Subject
Re: VN vs. Freud (fwd)
From
Date
Body
From: Ellen Pifer <epifer@odin.english.udel.edu>
Do you mean Ermarth's essay? See:
Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth, "Conspicuous Construction; or, Kristeva,
Nabokov, and the Anti-Realist Critique," *Novel* 21, 2 & 3 (Winter/Spring
1983): 330-39.
Ellen Pifer
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Galya Diment wrote:
> From: "Dustin C. Pascoe" <dcpasc0@pop.uky.edu>
>
> I don't know what Tim means by "recent," but anyone interested in VN and
> Lacan should probably look at Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth's work on Lacan and
> Kristeva (the title of which escapes me now, but it should be easy enough to
> find). Good luck.
>
> Dustin C. Pascoe
>
>
> >Now, my question. What work has been done recently with Nabokov and Lacan
> >(who, for me, "fixed" much of the problems I've had with Freud)? Is the
> >Lacanian algebra too reductionist as well? And, what the heck, is there
> >anything with Lyotard? It would be nice if I could combine my age-old love
> >of Nabokov with my new-found (though admittedly dated) interest in theory.
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
> >
> >Tim Richardson
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Do you mean Ermarth's essay? See:
Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth, "Conspicuous Construction; or, Kristeva,
Nabokov, and the Anti-Realist Critique," *Novel* 21, 2 & 3 (Winter/Spring
1983): 330-39.
Ellen Pifer
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Galya Diment wrote:
> From: "Dustin C. Pascoe" <dcpasc0@pop.uky.edu>
>
> I don't know what Tim means by "recent," but anyone interested in VN and
> Lacan should probably look at Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth's work on Lacan and
> Kristeva (the title of which escapes me now, but it should be easy enough to
> find). Good luck.
>
> Dustin C. Pascoe
>
>
> >Now, my question. What work has been done recently with Nabokov and Lacan
> >(who, for me, "fixed" much of the problems I've had with Freud)? Is the
> >Lacanian algebra too reductionist as well? And, what the heck, is there
> >anything with Lyotard? It would be nice if I could combine my age-old love
> >of Nabokov with my new-found (though admittedly dated) interest in theory.
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
> >
> >Tim Richardson
> >
> >
> >
> >
>