NABOKV-L post 0002375, Tue, 23 Sep 1997 12:25:25 -0700

Subject
NYTimes OnLyne (fwd)
Date
Body
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 15:20:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: NABOKV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu
Subject: NYTimes OnLyne

From: ValSyl@aol.com

Thanks to Galya for posting Celestine Bohlen's piece on the European release
of Lyne's LO (and its conspicuous American non-release).

While there is something inherently preposterous about hearing the
director of such dreadful, venal trash as "Fatal Attraction" wax indignant
about the suppression of artistic expression, there is also truth to Lyne's
accusations. Of course Hollywood is filled with cowards. But then, what
else is new?
What is new, insidious, and frightening is the apparent censorial equation
between LO and violent crimes against children. What Humbert's mad love has
to do with slashers from Belgium or Biloxi is beyond me. God knows, in
contemporary America a young woman in Lolita's position would probably just
get a shotgun from the local Wal-Mart and blow Humbert's supplicating head
off -- and furthermore, she'd go scot-free, be hailed as a heroine and
"survivor", and no doubt have her own book ghostwritten. Film this, and
you'll have distributors beating down the door, and critics blathering about
"empowerment."
But you wouldn't have Nabokov. You'd have a murderer walking the streets.
After all, Humbert pays for his crimes with his life, like any forties
antihero. So whose universe is more amoral?

Anyone who can get me a samizdat video, email me, please.
Sylvia
Sylvia Weiser Wendel