Men Explain Lolita To Me

[Mark Thibodeau]

It's not this particular essay that has my 5X "panties" in a twist,
it's Solnit's simultaneous and paradoxical intellectual mediocrity and
current cultural omnipresence. If she hadn't been befouling my
favorite magazine with her fatuous scribblings of late, I couldn't be
arsed to give a damn.

J

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:37 PM, kelber at mindspring.com
<kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
> With so many guys getting their panties in a twist over an inconsequential
> essay, it seems the writer must have hit a nerve.
>
> Laura
>
>
> Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Punishing myself by reading this latest Solnit on men "explaining"
> Lolita to her and I've come across what must be the most painfully
> awful neologism of an era and a medium that is stuffed to the bursting
> with awful neologisms: "privelobliviousness". Sweet Christ what a
> mediocre, one-track mind this person has.
>
> J
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:00 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> HH wasn't empathetic because he was obsessive. One usurps the other, ergo
>> failure. HH failed in scores of other traits for the same root cause. The
>> beauty of Lolita is HH's ability to elist our empathy with his obsession.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, December 17, 2015, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Solnit praises Lolita and calls it "that masterpiece of Humbert
>>> Humbert’s failure of empathy". Which someone would Arkansas my work
>>> that way.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Charles Albert <cfalbert at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > An angry bint with a bludgeon looking to make her bones Arkansasing the
>>> > justifiably celebrated work of a dead white guy?
>>> >
>>> > Don't see that every day.
>>> >
>>> > If you want a truly stimulating  and exquisitely balanced investigation
>>> > of
>>> > the same question I recommend Byatt's Possession.
>>> >
>>> > love,
>>> >
>>> > cfa
>>> >
>>> > On Dec 17, 2015 8:59 PM, "John Bailey" <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> If you approach pop literary criticism with the same standards you
>>> >> expect of Kantian philosophy you may end up with a reasonable amount
>>> >> of stomach trouble.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Tommy Pinecone
>>> >> <endaflynn345 at gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > I had originally extended that message to cover that point but then
>>> >> > decided
>>> >> > to take it away.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > To show the weight of thought that needs to go behind a conclusion.
>>> >> > Kant
>>> >> > is
>>> >> > astoundingly painstaking, as you likely know. That's why I
>>> >> > recommended a
>>> >> > short introduction, the excerpts can be shocking to someone not used
>>> >> > to
>>> >> > it,
>>> >> > it is an education you are not likely to find anywhere else apart
>>> >> > from
>>> >> > first
>>> >> > hand in Kant. I could just as easily recommended some of Aristotle's
>>> >> > work,
>>> >> > but Kant is more illustrative of the point.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Wittgenstein's big ideas and posthumous work are constructive in a
>>> >> > similar
>>> >> > way.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On 18 Dec 2015 01:09, "Danny Weltman" <danny.weltman at gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> What in Kant's first critique do you find helpful for hitting on "a
>>> >> >> fast
>>> >> >> track way to make someone who is uneducated aware of the blatant
>>> >> >> flaws
>>> >> >> in
>>> >> >> certain ideas and movements that are just unsustainable, and
>>> >> >> somehow
>>> >> >> having
>>> >> >> their day the past few years?"
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tommy Pinecone
>>> >> >> <endaflynn345 at gmail.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> This is why I make it a deliberate priority not to go on Twitter
>>> >> >>> or
>>> >> >>> to
>>> >> >>> follow any new intellectual voices.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Every time it is some unfamiliar, alleged authority voicing a loud
>>> >> >>> opinion that's appointed a flashy title; for some reason Twitter
>>> >> >>> is
>>> >> >>> frequently mentioned along the way.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> I hope the majority of you can see through this pettiness. It's
>>> >> >>> unfortunate that we are swamped with the hack work and profound
>>> >> >>> blanketed
>>> >> >>> hate in modern academia, it is however a fortunate thing that we
>>> >> >>> can
>>> >> >>> merely
>>> >> >>> look away and concentrate on human issues instead of coining new
>>> >> >>> derogatory
>>> >> >>> terms and stirring up the rabble with a short article.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> I often wonder how different these outlooks would be if these
>>> >> >>> people
>>> >> >>> were
>>> >> >>> introduced to literature in a different way, free from ideology
>>> >> >>> and
>>> >> >>> identity-that is an unbiased, philosophical way. I make it a hard
>>> >> >>> point with
>>> >> >>> any aspiring student to start off with a short introduction to
>>> >> >>> Kant's
>>> >> >>> primary Critique and a short introduction to Wittgenstein's
>>> >> >>> thought;
>>> >> >>> no
>>> >> >>> doubt it is an anomalous approach, but it's a fast track way to
>>> >> >>> make
>>> >> >>> someone
>>> >> >>> who is uneducated aware of the blatant flaws in certain ideas and
>>> >> >>> movements
>>> >> >>> that are just unsustainable, and somehow having their day the past
>>> >> >>> few
>>> >> >>> years.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> We shouldn't have to pause to think of these things when there are
>>> >> >>> bigger
>>> >> >>> issues than female characters not being put in the center of the
>>> >> >>> stage. What
>>> >> >>> if I wanted to pen an article on how I wasn't happy with the lack
>>> >> >>> of
>>> >> >>> empathy
>>> >> >>> Beckett shows in all of his works, to individuals of both genders
>>> >> >>> no
>>> >> >>> less?
>>> >> >>> Sure, the circumstances are different here, but not dramatically.
>>> >> >>> It's
>>> >> >>> simply absurd. I struggle to believe these type of things when I
>>> >> >>> see
>>> >> >>> them
>>> >> >>> being taken so seriously by so many. Makes one feel hopeless,
>>> >> >>> especially
>>> >> >>> when these are still the early years of the internet and the
>>> >> >>> loudest
>>> >> >>> voices
>>> >> >>> are reaching aspiring students through social media poisoning
>>> >> >>> their
>>> >> >>> nascent
>>> >> >>> opinions and thoughts.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On 17 Dec 2015 20:51, "Matthew Taylor"
>>> >> >>> <matthew.taylor923 at gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Thoughts on Rebecca Solnit's latest?
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> http://lithub.com/men-explain-lolita-to-me/
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> -
>>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l