Responce to Nabokov in Vernacular

Would I would like to say to my figgin English teacher if she wasn't a friggin conformist to traditional english literary values.

Background: Nabokov's Criticism of Dostoevski

Nabokov?s response to the writings of Dostoevski is that they have little true literary merit, and that they are simply contrived with sentimentalist feelings to establish Dostoevski?s view of reality through the reactions of flat and half insane characters put in absurd situations as a model. He describes, using Crime and Punishment as an example of how Dostoevski is an inartistic and melodramatic mystery writer who does not spend enough time with his work to make it believable, and that he is completely unworthy of the title of a great author which has been bestowed upon him.

My Resonce Directed to NAbokov:
Did you ever notice how thoughts are sometimes very hard to come by— How you can sit and mull over something for hours, days, weeks, decades, and still not form a coherent conclusion to your deliberating madness? It brings me to the question of what the point is. I mean, isn?t the point to entertain? If that?s the point, then why do you complain when something?s entertaining? Just shut your figgin mouth and be happy that your getting any entertainment at all. I mean come on, you?re not living in Russia anymore, so you should be friggin thankful and stop complaining, you ruin the whole friggin thing for all of us. Your friggin arrogance astounds me! GRRRRR!!! I mean, who do you think you are anyway? The friggin pope? Telling people what they should read and what they shouldn?t. That?s not right!!!

My English class is driving me insane. More and more my mind wonders away from conventional essay writing to dwell in trying to find some form of writing that can actually be both fun to write and fun to read. I SAY WE MUST REBEL AGAINST THE TRADITIONAL RESTRICTIONS OF WRITING!!! Who says what's good writing and what's not? Some high literary elitists who are completely disconnected from the common folk? Common!!! I mean, literature was first invented in the form of story telling to actually tell stories that could be understood and appreciated for their ability to (a) communicate messages (as in morals or explanations of why some things are the way they are) and (b) to entertain. The literary elite are completely disconnected from reality!!! I mean, I don't want to diss Shakespeare here, he was a literary genius and everything, but I'd just like to highlight the reasons why people recognize him as one regardless of his true literary merit. Most people know him only by reputation, and they admire his work (a) because they can't understand his flowery language and (b) everyone else says he's a genius. Come on. Do you know where the publishing companies get all their money form? Do you think it's books with high intellectual literary merit, that some doctor of literature would praise and outstanding contribution to the English language— NO!!! It's friggin romance books!!! The average person doesn't give jack about "literary merits". They are stuck in an escapist attitude which demands satisfaction through entertainment. They don't need a message; they just want something that tickles their imaginations. Do you realize what this is doing to the publishing industry— All those literature elitists who decide to publish their books of strict constriction to traditional English forms of writing are GOING OUT OF BUSINESS!!! It makes me sick!!! There's nothing but conforming in the entire industry. Now those publishing houses are firing all those people who want to print the strict literature because they're out to make a profit and that kind of writing doesn't sell. This separates the two different writing groups even more!!! The elitists are resentful of everyone else because they're out of a friggin job, and they feel good about being able to act more educated and pretend to have more taste to everyone else, but all they're really doing is denying and true artistic credit which new forms of writing might have. It's these traditional literary standards which stand in the way of the popularity of all forms of literature. You may disagree on me, but who wants to be told what is good to read by some arrogant old coot who is completely disconnected from your reality? Regardless or not of if the book is really good, you won't find it so because you don't like them. They need to expand their horizons just a bit and be more accepting of new visions. And anyway, most judges of literature are so oriented on their own opinions, they only look for things that satisfy themselves. It is a completely subjective art. That's why I hate literary contest, because you know the judges are just looking for something in particular which they like, but you really don't want to bend your own artistic love of the art to meat what they think is good, just to win the contest. This is terrible, because it once again preaches conformity and unoriginality!!! How hard is to start some new form of anything and get it accepted as something worthy of recognition? Most people who do this die undiscovered and there work isn't valued until years after their death! Critics and elitists are always years behind, and the innovators always are the ones to pay for it. THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED!!! Instead of repression, I say that we should be taught to use our imagination and our abilities of creation to express ourselves and our ideals and our values and the way we see the world around us through innovation and new ideas!!! The limits should be taken down and done away with!

Side Note:
And also, there are some words that should be in the language, but aren't, like, say, a noun form of the word "pathetic". But how hard is it to get new words added to the language? There also is absolutely no need for the letter c, as there is an s and a k, and for ch we can use kh, but try telling that to the alphabet people! Let's talk about English spelling too. The first dictionary was not written using the forms of word that would be most logical (which would be phonetically, and by the way, did you ever notice how phonetic isn't phonetic? what's the deal with that? ph is another letter combination we can do without) but instead they used the most popular spellings of the time, which happened to be completely screwed up!!! So we need to change the dictionary too!!! But try telling that to the dictionary people!!!

Oh, and we should start this end to literary conformity by flushing out our schools of teachers who mark things wrong because the student did not agree with the teachers opinions.

I'm thinking about putting out a newsletter with all my revolutionary ideas. Somebody needs to break through and tell things like they are, and I elect me.

You know, I rather enjoy having conversations with myself...

Oh yeah, and if anyone actually bothered to read that very long trail of thought, I apologize, but I'm stressed out of my mind and I need to vent. And please don't automatically disqualify my opinions of the direction which English literature should take in the future just because I can't spell for butter.

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I can't beleave I read this.

lol, I'm honored that you stuck out all the way through the madness.

me too, I did too, I read it all. I agree with pretty much everything you said.

Unlike James, I did not read this through. It would've induced madness! But, all these Russian names and wild rantings prompt me to say that you should read "Variations On the Death of Trotsky" by David Ives. Especially Morgan. Ives is good- he's like the Douglass Adams of the theatrical world! (And if any of you haven't read Douglass Adams, I recommend him too. Strongly.)

And as far as literary conformity- I'm working on its downfall. But, if by some chance of fate I become a successful communicator/artist with words, then I'll be a living paradox to the above statement. Writing is communicating. Some people communicate differently. Some value communications made by others differently. Thus, your English teacher values someone who communicates similar to my great grandfather, may he rest in peace. (e.g.: Weak thesis which makes a feeble or insignificant point that is dragged on to maddenning lengths and ends up resulting in an overflow of words that could hurt my virgin ears.) (lol)

And as far as Shakespeare goes- the man was a genious. Just like Einstein. Little to no work at all and he gets his name in history. All you have to know is where to find the cheapest copy of the original Hamlet written in Swedish and translate. Or the Italian version of Romeo and Juliet. Or copy your roommate's notes the day before every exam, go to coffee houses with attractive women, and make a scientific theory based on what you would imagine happenning should you ever catch up to a wave of light!

Dictionaries! Another interesting rant! Hurrah! (Or is it Huzzah?) At any rate, does your dictionary include the English spellings or the Americanized English spellings? (And what colour is it, perchance?)

Lol, Josh, my dictionary has both American and English, well, that is the one I use most often, I have quite a few. What colour is it? Well, black and white.

I've not heard of Ives, but if you say he's like Douglass Adoms (whom I adore), I'll have to try him. (Thanx for the suggestion 🙂) Does he write a lot about Russians? I just love Russian names, some say they're too complicated, but I say the longer the more fun.

I must say, I wrote my previous rantings in a fit of bitter rage and frustration, and am unable now to remember exactly what I was thinking. Oh well. I shall write what I will, and what the world thinks of it will be not my concern, but their own.

Que sera sera.

Josh One must understand that I was mad before I started