Talk:Pnin (novel)

message: I changed "aristocratic" because Nabokov was from the haute bourgeoisie, not the aristocracy.  I hope the same applies to Vladimir Vladimirovich N.  If not, or if "landed gentry" isn't the right term, the comparison will have to be changed.  —JerryFriedman 23:02, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why the text of some paragraphs is written in the first person?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.109.42.97 (talk) 00:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're asking that question about the novel--as opposed to this Wikipedia article--the answer is because the novel is being narrated, and the "I" refers to the narrator. However, I believe questions about the story itself are supposed to be omitted from Wiki article discussions, being better suited to book discussion forums.Chillowack (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Point of view

message: pnin is not based on nabokov. pnin could be partially based on a man named marc szeftel, who taught at cornell university, but even this is questionable. the article should not suggest that nabokov is pnin.
In chapter 5/part 4 Nabakov is clearly the butterfly collector Vladimir Vladimirovich, I'd agree that he is definitely saying that he is not Pnin.
:Nowhere in this article is it suggested that Pnin is Nabokov.
:What is suggested is that the narrator is Nabokov.
:Please remember to sign your posts, thanks.Chillowack (talk) 17:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  pnin is not nabokov 

message: In chaper three of Pnin Nabokov describes a typical bookcase in a 1950's home: "Hendrik Willem van Loon and Dr Cronin were invariably present...exchanging looks of tender recognition, like two old friends at a crowded party."   Vincent looks like a candidate, but his publications are maybe a tad too late... is A. J. Cronin meant? Sparafucil (talk) 11:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dr Cronin" 

message: I don't agree that Pnin bore the narrator "malice." That seems to be an exaggeration, probably based on Pnin's remark that he will never work for the narrator. The other clues to Pnin's feelings (the remark about the butterflies, his youthful comments during dinner, and his rejection of the narrator's job offer) indicate some exception to the narrator's ways, but to call it "malice" is going too far. I think this opinion should be deleted, being both editorial and inaccurate.Chillowack (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malice? 

message: The paragraph about Pnin's supposed "malice" toward the narrator, and the extensive editorializing going on in this paragraph, seems much more like one person's slant on the tale than an objective description of it. This paragraph is no doubt why the article was tagged as "sounding too much like a review." I propose that this paragraph be rewritten or deleted, and if there are no objections, I will do so.Chillowack (talk) 19:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editorializing 

message: I tried to tackle the problems of this article and I think I got it to the point where it no longer needs that menacing header about having "multiple issues."  Thoughts?  Now I think the thing that would really improve this article would be a section about critical reception and later analysis.  One good source for this is the 2004 introduction I've cited by David Lodge, for any of you editors who might be interested in taking up the torch.  Tdimhcs (talk) 05:18, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "Multiple Issues" header 

message: In the Background section it states that ". . . it has been claimed that [the novel] is 'teeming' with people and physical details" from Cornell. I wonder if this is an echo of Edmund Wilson's proof-correction of the manuscript, in which he noted that Nabokov had "amusingly misspelled" teamed in the sentence "Pnin teemed with Madame Bolotov against Shpolyanski" during a game of croquet. (See The Nabokov-Wilson Letters.)BruceSwanson (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Teeming"

message: Just because Nabokov uses the word "systole" does not make these epsiodes heart attacks. They are deliberately ambiguous (possibly emanating from Mira Belochkin?) See Boyd p 281 https://books.google.com/books?id=C8lF4iqAgRQC or p30 https://books.google.com/books?id=PflkAAAAMAAJ or here https://books.google.com/books?id=BhCQwPr23LIC&pg=PA137 best description is probably "seizure" (which I am changing to). And where is the justification for the claim that "consciousness to travel back to his childhood in St. Petersburg, where he is reminded of the love of his mother and the Russian Revolution", that's just completely wrong. NPalgan2 (talk) 20:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I have read that. More to the point, I cited 3 secondary WP:RSs who did not call it a "mild heart attack". Also, as I pointed out, the "reminded of his love for his mother and the Russian revolution" bit was wrong. NPalgan2 (talk) 21:53, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot summary