Subject
Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3388 PALE FIRE
From
Date
Body
----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3388
>
> pynchon-l-digest Thursday, July 10 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3388
>
>> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:39:55 -0400
> From: "davemarc" <davemarc@panix.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_00A9_01C346D7.FBD8ACA0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> People keep referring, with varying degrees of accuracy, to my =
> suggestions regarding the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion. As I recall, I =
> tried to address two issues.
>
> One was the possibility that pynchon-l was not the best place for an =
> extensive Nabokov/Pale Fire-centered discussion. I suggested various =
> ways to cover Nabokov/Pale Fire without diverting the focus from this =
> list's raison d'etre. Options would include discussing the book on the =
> nabokov-list and reporting back, creating a new list (i.e. on =
> yahoogroups.com) for a discussion and reporting back, or using a kind of =
> essay format instead of the freewheeling format. In all cases, the =
> content of the posts could revolve around Pynchon/Nabokov/Pale Fire.
>
> The other issue had to do with the possibility that the traditional =
> pynchon-l reading routine might not be the best reading routine for Pale =
> Fire (or even Pynchon's books). Just because it's "always" been done one =
> way doesn't mean that it has to be done that way. My suggestions =
> included the essay format mentioned above.
>
> It seems to me that the people who thought that the suggestions were =
> worth looking into were not the people who organized the Nabokov/Pale =
> Fire discussion. Those organizers seem determined to go ahead with the =
> discussion with little or no interest in addressing the reasonable =
> concerns of other pynchon-l subscribers. I realize that can sound more =
> critical than I intend it to--I'm simply trying to describe how all of =
> this seems to have played out.=20
>
> I've been impressed by the quality of the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion =
> thus far, but I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking place =
> on pynchon-l. What continues to bug me is the rancor in posts from David =
> Morris, MalignD, pynchonoid, and slothenvypride. I've seen so much =
> better from all four of them. I suspect they're deluding themselves if =
> they think that abusing pynchon-l subscribers with their flames and =
> feuding puts them in a positive light.=20
>
> d.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:04:19 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: NPPF - Preliminary - Hazel
>
> Just dug these two out of the heap by my desk -- I guess they're general
> enough not to step on anybody's toes (by the way, thanks to all who've
> appreciated these preliminaries; I have tons of material on PF remaining,
> and await only the proper time to post it -- after the section-host has
had
> their hour):
>
> (from)
> Sir Walter Scott
> "The Lady of the Lake"
>
> The stag at eve had drunk his fill,
> Where danced the moon on Monan's rill,
> And deep his midnight lair had made
> In lone Glenartney's hazel shade....
>
> (all)
> Yeats
> "The Song of Wandering Aengus"
>
> I WENT out to the hazel wood,
> Because a fire was in my head,
> And cut and peeled a hazel wand,
> And hooked a berry to a thread;
> And when white moths were on the wing,
> And moth-like stars were flickering out,
> I dropped the berry in a stream
> And caught a little silver trout.
>
> When I had laid it on the floor
> I went to blow the fire a-flame,
> But something rustled on the floor,
> And someone called me by my name:
> It had become a glimmering girl
> With apple blossom in her hair
> Who called me by my name and ran
> And faded through the brightening air.
>
> Though I am old with wandering
> Through hollow lands and hilly lands,
> I will find out where she has gone,
> And kiss her lips and take her hands;
> And walk among long dappled grass,
> And pluck till time and times are done,
> The silver apples of the moon,
> The golden apples of the sun.
>
>
> akaHasperDidget
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Malignd <malignd@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors WAS VLVL2
epigraph
>
> <<If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> and
> Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> afield -- 9-11, war on Afghanistan and Iraq, erosion
> of civil liberties by the neofascist Bush
> Administration, etc. -- instead of shouting down such
> discussion (even when clearly proposed in a Pynchonian
> context) or bombing it with ad hominem attack as you
> two have done repeatedly, with help from three or four
> other screen-names, for a long time now. >>
>
> An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP, is
> in no way similar to the repeated, indeed endless,
> spamming of hysterical and unedited political cant to
> this list by the same single poster.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:09:58 -0400
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:10:13 -0400
> From: The Great Quail <quail@libyrinth.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> Sorry for being a posting fiend today!!!
