Re: a question

blah b b blah (jrovira@juno.com)
Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:40:57 -0500 (EST)

Mattis--

delightfully pathetic dialog, very good, thank you :)  "Pathetic"
referring not the writing, but to Holden's character :)

RE: the FUQ's....

Yeah, some FUQs are certainly more enjoyable than others.  I've had some
pretty important FUQs in my day, in fact, while others were pretty
terrible.   The fact that they still were, indeed, FUQs, however, and
could continue to be called by the name of FUQ, does not mean they really
do all belong in the same class.  The FUQs I mentioned were not by any
means to be understood as being in the same class of FUQ proposed
earlier.  

In other words, Mattis, you gave us a really good FUQ earlier.  It was
you, wasn't it?  If not, I'll have to send the roses elsewhere....

(And now let's hear some good arguments for a heavily moderated list...) 


Camille--

Yeah, Nabokov's single most endearing quality to me is his abject hatred
of Freudian Psychology :).   But the book still read to me like a study
in the psychology of desire--even if that study is written outside of the
context of what was psychological theory in its day.  I'd forgotten that
Humbert Humbert denied he was trying to return to Anabelle, but I think
he was being a bit idiotic in that regard.  Placing the Anabelle account
at the front of the book kinda BEGS the reader to make that assumption. 
It could be that an attempt to return to A was the source of his initial
attraction to Lo, but that his attraction developed and grew wings of its
own over time, and became a more significant factor in Humbert's mind
than A. ever was.    

Jim

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]