Subject
Fw: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3520 Pale Fire
From
Date
Body
----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchon-l-digest" <owner-pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
To: <pynchon-l-digest@waste.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 11:51 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3520
>
> pynchon-l-digest Sunday, August 31 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3520
>
>
>
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 21:48:16 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> Thanks for these, Jasper.
>
>
> > pg. 100
> > "Chicago where I interrupted for a couple of days my automobile journey
> from
> > New Wye to Cedarn"
> >
> > Reinforces the assumption of Cedarn's location, that it is at least west
> of
> > Chicago.
>
> Also suggests Kinbote has an acquaintance (the obituary "was shown to me")
> in Chicago.
>
> >
> > pg. 101
> > "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun on
> my
> > table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >
> > Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be in
it
> > for the money?
>
> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that "all
> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I think
> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
>
>
> >
> > pg. 101
> > From Professor Hurley's "Appreciation of John Shade": "Just before our
> > poet's untimely death he seems to have been working on an
autobiographical
> > poem."
> >
> > What if this quote from Prof H. were the only reference to the poem that
> > Kinbote had ever seen? What if he wrote his own poem and passed it off
as
> > Shade's, along with a commentary, in order to profit from the poet's
> death?
>
> This is a possibility but seems like a very remote one. Wouldn't it
require
> Sybil's collusion to pull off such a fraud? And I can't think of anything
in
> the text that points in that direction. (Of course not! Just shows how
well
> Charlie covered his tracks, right?)
>
> Don
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:06:28 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
> Well, hell, I guess we're just going to have to resign ourselves to
agreeing
> on this. The only thing I would take issue with is that "pretty soon, it
> becomes clear that the strands won't ever unravel" part. For me this novel
> has a lasting, tantalizing appeal, and part of that is a matter of
clinging
> to the (probably forlorn) hope that it can all be sorted out. Another more
> realistic part of it is a respect for the mind and generous sensibility
that
> created this literary playground for us.
>
> Don
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 6:58 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
>
> >
> > >> It's also possible that the two incidents (bird into window, plane
into
> > >> scaffolding) actually happened (in terms of the fiction), that the
> > >> similarities between them are superficial and coincidental, and that
> the
> > >> account of each was independent of the other, or that the detailed
> > >> recollection/significance of the one was jogged by the oral/written
> > > recount
> > >> of the other.
> > >>
> > >> Call this the Nabokovian authorship theory.
> > >
> > > Certainly. But if that is true of all of the consonances between
Shade's
> > > life and Kinbote's, and Shade's poem and Kinbote's Commentary--and I
> realize
> > > that you didn't suggest that it was--then the intricacy and complexity
> of
> > > the coincidence and happenstance is pretty spectaclar, isn't it? But
not
> > > terribly interesting.
> > >
> > > I believe the book invites the reader to make connections and to
indulge
> the
> > > human impulse to create order and sense.
> >
> > Sure. But by "the book" you actually mean Nabokov. And as the composer
of
> > the text he not only "invites" this activity on the part of the reader,
he
> > satirises it (through his characterisation of Kinbote), and in fact has
> > rendered the task of creating ultimate "order and sense" impossible.
> >
> > The thing that strikes me about _Pale Fire_ is that, yes, we're invited
> to,
> > and, yes, we *do* end up wondering whether Kinbote fabricated this or
> that,
> > whether Kinbote or Shade or another character made everything and
everyone
> > else up, whether one or another event or character or reminiscence is
> "true"
> > or "fictional", and so forth, when in fact it's *all* a fiction, and the
> > questions about authorship and identity -- about what's "fact" and what
> > isn't -- are components of a larger literary construction, and they are
> > questions and coincidences and contradictions which Nabokov has
> deliberately
> > created. And, that he has deliberately created these hints and leads and
> cul
> > de sacs in such a way that there is no ultimate solution to the
questions
> we
> > are being invited to consider about all these connections and
coincidences
> > and consonances. (I actually find that pretty interesting. But I realise
> > that mileage will vary.)
> >
> > > It's impossible to resist trying to
> > > unravel the strands.
> >
> > Pretty soon it becomes clear that the strands won't ever unravel in a
neat
> > way, however. But I agree it can be fun, a bit like trying to put
together
> a
> > jigsaw puzzle where there are too many pieces.