>
> The pleasingly sane davemarc writes,
>
> > Options would include creating a new list (i.e. on yahoogroups.com) for
a
> >discussion
>
> I am not happy with either the N-List or the essay format, but for the
> record, I have no problems with creating a Pynchon sub-List for targeted
> non-Pynch readings. As I said previously, I'm worried it might drain away
> some vitality from the main List, but on the other hand, it would be a
more
> focused, less flamey place that might meet the needs of all parties.
>
> Though I don't want this to be interpreted as a suggestion....I just don't
> want to be a monkey-wrench in the gears of the P-List.
>
> - --Quail, who just started "The Recognitions." (Wheee!)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:11:33 +0100
> From: "Burns, Erik" <Erik.Burns@dowjones.com>
> Subject: re: lolita quote
>
> betsy yoon wrote:
>
> >Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that quote from Lolita that
> >occurrs after he sees her while pregnant, and he's driving off to
quilty's
> >house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes were to fade to myopic
> >fish and your breasts were to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would
> still
> >love you my lolita."? I am in a foreign country without access to this
> >crap and I'm trying to prove a point to some reslient people.
>
> you're pretty close!
>
> [..]even if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
> swell and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted
and
> torn≈even when I would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your
dear
> wan face, at the mere sound of your young raucous young voice, my Lolita.
> (Nabokov, 278)
>
> (dunno the edition here, i found the cite here:
> http://www.vestige.org/nabokov/lolita/personal.html)
>
> a bit more: (from here: http://www.captiondm.net/e-resumes/nabokov.html)
>
> "I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, this Lolita, pale and
> polluted, and bug with another▓s child, but still Carmencita, still
mine┘No
> matter if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
> swell and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate bra be tainted and
> torn┘, my Lolita."
>
> and even more: (from here:
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tanguay/book76.htm)
>
> "I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, this Lolita, pale and
> polluted, and big with another's child, but still gray-eyed, still
> sooty-lashed, still auburn and almond, still Carmencita, still mine;
> Changeons de vie, ma Carmen, allons vivre quelque part ou nous ne serons
> jamais separes; Ohio? The wilds of Massachusetts? No matter, even if those
> eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples swell and crack,
and
> her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted and torn--even then I
> would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your dear wan face, at
the
> ere sound of your raucous young voice, my Lolita."
>
> etb (who disnae have the boo' at hand)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Malignd <malignd@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Mason and Dixon as Characters (was NPPF -- Why care about
Kinbote?)
>
> <<We all have our aesthetic likes and dislikes -- why
> get all aggro about them?>>
>
> I'm not certain what getting all aggro is, which isn't
> to say I'm not so doing.
>
> The point was less about M&D and more to the depth of
> Kinbote as a character as compared to what I find are
> the thin characterizations typical of Pynchon (a
> judgement you may disagree with).
>
>
>
> __________________________________
>
> ------------------------------
> etb
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:30:36 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: lolita quote
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pynchon-l@waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l@waste.org] On
> > Behalf Of Burns, Erik
> > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:12 PM
> > To: pynchon-l@waste.org
> > Subject: re: lolita quote
> >
> > betsy yoon wrote:
> >
> > >Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that quote from Lolita that
> > >occurrs after he sees her while pregnant, and he's driving off to
> > quilty's
> > >house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes were to fade to
myopic
> > >fish and your breasts were to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would
> > still
> > >love you my lolita."? I am in a foreign country without access to
this
> > >crap and I'm trying to prove a point to some reslient people.
> >
> > you're pretty close!
> > [...]
