NPPF Canto 1: 1-4

[jbor]

on 24/7/03 11:54 PM, Malignd at malignd at yahoo.com wrote:

> You should bear this in mind when discussing VN's
> (Shade's) poem.  Your comment that "the series of
> consonant blends creates a dissonant effect which, as
> a soundscape, doesn't correlate in any way to the
> scene or attempted mood," is "a rather subjective
> judgement," although you apparently don't see it as
> such.  Noting the series of consonants is objective;
> saying it doesn't correlate is not.  Calling it corny,
> certainly isn't.
> 
> In large, I think your argument that VN intended
> Shade's poem as less than grand is tenable, even
> probable, certainly interesting, and quite
> unavoidable.  But I think the poem is often far better
> than you allow and your addressing the argument as a
> closed case, insisting the poem is simply second rate
> and that such can be demonstrated as if with test tube
> and caliper ...  It's just hectoring.

Not at all, or not intentionally. Charles's notion that "smudge" correlates
with "wax" (and thus "works") was what I was calling corny. You've offered a
different interpretation and then implied that I'm calling that corny. (And,
by the by, I've made no claim to objectivity in offering my responses to the
poem. If you don't want to read them you know what to do.) As to the other:
the phrase "smudge of ashen fluff" is a mouthful; the prosody of it stands
out as such. My point is that it stands out to no legitimate effect in the
context of Shade's opening setpiece. The image itself combines a smudge, ash
and fluff, which are three contrasting textures, three different material
objects, which is why I've called it overwrought. Additionally, I think it's
pretty obvious that the second "I was ... " line after the semi-colon refers
to the remains of the bird on the windowpane, but you seem determined that
your interpretation that it is a repetition of the poet envisioning himself
as the bird's shadow is certain. That difference of opinion is not something
we can resolve.

I've made comments on several occasions that I think there are some nice
moments in the poem. Nabokov's creation of Shade as a "major poet" wouldn't
ring true if he wrote like a grade schooler. That I'm pointing to some of
the specific examples in the poem which gave me the impression that
Nabokov's intent was to parody a style of poetry and satirise Shade the poet
and man is to be expected, surely? Particularly as it's a thesis which had
been generally denounced as "nonsense". I'm not sure why it should prick
your balloon so, as it doesn't diminish Nabokov's stature in the slightest.

best