
Vladimir Nabokov and Edmund Wilson’s Epic Literary Feud - samclemens
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/tip-sheet/article/72177-inside-vladimir-nabokov-and-edmund-wilson-s-epic-literary-feud.html
======
dri_ft
Weird. I read the New York Review of Books articles about Eugene Onegin last
week, because I'm reading it (in a different translation) at the moment.

Douglas Hofstadter spends a chapter in Le Ton Beau De Marot, his book about
translation, talking about and comparing various translations of Eugene
Onegin, and he covers the Wilson/Nabokov feud described here. He is deeply
antithetical to Nabokov's approach to translating it (I have to agree) and
says that he finds some of Nabokov's remarks about Wilson unspeakably cruel.

He also says that his favourite translation is James Falen's; I can't comment
on how it compares to the others, not having looked at them, but I can confirm
that it seems excellent.

~~~
idlewords
Russian lit student here, can confirm that Falen is the best translator of
Pushkin into English.

Nabokov's Onegin translation is more like a piece of (unbelievably well-
researched) performance art. But be sure to read the book-length footnote
about dueling.

------
icantdrive55
I never appreciated Literature in college. I took the courses, and faked my
way through the course work. Yea--I read the books, but most were just dry,
and hard to read; for myself.

Years later, I read Lolita. There was a part of me that almost put it down. I
read it because I wondered what all the fuss was about. From the first page,
it might be the best written book I have ever read.

~~~
justifier
"You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style."

nabakov would agree with you

my opinion is Pale Fire is the only thing even slightly worth considering
reading from him

i'll refrain from recommending anything in his stead due to the fear of my
disliking nabakov might sully your reception of anything i recommend; instead
i'll say i empathise with your experience reading in an academic setting and
encourage you to keep reading and seeking what all the fuss is about in regard
other authors.. you may keep finding more and more that you enjoy reading

~~~
Fezzik
Truly curious - what do you find his writing lacking? I am always surprised
when people with any literary bent do not like him (this is the first I have
heard someone who has read more than Lolita say as much...). I find his story
construction and prose to be second to none.

~~~
justifier
i will admit i've yet to have read your praised 'Beneficence' but i have read
a few of his other works similarly to the gp's effort to 'see what all the
fuss was about'

i very much disliked lolita

i'm unable to speak to story construction because i only vaguely recall the
structure but i can speak to my distaste for the prose

i have a lot of respect for multilinguals and the fact that nabokov wrote
lolita in english is commendable but it reads to me like posturing

i felt it was humorless yet aggressively attempting to be funny

i feel people who like it inexplicably excuse its shortcomings as intentional
or representative of the narrator, and i always felt if that was the
penultimate interpretation i'd rather find meaning and enrichment in work that
engaged with me as a reader instead of trying to troll me while hoping i grant
its assumed brilliance credence

i felt it self serving while being acutely self aware; further promoting said
service

which is also why in my opinion the only thing even slightly worth reading by
nabokov is pale fire

i feel it explicitly exhibits my interpretation of nabokov as an author

someone obsessed with one's own literary importance based on one's own
criteria of what makes good literature

------
yolesaber
Ugh, the way this writer talks about women is pretty gross. I know its a piece
about two of the most macho types in midcentury literature, but must the
author of the article really refer to women as "conquests"?

~~~
clock_tower
Thanks for the warning -- this sounds borderline NSFW. Will avoid the article
while on a work system.

~~~
yolesaber
I know you are being ironic, but the fact that this is the reply and im
getting downvotes just shows how HN thinks about and treats women.

~~~
greglindahl
People who receive downvotes frequently speculate as to why. It's rare that
they speculate that they were downvoted for making comments which are flame-
bait, uninteresting, or off-topic.

I believe that HN could use a huge improvement in how "we" treat women, but
I'm not going to point to your comment or downvotes as an example of fighting
the good fight.

~~~
yolesaber
Then what is fighting the good fight if not bringing attention to negative
attitudes towards women? It's an article about two very overrated writers who
treated women terribly and yet rather than critically approach the attitudes
of these authors, the article's writer gleefully revels in their chauvinism. I
was bringing it to attention since it is very relevant to the article at hand.

~~~
killedbydeath
I am puzzled what you consider being sexist here. It's just consented sex
between adults, no need to feel sorry for anyone. Both men and women who have
had many partners often get cynical about that and I have heard this kind of
language from people of both sexes. And it does not mean treating partners
terribly. Two people can meet, have sex and part ways thinking that they had
another "conquest" without having any bad feelings about the encounter.

------
idlewords
This article doesn't belong here on political detox week. Both writers were
deeply politically engaged, and their feud is not seperable from their
politics.

~~~
cpach
Flag the article then if you think so.