>
> Here's a fatter one:
>
> "Somewhere beyond Bill's shack an afterwork radio had begun singing of
folly
> and fate, and there she was with her ruined looks and her adult,
rope-veined
> narrow hands and her goose-flesh white arms, and her shallow ears, and her
> unkempt arm-pits, there she was (my Lolita!), hopelessly worn at
seventeen,
> with that baby, dreaming already in her of becoming a big shot and
retiring
> around 2020 A.D. -- and I looked and looked at her, and knew as clearly as
I
> know I am to die, that I loved her more than anything I had ever seen or
> imagined on earth, or hoped for anywhere else. She was only the faint
> violet whiff and dead leaf echo of the nymphet I had rolled myself upon
with
> such cries in the past; an echo on the brink of a russet ravine, with a
far
> wood under a white sky, and brown leaves choking the brook, and one last
> cricket in the crisp weeds... but thank God it was not that echo alone
that
> I worshiped. What I used to pamper among the tangled vines of my heart,
> _mon grand pИchИ radieux_, had dwindled to its essence: sterile and
selfish
> vice, all _that_ I canceled and cursed. You may jeer at me, and threaten
to
> clear the court, but until I am gagged and half-throttled, I will shout my
> poor truth. I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, _this_
> Lolita, pale and polluted, and big with another's child, but still
> gray-eyed, still sooty-lashed, still auburn and almond, still Carmencita,
> still mine; _Changeons de vie, ma Carmen, allons vivre quelque part oЫ
nous
> ne serons jamais sИparИs; Ohio? The wilds of Massachusetts? No matter,
> even if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
swell
> and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted and torn
> - -- even then I would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your
dear
> wan face, at the mere sound of your raucous young voice, my Lolita."
(Random
> House 277-278)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:31:27 +0300
> From: "Tsianides Costas" <tsianides@cytanet.com.cy>
> Subject: Test
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:50:23 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Kevin Troy <kevin@useless.net>
> Subject: mail formats (WAS P vs N lists)
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, pynchon-l-digest wrote:
> > From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> > Subject: P VS N Lists
> > > > --- Mondegreen <gwf@greenworldcenter.org> wrote:
> > > > > The Nabokov forum has a dress code. Being moderated, it has no
flames,
> > > > > [...]
> >
> > I agree with your assessment above. Also, I hate the formatting of the
posts
> > as they arrive in the form of "forwards" through the mailbox of the
moderator,
> > full of ">"'s preceding every line, making the posts nearly unreadable.
Just
> > try reading the archives and you'll see what I mean.
> >
> > David Morris
>
> On that point, I humbly ask those p-listers who use GUI e-mail clients
> (Outlook, AOL, yahoo and other web services) to disable HTML formatting
> when posting to pynchon-l. Doing so would make reading the digest version
> of the list (which is what what Dr. Johnson is forwarding to NABOKV-L)
> much easier. A-and you don't need to worry about hyperlinks: most modern
> e-mail clients will automatically activate URLs, even if the message
> received was not HTML-formatted.
>
> Example of how to do this, using MS Outlook: go to the Tools menu, select
> options, then go to the "mail format tab," then use the drop-down menu to
> choose "plain text" as your mail format.
>
> Questions about mail formats and their relation to informational entropy
> should be directed to your potsmaster.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin T.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> - --- davemarc <davemarc@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've been impressed by the quality of the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion
thus
> far, but I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking place on
> pynchon-l.
>
> It's very simple:
>
> 1. A good number of Pynchon fans onn the P-list are interested in reading
Pale
> Fire.
>
> 2. Pynchon's taking a LONG time comming forward with his next book.
>
> 3. It was not very long ago that we did a VLVL (and where's your name on
that
> sign-up list?).
>
> 4. We did not decide to take your all-knowing advice.
>
> 5. You have a delete button.
>
> David Morris
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:16:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: lolita quote
>
> http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/nabokov_vladimir_lolita.tmp
>
> - --- Betsy Yoon <qwpoi@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that
> > quote from Lolita that occurrs after he sees her
> > while pregnant, and he's driving off to quilty's
> > house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes
> > were to fade to myopic fish and your breasts were
> > to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would still
> > love you my lolita."? ...
>
> __________________________________
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:32:15 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Nabokov....?