> >
> > best
> >
> > > It's probably also impossible to achieve a Unified
> > > Theory that everybody is going to find satisfactory, but it's fun
> trying.
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 12:34:37 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
>
> >> pg. 101
> >> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
on
> > my
> >> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >>
> >> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be in
it
> >> for the money?
> >
> > He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that "all
> > profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
think
> > he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> > Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
>
> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil because
> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous paragraph
> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not the
> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and yet
> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
through
> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). His final remark in that
> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through the
> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names derived
> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at Hurley.
>
> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
comprised
> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> professional jealousies and paranoias.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:38:14 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
> > I'm informed by Dr. Johnson (of the Nabokov-L) that VN often uses the
> "uran"
> > root in regard to homosexuality, which is common in Russian. Therefore,
> > with "grad" meaning "town," Uranograd means "Gay-town."
> >
> > I was wondering about Kinbote's phrasing there: "dubbing *my* capital
> > Uranograd" (emphasis mine) instead of *the* capital or Onhava. It helps
> to
> > resolve a question I've had regarding Zembla and homosexuality, whether
> it's
> > the norm there or just normal for Charles. This would imply that the
> latter
> > is the case, and that other locals have taken note (assuming
> Amphitheatricus
> > is local to the Zemblan narrative column).
> >
> > Jasper
>
> The "my capital" usage seems to me to be Kinbote lapsing into his Charles
II
> persona. But I think Kinbote's take on Zembla as a kind of YMCA of the
> Baltic represents his own preoccupation. The "ribald ballad about
> 'Karlie-Garlie'" also suggests the general population is aware of the
> then-prince's sexual orientation, and doesn't share it.
>
> Don
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:00:37 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> His final remark in that
> > paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> > Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through the
> > whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names derived
> > from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
Hurley.
>
> I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his own
> reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it, like a
> dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich, Botkin might change into
> something else, too.
>
> > I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> comprised
> > of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> > professional jealousies and paranoias.
>
> This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just professional
> jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
>
> Don
>
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
>
> > on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> >
> > >> pg. 101
> > >> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
> on
> > > my
> > >> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> > >>
> > >> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be
in
> it
> > >> for the money?
> > >
> > > He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
"all
> > > profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> think
> > > he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> > > Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> >
> > I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> > possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
because
> > they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
paragraph
> > saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not
the
> > place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
yet
> > that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> through
> > the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> > best
> >
> >
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 20:36:07 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> >>>I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
own
> reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it, like a
> dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich, Botkin might change into
> something else, too.<<<
>
> How versipellian.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 14:20:51 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> >> His final remark in that
> >> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> >> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through
the
> >> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names
derived
> >> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
Hurley.
> >
> > I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
own
> > reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it,
>
> Yes. I think it is the first time Nabokov has Kinbote drop the name
> "Botkin", though it (or he) gets two or three more mentions, and it's
> included in the Glossary. When the name of "Botkin" is dropped,
particularly
> later on, it seems as if Kinbote is self-consciously nurturing those
> ambiguities which surround him, or it.
>
> Note also that Kinbote had supposedly written a "remarkable book of
> surnames", with a 1956 English translation (note to line 894).
>
> > like a
> > dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> > of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich,
>
> Kinbote's point is that both Lukin and Lukasevich derive from "Luke" --
the
> "Christian name" -- and he uses this fact, and the fact that Hurley "does
> not know" (does not mention it in the obituary, and why would he have?) as
a
> pretext to talk about the way a "live and personal hereditary patronymic
> grows", and thus as an excuse to provide another list of names which
derive
> from "professions", all in order to get in that last little dig at Hurley.
>
> It might be worthwhile checking out a possible connection with the
Biblical
> Luke, or his Gospel, but I think Kinbote's just being a bitch.
>
> best
>
>
> > Botkin might change into
> > something else, too.
> >
> >> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> > comprised
> >> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> >> professional jealousies and paranoias.
> >
> > This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just
professional
> > jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> > fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
> >
> > Don
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> > To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
> >
> >
> >> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> >>
> >>>> pg. 101
> >>>> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
> > on
> >>> my
> >>>> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >>>>
> >>>> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be
in
> > it
> >>>> for the money?
