NABOKV-L post 0011807, Thu, 8 Sep 2005 19:19:28 -0700

Subject
Fwd: Re: Shapiro on Dolinin on Shapiro Response
Date
Body


----- Forwarded message from dolinin@wisc.edu -----
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 19:58:52 -0500
From: dolinin <dolinin@wisc.edu>
Reply-To: dolinin <dolinin@wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: Shapiro on Dolinin's Response
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum

My opponent's personal insults preclude my participation in the discussion
of my work on Nabokov-L. I suspected before that our notions of
conscientiousness in scholarship are different. Now I know that they are
opposite. What is even worse is that our notions of decency and honor are
opposite, too.
I stand firm by every word I have written but if anyone but Mr. Shapiro
would like to continue the scholarly discussion, I am available at my
University e-mail address: dolinin@wisc.edu.



At 04:46 PM 9/8/05 -0700, you wrote:
>EDNOTE. I find the ad hominem attitude of this message distasteful and would
>urge all subsequent contributors to avoid personal invective.
>----------------------------------------
>
>----- Forwarded message from gs33@cornell.edu -----
> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:29:07 -0400
> From: Gavriel Shapiro <gs33@cornell.edu>
>Reply-To: Gavriel Shapiro <gs33@cornell.edu>
> Subject: Re: Dolinin's Defense
> To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
>
>
>Mr. Dolinin's defense, I am afraid, is no more successful than that of his
>by far more attractive namesake. His attributing my sharp reaction to his
>chapter to my being "ardent but naive" is merely half true. I do become
>ardent when I see manifestations of cruelty, dishonesty, and arrogance. As
>for naive, Mr. Dolinin evidently confuses me with his pseudonymous namesake
>from Nabokov's story "Lips to Lips." Unlike his gullible namesake, however,
>I see very well through my correspondent's desperate attempts to extricate
>himself from the scandalous situation he himself created. Such, for
>example, is Mr. Dolinin's disingenuous claim that he does "not discuss
>Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov's personal problems, tragedies, challenges
>and choices." "What interests me," he says, "is the 'model author' or,
>better, two 'model authors' that happened to be named 'Sirin' and
>'Nabokov,' two differently constructed personae, and their strategies in
>the changing literary field." This apologetic statement, although it sounds
>very scholarly, does not tally at all with Mr. Dolinin's attacks on Nabokov
>and his integrity, and no degree of sophistication is needed to comprehend
>this.
>
>As for Mr. Dolinin's idea about "Sirin" and "Nabokov" as "two differently
>constructed personae," I am willing to give it a try, even though at first
>glance this bifurcation seems oversimplified. Let us see: there is
>"Aleksandr Dolinin," habitually referred to as "the leading Russian Nabokov
>scholar," and there is "Alexander Dolinin," the unfortunate author of the
>chapter in question. Are they two different individuals or two faces of one
>and the same person? It seems that my luckless correspondent's best
>strategy at this point is to assert that he has nothing to do with
>"Alexander Dolinin." No. My recommendation "betrays an ardent but naive
>mind": a fleeting character in The Gift had already tried and miserably
>failed "to dissociate himself from a villainous namesake, who subsequently
>turned out to be his relative, then his double, and finally himself."
>
>My other recommendation for Mr. Dolinin: in the future, to avoid such
>lamentable statements as those that appeared in his chapter, he ought to
>re-read Nabokov. Speak, Memory and Strong Opinions will be the best way to
>start. No. This recommendation will not work either: Mr. Dolinin might
>unwittingly "fall under the spell of Nabokov's own inventions, evasions,
>exaggerations, and half-truths" and, Heavens forbid, will abandon his
>resentful tone and will give up his slanderous attacks on the writer, the
>attacks that he clumsily dubs "demythologization" and passes them off as
>representing his scholarly objectivity.
>
>I suppose I am running out of recommendations for Mr. Dolinin. My last
>recommendation for him: to behave as a decent human being and as a
>conscientious scholar. But perhaps it is too much to ask.
>
>Gavriel Shapiro
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
>Dear Don,
>
> I trust you will run my rebuttal to Dolinin's response,
> entitled "Dolinin's Defense," in full and without delay.
>
>Many thanks.
>
>Best,
>
>Gavriel
>
>
>Mr. Dolinin's defense, I am afraid, is no more successful than that of his
>by far more attractive namesake. His attributing my sharp reaction to his
>chapter to my being "ardent but naive" is merely half true. I do become
>ardent when I see manifestations of cruelty, dishonesty, and arrogance. As
>for naive, Mr. Dolinin evidently confuses me with his pseudonymous
>namesake from Nabokov's story "Lips to Lips." Unlike his gullible
>namesake, however, I see very well through my correspondent's desperate
>attempts to extricate himself from the scandalous situation he himself
>created. Such, for example, is Mr. Dolinin's disingenuous claim that he
>does "not discuss Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov's personal problems,
>tragedies, challenges and choices." "What interests me," he says, "is the
>'model author' or, better, two 'model authors' that happened to be named
>'Sirin' and 'Nabokov,' two differently constructed personae, and their
>strategies in the changing literary field." This apologetic statement,
>although it sounds very scholarly, does not tally at all with Mr.
>Dolinin's attacks on Nabokov and his integrity, and no degree of
>sophistication is needed to comprehend this.
>
>As for Mr. Dolinin's idea about "Sirin" and "Nabokov" as "two differently
>constructed personae," I am willing to give it a try, even though at first
>glance this bifurcation seems oversimplified. Let us see: there is
>"Aleksandr Dolinin," habitually referred to as "the leading Russian
>Nabokov scholar," and there is "Alexander Dolinin," the unfortunate author
>of the chapter in question. Are they two different individuals or two
>faces of one and the same person? It seems that my luckless
>correspondent's best strategy at this point is to assert that he has
>nothing to do with "Alexander Dolinin." No. My recommendation "betrays an
>ardent but naive mind": a fleeting character in The Gift had already tried
>and miserably failed "to dissociate himself from a villainous namesake,
>who subsequently turned out to be his relative, then his double, and
>finally himself."
>
>My other recommendation for Mr. Dolinin: in the future, to avoid such
>lamentable statements as those that appeared in his chapter, he ought to
>re-read Nabokov. Speak, Memory and Strong Opinions will be the best way to
>start. No. This recommendation will not work either: Mr. Dolinin might
>unwittingly "fall under the spell of Nabokov's own inventions, evasions,
>exaggerations, and half-truths" and, Heavens forbid, will abandon his
>resentful tone and will give up his slanderous attacks on the writer, the
>attacks that he clumsily dubs "demythologization" and passes them off as
>representing his scholarly objectivity.
>
>I suppose I am running out of recommendations for Mr. Dolinin. My last
>recommendation for him: to behave as a decent human being and as a
>conscientious scholar. But perhaps it is too much to ask.
>
>Gavriel Shapiro
>
>

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