NPPF -- no need to relate to Pynchon . . . .?

[s~Z]

Reasons to have an extended Nabokov-centered discussion elsewhere:

1. This is a Pynchon-centered discussion, not a Nabokov-centered one.

The discussion has already related to Pynchon and will continue to do so.
That some will say it doesn't relate 'enough' to Pynchon is inevitable, but
there is much enthusiasm in the discussion thus far, and it is breathing
fresh life and topics into our interactions here. We have been in a rut for
a while, and this Pale Fodder seems rich and helpful in ways that will
enhance our ongoing discussions of Pynchon's works.

2. A Nabokov-centered discussion here might be interpreted by some as a
rationale for other non-Pynchon focused discussions, such as one that
revolves around George Bush. That would further erode the identity of this
discussion.

I do not see Pale Fire as a gateway drug, nor as a loosening of boundaries
which will lead to some making a case for legalizing the marriage of humans
to animals. It will be exceedingly difficult to find another non-Pynchon
text or topic which will rally enough support and hosts to succeed. Pale
Fire is an unusual novel, and the reasons it has created interest on the
Pynchon list will become more tangible as the discussion continues. There
are times, and this is one of them, that a given society is enhanced by
breaking the established codes rather than remaining subservient to
established forms of social control.