> >>>
> >>> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
"all
> >>> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> > think
> >>> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> >>> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> >>
> >> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> >> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
because
> >> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
paragraph
> >> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not
the
> >> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
yet
> >> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> > through
> >> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> >> best
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:09:22 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> as a
> > pretext to talk about the way a "live and personal hereditary patronymic
> > grows", and thus as an excuse to provide another list of names which
> derive
> > from "professions", all in order to get in that last little dig at
Hurley.
>
> The inclusion of Botkin in a list of names where it doesn't really fit
> (three writers--four counting Luke--and a shoemaker) is a way of pointing
at
> the name. Nabokov does this now and then, makes an odd intrusion or has
one
> of his characters say we shouldn't concern ourselves with X, which is
> usually a clear signal that we should check X out very carefully.
>
> And the paragraph is about how names change. The author of the book has
> pointed to a particular name, which is very similar to the name of a
> character whose identity is a bit vaporous, in the middle of a discussion
of
> how names grow, "sometimes in fantastic shapes."
>
> This is Nabokov rising pretty close to the surface, giving us information
we
> need to know in order to go where his novel wants to take us. Eventually
we
> will use it, in combination with other morsels, to form the understanding
> that Kinbote is a name that has been assumed by one V. Botkin.
>
> The Hurley joke is a nice little button for the paragraph, but I can't
agree
> with you that it's the only or even most important thing going on here.
>
> Don
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 12:20 AM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
>
> > >> His final remark in that
> > >> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> > >> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through
> the
> > >> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names
> derived
> > >> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
> Hurley.
> > >
> > > I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
> own
> > > reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it,
> >
> > Yes. I think it is the first time Nabokov has Kinbote drop the name
> > "Botkin", though it (or he) gets two or three more mentions, and it's
> > included in the Glossary. When the name of "Botkin" is dropped,
> particularly
> > later on, it seems as if Kinbote is self-consciously nurturing those
> > ambiguities which surround him, or it.
> >
> > Note also that Kinbote had supposedly written a "remarkable book of
> > surnames", with a 1956 English translation (note to line 894).
> >
> > > like a
> > > dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
> malleability
> > > of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich,
> >
> > Kinbote's point is that both Lukin and Lukasevich derive from "Luke" --
> the
> > "Christian name" -- and he uses this fact, and the fact that Hurley
"does
> > not know" (does not mention it in the obituary, and why would he have?)
>
> > It might be worthwhile checking out a possible connection with the
> Biblical
> > Luke, or his Gospel, but I think Kinbote's just being a bitch.
> >
> > best
> >
> >
> > > Botkin might change into
> > > something else, too.
> > >
> > >> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> > > comprised
> > >> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from
Kinbote's
> > >> professional jealousies and paranoias.
> > >
> > > This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just
> professional
> > > jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> > > fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
> > >
> > > Don
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> > > To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> > > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> > > Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
> > >
> > >
> > >> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>> pg. 101
> > >>>> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the
sun
> > > on
> > >>> my
> > >>>> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote
be
> in
> > > it
> > >>>> for the money?
> > >>>
> > >>> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
> "all
> > >>> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> > > think
> > >>> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem
and
> > >>> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> > >>
> > >> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> > >> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
> because
> > >> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
> paragraph
> > >> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is
not
> the
> > >> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
> yet
> > >> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> > > through
> > >> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> > >> best
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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: Saturday, August 30, 2003 11:51 PM
Subject: pynchon-l-digest V2 #3520
>
> pynchon-l-digest Sunday, August 31 2003 Volume 02 : Number
3520
>
>
>
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 21:48:16 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> Thanks for these, Jasper.
>
>
> > pg. 100
> > "Chicago where I interrupted for a couple of days my automobile journey
> from
> > New Wye to Cedarn"
> >
> > Reinforces the assumption of Cedarn's location, that it is at least west
> of
> > Chicago.
>
> Also suggests Kinbote has an acquaintance (the obituary "was shown to me")
> in Chicago.
>
> >
> > pg. 101
> > "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun on
> my
> > table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >
> > Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be in
it
> > for the money?
>
> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that "all
> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I think
> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
>
>
> >
> > pg. 101
> > From Professor Hurley's "Appreciation of John Shade": "Just before our
> > poet's untimely death he seems to have been working on an
autobiographical
> > poem."
