NPPF Canto 1 Incest Motif

[Michael Joseph]

You're welcome, cfa.

Gee, I was about to say that, in the Bildungsroman I remember, a boy was
considered grown up when he could lick his pa, but I wasn't sure that this
sort of picaresque humor is considered il comme faute here.


Michael



On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, cfalbert wrote:

> Thank you for your assistance......Belerma, according to one essay I scanned
> in the Norton Quixote may be part of a "picaro" metaphor.......this would
> make the "cunnilingus" references perhaps only metonymical for the
> "maturing" process.......
>
>
> and thank you again for  going to the trouble
>
> love,
> cfa
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Joseph" <mjoseph at rci.rutgers.edu>
> To: "cfalbert" <calbert at hslboxmaster.com>
> Cc: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 1:46 PM
> Subject: Re: NPPF Canto 1 Incest Motif
>
>
> > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>