http://wmjas.wikidot.com/nabokov-s-recommendations
How can one man be so right about everything?
>>8288311
>Marx, Karl. Loathe him.
Kek, I wonder why.
>>8288311
>Schweitzer, Albert -- Detest him.
Obviously made a bad impression at Koblsheim. Odd considering Schweitzer's cousin (Fritz) and Nabokov's cousin (Nicolas) were in fact very good friend and Fritz even let Nicolas feature on his programs.
>>8288323
best post
>>8288311
Daily reminder, Nabokov was a literal pedo, and Lolita is autobiographical.
>>8289303
But that's not the only reason why we love him.
>Gogol, Nikolai - Loathe his moralistic slant, am depressed and puzzled by his inability to describe young women,
>>8288311
>How can one man's opinions be so right?
What did he mean by this?
>>8289380
To understand what he meant you must first understand what he did not mean.
>>8288311
I agree with his thoughts on Dostoevsky. He is extremely nauseating to read and writes as if he is pontificating.
While not one of the best writers, definitely one of the most intelligent persons to ever be relevant in literature. Good guy. Smug but respectable.
>Austen, Jane. Great.
>>8288311
How can one man have such horrid opinions
>Melville, Herman. Love him. One would like to have filmed him at breakfast, feeding a sardine to his cat.
what did he mean by this?
>>8291402
Morning means before noon.
>recommending authors for 10-14 year olds that most 20-40 year olds can barely read
>>8291416
He didn't write this recently. My grandfather read Joyce when he was a young schoolboy.
>Camus, Albert. Dislike him. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up. A nonentity, means absolutely nothing to me. Awful.
>García Lorca, Federico. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up.
>Kazantzakis, Nikos. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up.
>Lawrence, D. H. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up. Mediocre. Fakes realism with easy platitudes. Execrable.
>Mann, Thomas. Dislike him. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up.
>Wolfe, Thomas. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up.
The very same words sums up my thoughts on Lolita.
Did he like Woolf I wonder?
>>8291471
I don't think he did anon
>>8288311
Nabokov
Why was he so perverted, mates?
he had terrible taste t.bh.
>>8291471
>Nabokov did say he had read Woolf. In fact he claims to have read “all” of Woolf in 1933 in preparation for writing “The Admiralty Spire.”1 Yet the faults for which his story’s horrid narrator reviles “lady novelists” have nothing to do with either the subject, method, or stylistic devices of Woolf ’s novels. Nabokov finds lady novelists sentimental and famously wrote to Edmund Wilson, “I dislike Jane, and am prejudiced, in fact, against all women writers. They are in another class. Maxim D. Shrayer reviews Nabokov’s largely negative criticism of the works of Russian and anglophone women poets and prose writers, finding that he “fails to offer grounds for his dismissive remarks” about even such a poet as Marina Tsvetaeva.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/520234
But he says that he dislikes Jane (Austen) and in OP's link he says
>Austen, Jane. Great.
>Salinger, J. D. By far one of the finest artists in recent years.
>Plato. Not particularly fond of him.
>>8291491
You're delusional, Woolf is middlebrow.
>Tolstoy, Leo. A favorite between the ages of 10 and 15, and thereafter. Read complete works between 14 and 15.
I feel like such a retard.
>>8291577
It was a different time
>>8291577
You put Tolstoy and Dostoevsky and all these other great authors on a pedestal, saying they're inaccessible at a young age. That is an utterly foolish sentiment. You too could have read their works at that age if you were so inclined; you would have had a different experience of it then but you could have still read it. There's no great skill barrier to this, just pick up the fucking book and read it.
Literature is not static, it's a prism through which you view these experiences and intricacies. A boy who reads Anna Karenina at 14 will get a very different message than a man who reads it at 30.
>>8291639
That could put them off reading literature really though. I was 13 when I read A Tale of Two Cities and hated the thing, it was only when I was about 19 I tried it again and enjoyed it. Some ages just aren't mature enough to appreciated certain books.
>>8288311
>Faulkner, William. Dislike him. Writer of corncobby chronicles.
What did he mean by this?
>>8288311
Is that Mike Huckabee?
>>8292418
A girl gets raped by a gangster with a corncob.
>>8288311
A snob.
Y'all should read an essay (can't recall the title) on Nabokov by literary critic Simon Leys. Very spot on.
>>8291512
As if your non-existent mind has ever mulled over the words of play-doh, unsullied by translation.
>>8288311
>Humbert Humbert
Do I need to provide you with any more proof that this man is a second-rate, nonentity?
>>8292516
There are similar things written about the vast pool of artists. A thing like this won't sway my opinion, nor do I care to read it.
>>8292802
There are similar tings written in this vast pool of comments. A ting like ain't but convey you're a minion, nor do anyone care to read it.
>>8291577
Different time. If Nabokov was born in the 90's he'd be shit posting like the rest of us.
>>8291577
He was probably reading books when he was 2
>>8292516
>reading essays
>>8292874
In what conceivable universe is reading essays a bad thing, other than the one where you're hopefully trying haphazardly to be funny
>Kafka, Franz.
The Metamorphosis. Second-greatest masterpiece of 20th century prose.
So which one was the best?
>>8294011
Lolita
>>8294011
>not being able to read
>>8294011
ulysses
>You'll never inherited the Rozhdestveno estate inherited from your maternal uncle as a 16-year-old Nabokov
Why even live?
>>8294230
Yes, and being a son of a politician, noblemen and a millionare, which means you're really top of the tops, blue blood, then you get your fatherland destroyed, your fellow countrymen degrade in Communist Russia or nobles (remember the gap between the nobles and peasants in Russia was insane) working as taxists in Paris.
Then your father gets killed, and in order to get money you have to write in non-native tongue and teach at a state uni.
>Finnegans Wake - Conventional and drab
>>8289303
wtf i love nabokov now
>>8289319
Kek
>>8289319
>puzzled by his inability to describe young women,
KEK
>Pirandello, Luigi. Never cared for him
Lmao
This guy read War and Peace when he was 15?
>>8292396
>Dickens
No wonder you hated it
>>8289319
Gogol is by far the best writer Russia ever had, Nabokov is goodreads tier when it comes to opinions of literature.
>Plato. Not particularly fond of him.
What a presumptuous ass
>>8294908
Gogol ain't even Russian.
>Don Quixote. A cruel and crude old book.
Does anyone actually take his reviews seriously? They're awful, and I don't just mean awful as in taste, I meant they are awful as in written awfully. He said "read complete works between 14 and 15" for both Shakespeare and Tolstoy, I don't actually believe that.
>>8294922
He was for back then.
I don't think he's every read anything by Faulkner.
>>8294942
>Don Quixote. A cruel and crude old book.
I'd somewhat agree with this, Don Quixote makes me feel sad. It's like watching someone naive and poor get swindled.
>>8294942
>awful as in written awfullybut anon, Nabokov is an awful writer
>>8294908
Anon, Nabby wrote a book about Gogol. The part the anon you responded to quoted gives a distorted picture of Nabokov's sentiments concerning Gogol. Here's a link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/509306.Nikolai_Gogol?ac=1&from_search=true
>>8294978
Then what is Lolita like?
>>8294981
In every sense except prose, yeah, but considering he has fine prose, he could have done better than this toilet paper tier reviewing
>>8295030
Then Nabokov shouldn't have said such a stupid quote. He didn't say it in any other context than as a brief review.
>>8288311
>Austen, Jane. Great
