Boycott the Pale Fire discussion

[Eulenspiegel7646 at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/9/2003 9:36:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
quail at libyrinth.com writes:


> To believe that we have to labor to make arbitrary connections to
> Pynchon in order to please a vocal minority is misguided. 



The "minority" might be vocal, but the vast majority are just boycotting the 
PF reading, which, I reiterate, does not belong on this list.  Those saying 
there is no need to relate the PF reading to Pynchon are wrong, just like 
Republicans who insist that the missing WMDs have no bearing on the invasion & 
destruction of Iraq.
If you can't make a case for the relevance of a work by Nabokov being 
formally read & discussed on this Pynchon-list, beyond the possibility that the young 
Tom Pynchon may or may not have audited or taken his class at Cornell (which, 
in itself, does not rate a reading), you do not have a case for a reading of 
PF.
I maintain that there is no reason to have a formal discussion of Pale Fire 
on the Pynchon List.  I remember a few years ago, some twits wanted to have a 
reading & discussion of Something by David Foster Wallace.  It died a deserved 
death.  
There is a Nabokov List.  It is a moderated list.  What a shame!  Maybe the 
lack of opportunity to flame someone who disagrees with them is too hard for 
them to bear.  If they really are interested in Pale Fire, let them go to the 
Nabokov List.  No, they are only interested in having their little circle-jerk.
Go to it!  I for one will take no part in this folly.  I enjoy using my 
delete key.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20030711/77bb6a0f/attachment.html>