> >
> > What if this quote from Prof H. were the only reference to the poem that
> > Kinbote had ever seen? What if he wrote his own poem and passed it off
as
> > Shade's, along with a commentary, in order to profit from the poet's
> death?
>
> This is a possibility but seems like a very remote one. Wouldn't it
require
> Sybil's collusion to pull off such a fraud? And I can't think of anything
in
> the text that points in that direction. (Of course not! Just shows how
well
> Charlie covered his tracks, right?)
>
> Don
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:06:28 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
> Well, hell, I guess we're just going to have to resign ourselves to
agreeing
> on this. The only thing I would take issue with is that "pretty soon, it
> becomes clear that the strands won't ever unravel" part. For me this novel
> has a lasting, tantalizing appeal, and part of that is a matter of
clinging
> to the (probably forlorn) hope that it can all be sorted out. Another more
> realistic part of it is a respect for the mind and generous sensibility
that
> created this literary playground for us.
>
> Don
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 6:58 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
>
> >
> > >> It's also possible that the two incidents (bird into window, plane
into
> > >> scaffolding) actually happened (in terms of the fiction), that the
> > >> similarities between them are superficial and coincidental, and that
> the
> > >> account of each was independent of the other, or that the detailed
> > >> recollection/significance of the one was jogged by the oral/written
> > > recount
> > >> of the other.
> > >>
> > >> Call this the Nabokovian authorship theory.
> > >
> > > Certainly. But if that is true of all of the consonances between
Shade's
> > > life and Kinbote's, and Shade's poem and Kinbote's Commentary--and I
> realize
> > > that you didn't suggest that it was--then the intricacy and complexity
> of
> > > the coincidence and happenstance is pretty spectaclar, isn't it? But
not
> > > terribly interesting.
> > >
> > > I believe the book invites the reader to make connections and to
indulge
> the
> > > human impulse to create order and sense.
> >
> > Sure. But by "the book" you actually mean Nabokov. And as the composer
of
> > the text he not only "invites" this activity on the part of the reader,
he
> > satirises it (through his characterisation of Kinbote), and in fact has
> > rendered the task of creating ultimate "order and sense" impossible.
> >
> > The thing that strikes me about _Pale Fire_ is that, yes, we're invited
> to,
> > and, yes, we *do* end up wondering whether Kinbote fabricated this or
> that,
> > whether Kinbote or Shade or another character made everything and
everyone
> > else up, whether one or another event or character or reminiscence is
> "true"
> > or "fictional", and so forth, when in fact it's *all* a fiction, and the
> > questions about authorship and identity -- about what's "fact" and what
> > isn't -- are components of a larger literary construction, and they are
> > questions and coincidences and contradictions which Nabokov has
> deliberately
> > created. And, that he has deliberately created these hints and leads and
> cul
> > de sacs in such a way that there is no ultimate solution to the
questions
> we
> > are being invited to consider about all these connections and
coincidences
> > and consonances. (I actually find that pretty interesting. But I realise
> > that mileage will vary.)
> >
> > > It's impossible to resist trying to
> > > unravel the strands.
> >
> > Pretty soon it becomes clear that the strands won't ever unravel in a
neat
> > way, however. But I agree it can be fun, a bit like trying to put
together
> a
> > jigsaw puzzle where there are too many pieces.
> >
> > best
> >
> > > It's probably also impossible to achieve a Unified
> > > Theory that everybody is going to find satisfactory, but it's fun
> trying.
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 12:34:37 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
>
> >> pg. 101
> >> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
on
> > my
> >> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >>
> >> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be in
it
> >> for the money?
> >
> > He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that "all
> > profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
think
> > he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> > Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
>
> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil because
> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous paragraph
> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not the
> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and yet
> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
through
> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). His final remark in that
> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through the
> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names derived
> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at Hurley.
>
> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
comprised
> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> professional jealousies and paranoias.
>
> best
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:38:14 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm2: Parents, part 2
>
> > I'm informed by Dr. Johnson (of the Nabokov-L) that VN often uses the
> "uran"
> > root in regard to homosexuality, which is common in Russian. Therefore,
> > with "grad" meaning "town," Uranograd means "Gay-town."