>
> In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire to the Pynchon-L,
> stretching the rules of what is appropriate subject matter for a list
> dedicated to the works of Thomas Pynchon, we also have the chemistry of
the
> offerings of an unmoderated list appearing on a moderated list. Will any
> good come of this?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Nabokov....?
>
> - --- s~Z <keithsz@concentric.net> wrote:
> > In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire to the Pynchon-L,
> stretching the rules of what is appropriate subject matter for a list
dedicated
> to the works of Thomas Pynchon, we also have the chemistry of the
offerings of
> an unmoderated list appearing on a moderated list. Will any good come of
this?
>
> The N-list moderator has also highlighted for his group "Mondegreen's"
post
> which described some of the major differences between the two lists,
concluding
> that this list is more "fun." A bold move...
>
> And the gem "Quail/Goose" comment also made it past his cuts (he has
decided to
> edit out the non-N posts, but missed that one). Truly a high point for
export
> to the N-list.
>
> DM
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: (Nabokov-free) Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .
>
> - --- davemarc <davemarc@[omitted]> wrote:
> > I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
>
> keith:
> >In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire
> >to the Pynchon-L
>
> Is that anything like "the magic of Hollywood"? If
> so, I've got two words for you: Pirates of the
> Caribbean.
>
> >Will any
> >good come of this?
>
> Not without an effort to use Pale Fire to illuminate
> Pynchon, instead of just continuing to rationalize a
> reading that doesn't care that most of the people here
> signed up to read about Pynchon.
>
> When the Nabokv-L folks start coming into Pynchon-L to
> take part in the discussion, instead of steadfastly
> ignoring it as they have done so far, maybe. I expect
> most of the useful insights that have and will
> originate on Pynchon-L can already be found in the
> Nabokv-L archives.
>
>
>
>
>
> previous - next - by thread - by date - by author
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:43:05 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors
>
> >If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> >and
> >Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> >distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> >discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> >afield
>
> Malin:
> >An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> >novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> >while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP
>
> Put this way, it does promise something interesting,
> although it remains to be seen if this group reading
> of Pale Fire will shed any special light on a reading
> of Pynchon. Nobody's even bothered to pluck out
> excerpts of those papers that are supposed to discuss
> both Pynchon and Nabokov, for example.
>
> Certainly, Malign hasn't offered anything to the Pale
> Fire reading that advances the understanding of
> Pynchon's work.
>
> By the way, didn't Nabokov, or his wife, say that they
> had no recollection of Pynchon as Nabokov's student?
> (Those old chestnuts do create the impression of
> substance in an otherwise watery casserole of muddled
> rationalizations, don't they.)
>
>
>
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "pynchonoid" <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> To: "Pynchon-L" <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors
>
>
> >
> > >If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> > >and
> > >Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> > >distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> > >discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> > >afield
> >
> > Malin:
> > >An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> > >novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> > >while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP
> >
> > Put this way, it does promise something interesting,
> > although it remains to be seen if this group reading
> > of Pale Fire will shed any special light on a reading
> > of Pynchon. Nobody's even bothered to pluck out
> > excerpts of those papers that are supposed to discuss
> > both Pynchon and Nabokov, for example.
> >
> > Certainly, Malign hasn't offered anything to the Pale
> > Fire reading that advances the understanding of
> > Pynchon's work.
> >
> > By the way, didn't Nabokov, or his wife, say that they
> > had no recollection of Pynchon as Nabokov's student?
> > (Those old chestnuts do create the impression of
> > substance in an otherwise watery casserole of muddled
> > rationalizations, don't they.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3388
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3388
>
> pynchon-l-digest Thursday, July 10 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3388
>
>> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:39:55 -0400
> From: "davemarc" <davemarc@panix.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_00A9_01C346D7.FBD8ACA0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> People keep referring, with varying degrees of accuracy, to my =
> suggestions regarding the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion. As I recall, I =
> tried to address two issues.
