Vladimir Nabokov's opinions on various authors (1/3)
>His translations contain deplorable blunders.Nabokov is surely one to talk.
>>23979162(2/3)
>>23979168(3/3)
>>23979162>>23979168>>23979172I've never read a single author on this list
>>23979168>John Galsworthy: A formidable mediocrity.>formidable mediocrityThat's a bit of an idiom. Was Nabokov just trolling?
applying the same description to the prose of Sartre, Celine, and Barbusse is pretty silly.
>>23979183I don't agree with Nabokov's opinions of them, but I would agree that Sartre and Celine have comparable prose styles. Despite their public arguments, Sartre was an admirer of Celine and his own novels were greatly inspired by Journey to the End of the Night.
>>23979162>>23979168>>23979172I'm thoroughly convinced that Nabokov simply didn't give enough attention to the authors who he disliked, or found unsatisfying, because many of the qualities he admires in other artists are plainly exhibited by those he pushes aside.
>>23979162>>23979168>>23979172He was a midwit
>>23979193You may just have bad taste.I don't care for Nabby as a writer, but as a literary critic he is beyond reproach.
>>23979200This is not literary criticism, kek.
>>23979197>t. formidable mediocrity
>>23979200how did that anon's post indicate anything about his own taste
stopped reading at Austen, Jane
>>23979205>>23979209No need to get so defensive. Which of your favorite authors did he dismiss as worthless? Be honest; not all bad taste is unfixable. There might still be hope for you.
>>23979213Right, the first one isn't even an opinion
If you're an ameriburger you can either be corncobby or you can be puffed up. Or you are Herman. -Nab
>>23979172Loves H.G. Wells. Unexpected, nice
>>23979246He liked Cheever too, so maybe you just have to be gay to get Nabby's respect.
Nabokov is the prime example of read what he writes, not says.
>>23979162Proof that being a good writer doesn't make you a good reader. I mean, it's obvious if you compare it to music, but for whatever reason, it needs to be said.>>23979193True. Camus' The Plague explores the exact same themes as Pale Fire.>>23979200You're retarded.
>>23979162>Don Quixote: A cruel and crude old book.Nabby has a lot in common with the average non-reader on /lit/.
Anyway, here's me reviewing girls on Pornhub in the style of Nabokov.Kenzie Reeves>Second Rate. Fakes girlishness with bizarre mannerisms. Overly large anus.Angela White>Delightful scenes. Lovable, motherly face.Zaawaadi>A particular favorite.Coco Lovelock>Outstanding performance in every scene. Unnervingly good at playing the part of the teenage girl.Mia Khalifa>Easily replaceable. Her body strikes one as a composite of the most middling pornstars of the 2010s. A complete nonentity, means absolutely nothing to me. Katie Morgan>Delightful body. Not quite first rate.Ryan Keely>Quite fond of her. Endearingly short torsoLana Rhoades>A favorite between the ages of 15 and 20, and thereafterAngela Devi>Of purely nostalgic appeal. Third-rate, ephemeral. Natasha Nice>Not quite first rate, but close.Mallory Sierra>An absolute delight. Her scenes have the primal magic of a long forgotten episode of one's childhood.
>>23979162Seems very random and based on vibes than any real literary instinct, which isn't bad, he just tries to paint it in a pseud way. Instead of saying "I'm not overly fond of Celine, although he isn't terrible by any means," he has to be a fag about it.
>>23979315This guy likes big tits.
>NabokovHas grown effeminate from luxury. Sugared plums glazed with honey and stuffed with summer afternoons. An over-perfumed hag. ESL.
>>23979177in contemporary 4chinz slang, it means midwit
>>23979177“Formidable”To be reckoned with, overstated, is powerful enough to ruin literary culture with his negative influence if left unattended “Mediocrity”Mediocre
>>23979162Strongly agree when it comes to Emerson, Austen and Eliot. Strongly disagree when it comes to Flaubert, which I doubt he ever got even fleetingly, in the reflective sense of the term: Women in general aren't much different from men in terms of sheer horniness.
>>23979162Nabokov reading Chernyshevksy like
>>23979315Are all of these at large, i.e. still alive?A terrible thought emerges.. don't do it, anon
>>23979477With respect to VN on Flaubert, I'm unsure what (you) mean. Flaubert did say 'Madame Bovary, c'est moi' at his trial aar>the reflective sense of the termgot?
>>23979439
>>23979162What did he mean by Freudian interpretation of dreams being satanic
>>23979315lmao
>>23979315what about mandy flores and Mia malkova anon?
>>23979193I think a lot of this comes from the fact that he was both a turbo-autist and extraordinarily well-read. On the turbo-autist side he could appreciate when he saw one thing done brilliantly even if the rest was merely serviceable. Take for example pic related where he basically calls austen a stunted woman-child writer. Yet at the same time he rates her as "great" because of her ability to marry form and content in a way he finds satisfying. So one thing can ruin a writer for him, one thing can elevate a writer for him.On the well-read side, he probably read more than the vast majority of writers he rated, so he's seen most everything before. If any aspect isn't great (without at least one thing being genius), he'll shit on it. And if he finds the story to rely on too much contrived melodrama, pathos, or platitude, then the best he'll rate them is "powerful mediocrity".
>>23979213See >>23981480 for context.
>>23979477>Women in general aren't much different from men in terms of sheer horniness.Yeah, if you just ignore everything that shows they are extremely different.