> >
> > I was wondering about Kinbote's phrasing there: "dubbing *my* capital
> > Uranograd" (emphasis mine) instead of *the* capital or Onhava. It helps
> to
> > resolve a question I've had regarding Zembla and homosexuality, whether
> it's
> > the norm there or just normal for Charles. This would imply that the
> latter
> > is the case, and that other locals have taken note (assuming
> Amphitheatricus
> > is local to the Zemblan narrative column).
> >
> > Jasper
>
> The "my capital" usage seems to me to be Kinbote lapsing into his Charles
II
> persona. But I think Kinbote's take on Zembla as a kind of YMCA of the
> Baltic represents his own preoccupation. The "ribald ballad about
> 'Karlie-Garlie'" also suggests the general population is aware of the
> then-prince's sexual orientation, and doesn't share it.
>
> Don
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:00:37 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> His final remark in that
> > paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> > Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through the
> > whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names derived
> > from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
Hurley.
>
> I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his own
> reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it, like a
> dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich, Botkin might change into
> something else, too.
>
> > I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> comprised
> > of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> > professional jealousies and paranoias.
>
> This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just professional
> jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
>
> Don
>
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
>
> > on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> >
> > >> pg. 101
> > >> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
> on
> > > my
> > >> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> > >>
> > >> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be
in
> it
> > >> for the money?
> > >
> > > He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
"all
> > > profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> think
> > > he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> > > Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> >
> > I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> > possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
because
> > they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
paragraph
> > saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not
the
> > place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
yet
> > that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> through
> > the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> > best
> >
> >
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 20:36:07 -0700
> From: "s~Z" <keithsz@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> >>>I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
own
> reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it, like a
> dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich, Botkin might change into
> something else, too.<<<
>
> How versipellian.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 14:20:51 +1000
> From: jbor <jbor@bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> >> His final remark in that
> >> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> >> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through
the
> >> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names
derived
> >> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
Hurley.
> >
> > I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
own
> > reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it,
>
> Yes. I think it is the first time Nabokov has Kinbote drop the name
> "Botkin", though it (or he) gets two or three more mentions, and it's
> included in the Glossary. When the name of "Botkin" is dropped,
particularly
> later on, it seems as if Kinbote is self-consciously nurturing those
> ambiguities which surround him, or it.
>
> Note also that Kinbote had supposedly written a "remarkable book of
> surnames", with a 1956 English translation (note to line 894).
>
> > like a
> > dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
malleability
> > of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich,
>
> Kinbote's point is that both Lukin and Lukasevich derive from "Luke" --
the
> "Christian name" -- and he uses this fact, and the fact that Hurley "does
> not know" (does not mention it in the obituary, and why would he have?) as
a
> pretext to talk about the way a "live and personal hereditary patronymic
> grows", and thus as an excuse to provide another list of names which
derive
> from "professions", all in order to get in that last little dig at Hurley.
>
> It might be worthwhile checking out a possible connection with the
Biblical
> Luke, or his Gospel, but I think Kinbote's just being a bitch.
>
> best
>
>
> > Botkin might change into
> > something else, too.
> >
> >> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> > comprised
> >> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from Kinbote's
> >> professional jealousies and paranoias.
> >
> > This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just
professional
> > jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> > fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
> >
> > Don
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> > To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
> >
> >
> >> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> >>
> >>>> pg. 101
> >>>> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the sun
> > on
> >>> my
> >>>> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> >>>>
> >>>> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote be
in
> > it
> >>>> for the money?
> >>>
> >>> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
"all
> >>> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> > think
> >>> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem and
> >>> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> >>
> >> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> >> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
because
> >> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
paragraph
> >> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is not
the
> >> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
yet
> >> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> > through
> >> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> >> best
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:09:22 -0400
> From: "Don Corathers" <gumbo@fuse.net>
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
> as a
> > pretext to talk about the way a "live and personal hereditary patronymic
> > grows", and thus as an excuse to provide another list of names which
> derive
> > from "professions", all in order to get in that last little dig at
Hurley.
>
> The inclusion of Botkin in a list of names where it doesn't really fit
> (three writers--four counting Luke--and a shoemaker) is a way of pointing
at
> the name. Nabokov does this now and then, makes an odd intrusion or has
one
> of his characters say we shouldn't concern ourselves with X, which is
> usually a clear signal that we should check X out very carefully.
