Is this Pynchon-L or Nabokov-L? WAS Re: Was Reading and discussing Pynchon's texts

[Otto]

----- Original Message -----
From: "pynchonoid" <pynchonoid at yahoo.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:31 PM
Subject: Is this Pynchon-L or Nabokov-L? WAS Re: Was Reading and discussing
Pynchon's texts


> pynchonoid:
> > Too bad about Pynchon-L, as davemarc likes to
> > point
> > out, there's no place else on the Internet devoted
> > to
> > Pynchon's works. But you knew that already.
>
> --- s~Z <keithsz at concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > The Pynchon-L is a fabulous list. I tire of your
> > criticisms of it.
>
>
> I can easily live without your contributions, too,
> Keith.
>
> I suggest you and your pals take a Pale Fire reading
> to NABOKOV-L.
>
> If you care for Pynchon-L, why not respect the only
> guideline provided for the list, instead of turning it
> into a forum for discussion of Nabokov?
>
> "As far as we're concerned, pretty much any
> Pynchon-related topic is OK on this list, from Pynchon
> apocrypha through light discussion of our favourite
> passages, to litcrit as heavy as you want."
> <http://waste.org/pynchon-l/>
>

1. Well, as far as I remember the rumour that P. had attended Nabokov's
lectures at Cornell has never been definitely proven not to be true. I think
this is enough reason to do a Nabokov novel, why not Pale Fire. If somebody
would propose to do the Tinasky-letters that would be ok to to me too
because it's part of the pyndustry.

2. What bothers you, Doug? You're the one with the most NP-input on this
list, which is a discussion list for literature.

3. Nabokov-L. is a moderated list. I don't like that.

4. If our list owners have no objections what's wrong with it?

5. Reading Pale Fire together doesn't mean that there will be no talk about
Pynchon. Most of us are reading novels of other authors, recommend book
titles and authors.

Let's try

Otto