>
> One was the possibility that pynchon-l was not the best place for an =
> extensive Nabokov/Pale Fire-centered discussion. I suggested various =
> ways to cover Nabokov/Pale Fire without diverting the focus from this =
> list's raison d'etre. Options would include discussing the book on the =
> nabokov-list and reporting back, creating a new list (i.e. on =
> yahoogroups.com) for a discussion and reporting back, or using a kind of =
> essay format instead of the freewheeling format. In all cases, the =
> content of the posts could revolve around Pynchon/Nabokov/Pale Fire.
>
> The other issue had to do with the possibility that the traditional =
> pynchon-l reading routine might not be the best reading routine for Pale =
> Fire (or even Pynchon's books). Just because it's "always" been done one =
> way doesn't mean that it has to be done that way. My suggestions =
> included the essay format mentioned above.
>
> It seems to me that the people who thought that the suggestions were =
> worth looking into were not the people who organized the Nabokov/Pale =
> Fire discussion. Those organizers seem determined to go ahead with the =
> discussion with little or no interest in addressing the reasonable =
> concerns of other pynchon-l subscribers. I realize that can sound more =
> critical than I intend it to--I'm simply trying to describe how all of =
> this seems to have played out.=20
>
> I've been impressed by the quality of the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion =
> thus far, but I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking place =
> on pynchon-l. What continues to bug me is the rancor in posts from David =
> Morris, MalignD, pynchonoid, and slothenvypride. I've seen so much =
> better from all four of them. I suspect they're deluding themselves if =
> they think that abusing pynchon-l subscribers with their flames and =
> feuding puts them in a positive light.=20
>
> d.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:04:19 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: NPPF - Preliminary - Hazel
>
> Just dug these two out of the heap by my desk -- I guess they're general
> enough not to step on anybody's toes (by the way, thanks to all who've
> appreciated these preliminaries; I have tons of material on PF remaining,
> and await only the proper time to post it -- after the section-host has
had
> their hour):
>
> (from)
> Sir Walter Scott
> "The Lady of the Lake"
>
> The stag at eve had drunk his fill,
> Where danced the moon on Monan's rill,
> And deep his midnight lair had made
> In lone Glenartney's hazel shade....
>
> (all)
> Yeats
> "The Song of Wandering Aengus"
>
> I WENT out to the hazel wood,
> Because a fire was in my head,
> And cut and peeled a hazel wand,
> And hooked a berry to a thread;
> And when white moths were on the wing,
> And moth-like stars were flickering out,
> I dropped the berry in a stream
> And caught a little silver trout.
>
> When I had laid it on the floor
> I went to blow the fire a-flame,
> But something rustled on the floor,
> And someone called me by my name:
> It had become a glimmering girl
> With apple blossom in her hair
> Who called me by my name and ran
> And faded through the brightening air.
>
> Though I am old with wandering
> Through hollow lands and hilly lands,
> I will find out where she has gone,
> And kiss her lips and take her hands;
> And walk among long dappled grass,
> And pluck till time and times are done,
> The silver apples of the moon,
> The golden apples of the sun.
>
>
> akaHasperDidget
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Malignd <malignd@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors WAS VLVL2
epigraph
>
> <<If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> and
> Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> afield -- 9-11, war on Afghanistan and Iraq, erosion
> of civil liberties by the neofascist Bush
> Administration, etc. -- instead of shouting down such
> discussion (even when clearly proposed in a Pynchonian
> context) or bombing it with ad hominem attack as you
> two have done repeatedly, with help from three or four
> other screen-names, for a long time now. >>
>
> An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP, is
> in no way similar to the repeated, indeed endless,
> spamming of hysterical and unedited political cant to
> this list by the same single poster.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:09:58 -0400
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:10:13 -0400
> From: The Great Quail <quail@libyrinth.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> Sorry for being a posting fiend today!!!
>
> The pleasingly sane davemarc writes,
>
> > Options would include creating a new list (i.e. on yahoogroups.com) for
a
> >discussion
>
> I am not happy with either the N-List or the essay format, but for the
> record, I have no problems with creating a Pynchon sub-List for targeted
> non-Pynch readings. As I said previously, I'm worried it might drain away
> some vitality from the main List, but on the other hand, it would be a
more
> focused, less flamey place that might meet the needs of all parties.
