NPPF Canto 1 Incest Motif

[Michael Joseph]

Cfalbert, without an index, it's hard to be absolutely sure, but Nabokov
seems to make but one passing reference to Lady Belerma, in his lecture
"Narrative and Commnetary Part To (1615), merely recounting the narrative
passage in which she appears (chapter 23). Glad to check further if you
remember something more.


Michael



On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, cfalbert wrote:

> Does anyone have access to Nab's lectures on Quixote?
>
> If so, please check what he has to say about Lady Belerma and get back to
> us...
>
>
> thanks,
>
> love,
> cfa
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Joseph" <mjoseph at rci.rutgers.edu>
> To: "s~Z" <keithsz at concentric.net>
> Cc: "Pynchon-L" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 3:01 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Canto 1 Incest Motif
>
>
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, s~Z wrote:
> > >
> > > My reading has nothing to do with Freud,
> >
> > I thought you were pointing through your quotation at VN's use of the term
> > "uncanny," and it made sense that as you were analyzing the poem with the
> > thought that it possessed a central secret and that secret was incest, you
> > would be drawing on Freud, one way or the other, either to explain
> > Nabokov's incest gambit or to rat out the meanings of incest.
> >
> > Although I'm persuaded against the incest argument, I'm not persuaded
> > there aren't clues pointing toward it. I agree that, since Kinbote is
> > apparently a pedophile, it would be interesting to see Shade as an abused
> > child - which is different from incest, of course. Kinbote <> Shade would
> > constitute the binary: literary admirer/abuser of innocence ..> admired
> > poet/abused innocent, and Kinbote's various pursuits would take on an
> > additional quality of menace.
> >
> >
> > > and I read the quote
> > > through my hypothesis that ADA has clues for interpreting PF.
> > > I.e., seeing ADA as the dot-arrow pointing back to PF.
> > >
> >
> > I see the mysterious backward foot-print as Shade's symbol of the present,
> > which moves into the future but points back to the past, and the parallel
> > operations of the poem. (Of course, it could be other things, too. We know
> > it's a pheasant, so at least it can't be a wild goose.)
> >
> >
> > > "Learn to distinguish banality. Remember that mediocrity thrives on
> 'ideas.'
> > > Beware of the modish message. Ask yourself if the symbol you have
> detected
> > > is not your own footprint. Ignore allegories. By all means place the
> 'how'
> > > above the 'what' but do not let it be confused with the 'so what.' Rely
> on
> > > the sudden erection of your small dorsal hairs. Do not drag in Freud at
> this
> > > point. All the rest depends on personal talent." - Vladimir Nabokov
> > >
> >
> > Devilish advice!
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
>
>
>