Subject
The von Lichtberg "Lolita" affair
From
Date
Body
EDNOTE. NABOKV-L thanks Michael Maar for this item. I shall try to run the
von Lichtberg story and the associated articles mentioned below. As MM
notes, one of the gaps in the discussion has been that few people have
actually read the story.
--------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Maar" <michael.maar@snafu.de>
Interestingly enough some debate participants still seem to believe
that Heinz von Lichberg's "Lolita" had not been published. It was
published, in its entire length, in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung"
(March 27). There is an electronic version of the full text that is
available after registration and the payment of a small fee (something like
75 cent, I think).
>
This unabridged "Lolita" - and not just my essay - was the factual and
objective ground on which the following critical articles were based: "Der
Spiegel" (March 22), "Süddeutsche Zeitung" (April 1), "Frankfurter
Rundschau" (April 14), "Rheinischer Merkur" (April 15). All of these
articles, one of them an erudite study of the leading Musil expert Karl
Corino, came to the same conclusion. I can assure you that it was not the
conclusion that the similarities between the two Lolitas were too vague,
but quite the contrary. Not one of those authors,
while differing in their opinions about the possible explanation, was not
convinced by the case itself, that is: the very fact that there is a Lolita
case, or enigma, in question (instead of, with all due respect, a "Maar
affair")
> .
This important side of the reception - important since we deal with a
German novella - does not exist in the list's picture. It does not because
most of the members don't read German. I don't blame them at all, don't get
me wrong, but it leads to a certain disbalance in the whole debate.
>
> I don't have any ideas if there are plans to translate Lichberg's "Lolita"
into English. It will be translated into Italian, though.
>
>
> With best wishes,
> Michael Maar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "D. Barton Johnson" <chtodel@cox.net>
> An: "Michael Maar" <michael.maar@snafu.de>
> Gesendet: Montag, 19. April 2004 19:21
> Betreff: Lolita flap
>
>
> Dear Michael Maar,
> Thank you for your reasoned response to Bolt and Dolinin. Like you, I
am
> bewildered over the uproar. Even if your hypothesis proves wrong (as I
> suspect it will--in so far as negative proof is possible), I cannot see
why
> it has aroused such emotions. I (and most literary scholars) have
published
> articles suggesting connections based on far less evidence than you offer
> and no one bats an eye. I suppose it's the global "Lolita Syndrome." A
> cultural history of world-wide Lolita flaps might make an entertaining
book.
> Making available von Lichtberg's story in German and English might at
> least add a note of reality to the whole thing. Do you have a copy that
> could be used without involving copyright issues?
>
> Best, Don
>
>
>
>
>
>
von Lichtberg story and the associated articles mentioned below. As MM
notes, one of the gaps in the discussion has been that few people have
actually read the story.
--------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Maar" <michael.maar@snafu.de>
Interestingly enough some debate participants still seem to believe
that Heinz von Lichberg's "Lolita" had not been published. It was
published, in its entire length, in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung"
(March 27). There is an electronic version of the full text that is
available after registration and the payment of a small fee (something like
75 cent, I think).
>
This unabridged "Lolita" - and not just my essay - was the factual and
objective ground on which the following critical articles were based: "Der
Spiegel" (March 22), "Süddeutsche Zeitung" (April 1), "Frankfurter
Rundschau" (April 14), "Rheinischer Merkur" (April 15). All of these
articles, one of them an erudite study of the leading Musil expert Karl
Corino, came to the same conclusion. I can assure you that it was not the
conclusion that the similarities between the two Lolitas were too vague,
but quite the contrary. Not one of those authors,
while differing in their opinions about the possible explanation, was not
convinced by the case itself, that is: the very fact that there is a Lolita
case, or enigma, in question (instead of, with all due respect, a "Maar
affair")
> .
This important side of the reception - important since we deal with a
German novella - does not exist in the list's picture. It does not because
most of the members don't read German. I don't blame them at all, don't get
me wrong, but it leads to a certain disbalance in the whole debate.
>
> I don't have any ideas if there are plans to translate Lichberg's "Lolita"
into English. It will be translated into Italian, though.
>
>
> With best wishes,
> Michael Maar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "D. Barton Johnson" <chtodel@cox.net>
> An: "Michael Maar" <michael.maar@snafu.de>
> Gesendet: Montag, 19. April 2004 19:21
> Betreff: Lolita flap
>
>
> Dear Michael Maar,
> Thank you for your reasoned response to Bolt and Dolinin. Like you, I
am
> bewildered over the uproar. Even if your hypothesis proves wrong (as I
> suspect it will--in so far as negative proof is possible), I cannot see
why
> it has aroused such emotions. I (and most literary scholars) have
published
> articles suggesting connections based on far less evidence than you offer
> and no one bats an eye. I suppose it's the global "Lolita Syndrome." A
> cultural history of world-wide Lolita flaps might make an entertaining
book.
> Making available von Lichtberg's story in German and English might at
> least add a note of reality to the whole thing. Do you have a copy that
> could be used without involving copyright issues?
>
> Best, Don
>
>
>
>
>
>