>
> Though I don't want this to be interpreted as a suggestion....I just don't
> want to be a monkey-wrench in the gears of the P-List.
>
> - --Quail, who just started "The Recognitions." (Wheee!)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:11:33 +0100
> From: "Burns, Erik" <Erik.Burns@dowjones.com>
> Subject: re: lolita quote
>
> betsy yoon wrote:
>
> >Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that quote from Lolita that
> >occurrs after he sees her while pregnant, and he's driving off to
quilty's
> >house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes were to fade to myopic
> >fish and your breasts were to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would
> still
> >love you my lolita."? I am in a foreign country without access to this
> >crap and I'm trying to prove a point to some reslient people.
>
> you're pretty close!
>
> [..]even if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
> swell and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted
and
> torn≈even when I would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your
dear
> wan face, at the mere sound of your young raucous young voice, my Lolita.
> (Nabokov, 278)
>
> (dunno the edition here, i found the cite here:
> http://www.vestige.org/nabokov/lolita/personal.html)
>
> a bit more: (from here: http://www.captiondm.net/e-resumes/nabokov.html)
>
> "I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, this Lolita, pale and
> polluted, and bug with another▓s child, but still Carmencita, still
mine┘No
> matter if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
> swell and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate bra be tainted and
> torn┘, my Lolita."
>
> and even more: (from here:
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tanguay/book76.htm)
>
> "I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, this Lolita, pale and
> polluted, and big with another's child, but still gray-eyed, still
> sooty-lashed, still auburn and almond, still Carmencita, still mine;
> Changeons de vie, ma Carmen, allons vivre quelque part ou nous ne serons
> jamais separes; Ohio? The wilds of Massachusetts? No matter, even if those
> eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples swell and crack,
and
> her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted and torn--even then I
> would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your dear wan face, at
the
> ere sound of your raucous young voice, my Lolita."
>
> etb (who disnae have the boo' at hand)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Malignd <malignd@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Mason and Dixon as Characters (was NPPF -- Why care about
Kinbote?)
>
> <<We all have our aesthetic likes and dislikes -- why
> get all aggro about them?>>
>
> I'm not certain what getting all aggro is, which isn't
> to say I'm not so doing.
>
> The point was less about M&D and more to the depth of
> Kinbote as a character as compared to what I find are
> the thin characterizations typical of Pynchon (a
> judgement you may disagree with).
>
>
>
> __________________________________
>
> ------------------------------
> etb
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:30:36 -0400
> From: "Jasper Fidget" <jasper@hatguild.org>
> Subject: RE: lolita quote
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pynchon-l@waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l@waste.org] On
> > Behalf Of Burns, Erik
> > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:12 PM
> > To: pynchon-l@waste.org
> > Subject: re: lolita quote
> >
> > betsy yoon wrote:
> >
> > >Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that quote from Lolita that
> > >occurrs after he sees her while pregnant, and he's driving off to
> > quilty's
> > >house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes were to fade to
myopic
> > >fish and your breasts were to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would
> > still
> > >love you my lolita."? I am in a foreign country without access to
this
> > >crap and I'm trying to prove a point to some reslient people.
> >
> > you're pretty close!
> > [...]