>
> And the paragraph is about how names change. The author of the book has
> pointed to a particular name, which is very similar to the name of a
> character whose identity is a bit vaporous, in the middle of a discussion
of
> how names grow, "sometimes in fantastic shapes."
>
> This is Nabokov rising pretty close to the surface, giving us information
we
> need to know in order to go where his novel wants to take us. Eventually
we
> will use it, in combination with other morsels, to form the understanding
> that Kinbote is a name that has been assumed by one V. Botkin.
>
> The Hurley joke is a nice little button for the paragraph, but I can't
agree
> with you that it's the only or even most important thing going on here.
>
> Don
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 12:20 AM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
>
>
> > >> His final remark in that
> > >> paragraph about a "'hurley-house'" is another thinly-veiled attack on
> > >> Professor Hurley, and it seems to me that the reason he goes through
> the
> > >> whole Lukin etymology thing, and then into the the list of names
> derived
> > >> from various professions, is just to set up this ad hominem dig at
> Hurley.
> > >
> > > I think this is partly true, although Nabokov the uber-author had his
> own
> > > reason for the surname exercise: to plant the name Botkin in it,
> >
> > Yes. I think it is the first time Nabokov has Kinbote drop the name
> > "Botkin", though it (or he) gets two or three more mentions, and it's
> > included in the Glossary. When the name of "Botkin" is dropped,
> particularly
> > later on, it seems as if Kinbote is self-consciously nurturing those
> > ambiguities which surround him, or it.
> >
> > Note also that Kinbote had supposedly written a "remarkable book of
> > surnames", with a 1956 English translation (note to line 894).
> >
> > > like a
> > > dandelion in a pot of impatiens, in a context that suggests the
> malleability
> > > of names. If Lukin can become Lukashevich,
> >
> > Kinbote's point is that both Lukin and Lukasevich derive from "Luke" --
> the
> > "Christian name" -- and he uses this fact, and the fact that Hurley
"does
> > not know" (does not mention it in the obituary, and why would he have?)
>
> > It might be worthwhile checking out a possible connection with the
> Biblical
> > Luke, or his Gospel, but I think Kinbote's just being a bitch.
> >
> > best
> >
> >
> > > Botkin might change into
> > > something else, too.
> > >
> > >> I think there might be scope for another pile or sub-pile which is
> > > comprised
> > >> of those narrative and expository elements which derive from
Kinbote's
> > >> professional jealousies and paranoias.
> > >
> > > This would be an entertaining stack. I would include not just
> professional
> > > jealousies but also material that grows out of personal affronts: the
> > > fascinating Gerald Emerald strand comes to mind.
> > >
> > > Don
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "jbor" <jbor@bigpond.com>
> > > To: <pynchon-l@waste.org>
> > > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:34 PM
> > > Subject: Re: NPPF Comm 2: Parents: some notes
> > >
> > >
> > >> on 31/8/03 11:48 AM, Don Corathers at gumbo@fuse.net wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>> pg. 101
> > >>>> "the neatly stacked batches of [Pale Fire index cards] lie in the
sun
> > > on
> > >>> my
> > >>>> table as so many ingots of fabulous metal"
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Prompts a question that I don't recall being asked: could Kinbote
be
> in
> > > it
> > >>>> for the money?
> > >>>
> > >>> He says in the foreword that his contract with Sybil provides that
> "all
> > >>> profits, except the publisher's percentage, would accrue to her." I
> > > think
> > >>> he's just drawing a contrast between how highly he values the poem
and
> > >>> Hurley's dismissive mention of it.
> > >>
> > >> I think he's also gloating about the fact that he's the one who has
> > >> possession of the poem, thumbing his nose at both Hurley and Sybil
> because
> > >> they don't have it. Note also the way he starts off the previous
> paragraph
> > >> saying that a "Commentary where placid scholarship should reign is
not
> the
> > >> place for blasting the preposterous defects" of Hurley's article, and
> yet
> > >> that's exactly what he's doing right there in the sentence (and all
> > > through
> > >> the first three paragraphs of the note in fact). >
> > >> best
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to waste@waste.org
> with "unsubscribe pynchon-l-digest" in the message body.