of poem "Pale Fire"
To:

In a message dated 09/12/2005 17:12:58 GMT Standard Time,
chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu writes:

> the final line missing its matching rhyme until we return to the first
> line.

I am grateful to Brian Boyd for so eloquently and precisely defending Shade's
"Pale Fire". But how does he know that "we return to the first line"? Why
should we accept Kinbote's assertion? How, even, do we know that there would
have
been only one more line? The symmetry between parts 1 and 4, and 2 and 3,
would be thus preserved, but how do we know Shade wanted to preserve it?

Anthony Stadlen

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