>
> Here's a fatter one:
>
> "Somewhere beyond Bill's shack an afterwork radio had begun singing of
folly
> and fate, and there she was with her ruined looks and her adult,
rope-veined
> narrow hands and her goose-flesh white arms, and her shallow ears, and her
> unkempt arm-pits, there she was (my Lolita!), hopelessly worn at
seventeen,
> with that baby, dreaming already in her of becoming a big shot and
retiring
> around 2020 A.D. -- and I looked and looked at her, and knew as clearly as
I
> know I am to die, that I loved her more than anything I had ever seen or
> imagined on earth, or hoped for anywhere else. She was only the faint
> violet whiff and dead leaf echo of the nymphet I had rolled myself upon
with
> such cries in the past; an echo on the brink of a russet ravine, with a
far
> wood under a white sky, and brown leaves choking the brook, and one last
> cricket in the crisp weeds... but thank God it was not that echo alone
that
> I worshiped. What I used to pamper among the tangled vines of my heart,
> _mon grand pИchИ radieux_, had dwindled to its essence: sterile and
selfish
> vice, all _that_ I canceled and cursed. You may jeer at me, and threaten
to
> clear the court, but until I am gagged and half-throttled, I will shout my
> poor truth. I insist the world know how much I loved my Lolita, _this_
> Lolita, pale and polluted, and big with another's child, but still
> gray-eyed, still sooty-lashed, still auburn and almond, still Carmencita,
> still mine; _Changeons de vie, ma Carmen, allons vivre quelque part oЫ
nous
> ne serons jamais sИparИs; Ohio? The wilds of Massachusetts? No matter,
> even if those eyes of hers would fade to myopic fish, and her nipples
swell
> and crack, and her lovely young velvety delicate delta be tainted and torn
> - -- even then I would go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your
dear
> wan face, at the mere sound of your raucous young voice, my Lolita."
(Random
> House 277-278)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:31:27 +0300
> From: "Tsianides Costas" <tsianides@cytanet.com.cy>
> Subject: Test
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:50:23 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Kevin Troy <kevin@useless.net>
> Subject: mail formats (WAS P vs N lists)
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, pynchon-l-digest wrote:
> > From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> > Subject: P VS N Lists
> > > > --- Mondegreen <gwf@greenworldcenter.org> wrote:
> > > > > The Nabokov forum has a dress code. Being moderated, it has no
flames,
> > > > > [...]
> >
> > I agree with your assessment above. Also, I hate the formatting of the
posts
> > as they arrive in the form of "forwards" through the mailbox of the
moderator,
> > full of ">"'s preceding every line, making the posts nearly unreadable.
Just
> > try reading the archives and you'll see what I mean.
> >
> > David Morris
>
> On that point, I humbly ask those p-listers who use GUI e-mail clients
> (Outlook, AOL, yahoo and other web services) to disable HTML formatting
> when posting to pynchon-l. Doing so would make reading the digest version
> of the list (which is what what Dr. Johnson is forwarding to NABOKV-L)
> much easier. A-and you don't need to worry about hyperlinks: most modern
> e-mail clients will automatically activate URLs, even if the message
> received was not HTML-formatted.
>
> Example of how to do this, using MS Outlook: go to the Tools menu, select
> options, then go to the "mail format tab," then use the drop-down menu to
> choose "plain text" as your mail format.
>
> Questions about mail formats and their relation to informational entropy
> should be directed to your potsmaster.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin T.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?
>
> - --- davemarc <davemarc@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've been impressed by the quality of the Nabokov/Pale Fire discussion
thus
> far, but I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking place on
> pynchon-l.
>
> It's very simple:
>
> 1. A good number of Pynchon fans onn the P-list are interested in reading
Pale
> Fire.
>
> 2. Pynchon's taking a LONG time comming forward with his next book.
>
> 3. It was not very long ago that we did a VLVL (and where's your name on
that
> sign-up list?).
>
> 4. We did not decide to take your all-knowing advice.
>
> 5. You have a delete button.
>
> David Morris
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:16:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dave Monroe <monrovius@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: lolita quote
>
> http://textz.gnutenberg.net/textz/nabokov_vladimir_lolita.tmp
>
> - --- Betsy Yoon <qwpoi@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have (or know where I can find) that
> > quote from Lolita that occurrs after he sees her
> > while pregnant, and he's driving off to quilty's
> > house, and he's like 'oh lolita, even if your eyes
> > were to fade to myopic fish and your breasts were
> > to sag and your delta torn and etc. I would still
> > love you my lolita."? ...
>
> __________________________________
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:32:15 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Nabokov....?
>
> In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire to the Pynchon-L,
> stretching the rules of what is appropriate subject matter for a list
> dedicated to the works of Thomas Pynchon, we also have the chemistry of
the
> offerings of an unmoderated list appearing on a moderated list. Will any
> good come of this?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Morris <fqmorris@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Nabokov....?
>
> - --- s~Z <keithsz@concentric.net> wrote:
> > In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire to the Pynchon-L,
> stretching the rules of what is appropriate subject matter for a list
dedicated
> to the works of Thomas Pynchon, we also have the chemistry of the
offerings of
> an unmoderated list appearing on a moderated list. Will any good come of
this?
>
> The N-list moderator has also highlighted for his group "Mondegreen's"
post
> which described some of the major differences between the two lists,
concluding
> that this list is more "fun." A bold move...
>
> And the gem "Quail/Goose" comment also made it past his cuts (he has
decided to
> edit out the non-N posts, but missed that one). Truly a high point for
export
> to the N-list.
>
> DM
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: (Nabokov-free) Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .
>
> - --- davemarc <davemarc@[omitted]> wrote:
> > I'm still puzzled as to why the discussion is taking
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon....?
>
> keith:
> >In addition to the alchemy of introducing Pale Fire
> >to the Pynchon-L
>
> Is that anything like "the magic of Hollywood"? If
> so, I've got two words for you: Pirates of the
> Caribbean.
>
> >Will any
> >good come of this?
>
> Not without an effort to use Pale Fire to illuminate
> Pynchon, instead of just continuing to rationalize a
> reading that doesn't care that most of the people here
> signed up to read about Pynchon.
>
> When the Nabokv-L folks start coming into Pynchon-L to
> take part in the discussion, instead of steadfastly
> ignoring it as they have done so far, maybe. I expect
> most of the useful insights that have and will
> originate on Pynchon-L can already be found in the
> Nabokv-L archives.
>
>
>
>
>
> previous - next - by thread - by date - by author
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:43:05 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors
>
> >If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> >and
> >Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> >distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> >discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> >afield
>
> Malin:
> >An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> >novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> >while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP
>
> Put this way, it does promise something interesting,
> although it remains to be seen if this group reading
> of Pale Fire will shed any special light on a reading
> of Pynchon. Nobody's even bothered to pluck out
> excerpts of those papers that are supposed to discuss
> both Pynchon and Nabokov, for example.
>
> Certainly, Malign hasn't offered anything to the Pale
> Fire reading that advances the understanding of
> Pynchon's work.
>
> By the way, didn't Nabokov, or his wife, say that they
> had no recollection of Pynchon as Nabokov's student?
> (Those old chestnuts do create the impression of
> substance in an otherwise watery casserole of muddled
> rationalizations, don't they.)
>
>
>
>
> =====
> <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
>
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "pynchonoid" <pynchonoid@yahoo.com>
> To: "Pynchon-L" <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: (Nabokov-free) P-list hypocrites' true colors
>
>
> >
> > >If we accept the criteria proposed here by Malign
> > >and
> > >Big Bird (assuming for the moment that they are
> > >distinct individuals), then obviously it's OK to
> > >discuss Pynchon's politics, or to wander farther
> > >afield
> >
> > Malin:
> > >An organized reading by a number of list members of a
> > >novel by another writer, one who taught at Cornell
> > >while TP was there and may, indeed, have taught TP
> >
> > Put this way, it does promise something interesting,
> > although it remains to be seen if this group reading
> > of Pale Fire will shed any special light on a reading
> > of Pynchon. Nobody's even bothered to pluck out
> > excerpts of those papers that are supposed to discuss
> > both Pynchon and Nabokov, for example.
> >
> > Certainly, Malign hasn't offered anything to the Pale
> > Fire reading that advances the understanding of
> > Pynchon's work.
> >
> > By the way, didn't Nabokov, or his wife, say that they
> > had no recollection of Pynchon as Nabokov's student?
> > (Those old chestnuts do create the impression of
> > substance in an otherwise watery casserole of muddled
> > rationalizations, don't they.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > <http://www.pynchonoid.org/>
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
> End of pynchon-l-digest V2 #3388
> ********************************
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.