NABOKV-L post 0006785, Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:22:29 -0700

NOTE FROM NABOKOV-L EDITOR. Nabokv-l thanks Dr. Olga Voronina for making these available to us. One or two of the abstracts are in different type fonts from the others (thanks to my technical incompetence) and one has been revised by the authors and hence varies from the version in the English abstract collection printed by the Museum. This document contain BOTH English and Russian versions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------






The St. Petersburg V. V. Nabokov Museum
International Vladimir Nabokov Symposium
July 15-19, 2002


?????-????????????? ????? ?. ?. ????????
????????????? ??????????? ?????????
15-19 ???? 2002 ?.







































St. Petersburg / 2002 / ?????-?????????


???. ?. ????????? / Translated by A. Brodotskaya
???. ?. ????????? / Edited by O. Voronina





































??????? ?????-?????????????? ?????
?.?. ????????
??. ??????? ???????, ?. 47, ?????-?????????, 190000

This is a publication of the St.Petersburg V. V. Nabokov Museum
47 Bolshaya Morskaya St.
St. Petersburg, 190000
?????????? ? ????-?????????? «????»
??? ?69-320 ?? 10.12.98

Printed by «Znak», publisher's licence ?69-320 of December 12, 1998


GENERAL SESSION
July 15

Brian Boyd, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Nabokov as Storyteller

Nabokov at Cornell had his students consider great writers as teachers, storytellers and enchanters. As a writer he himself was first reviewed and read as a storyteller, then considered by critics in the 1960s and 1970s as an enchanter (his involute structures, his divine details) and in the 1980s and 1990s as a teacher (a moralist and a metaphysician). But if he lasts through the new millennium it will also be as a great storyteller whose inventiveness was fuelled by his wry awareness of his medium in millennia past.

I would like to try to characterize what makes Nabokov unique as a storyteller, to offer a kind of poetics of Nabokovian fiction, a narratology of Nabokov, a theory of Nabokovian narrative, and then after describing, to explain why his fiction takes the forms that it does. I will aim to be comprehensive but others will no doubt gleefully indicate what I have omitted.


GENERAL SESSION
July 15

Alexander Dolinin, University of Wisconsin - Madison, USA
Stories Hidden Inside the Plot (An Approach to Vladimir Nabokov's Poetics of Concealment)

Using the old Formalist dichotomy of the plot (sujet) vs. the story (fabula), I argue that the plot in some of Nabokov's texts contains two superimposed stories, one hidden beneath the other. In his famous letter to Katharine A.White concerning "The Vane Sisters" Nabokov not only stated that some of his short stories are composed "according to this system wherein a second (main) story is woven into, or placed behind, the superficial semitransparent one" but explained that in these cases a specific code, which must be used by the reader in order to uncover the hidden "fabula," is alluded to in the text. In my view, anagrammatical "trick-reading" used in "The Vane Sisters" should not be projected upon other texts with the "hidden story" because each of them has its own "system of mute responses." In my paper I suggest new readings of three short stories-"Lik," "That in Aleppo Once." and "Signs and Symbols"-based on three different codes embedded into the texts: respectively, the bifurcational, the intertextual, and the numerical. In the conclusion I discuss the problem of a "hidden story" in Lolita, arguing that Nabokov's narrative strategy in the novel implies multiple encoding that provides enough clues to uncover the main story placed behind the superficial one.


GENERAL SESSION
July 15

Donald Barton Johnson, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
"Signs & Symbols": Nabokov & Iconicity

Iconicity is one of the techniques Nabokov uses to surmount the limitations of language. Prominent among these devices is alphabetic iconicism, the use of a letter's physical shape to carry meaning: words mean; letters (sometimes) illustrate or mimic topic and/or theme.

After a brief survey of iconic types, I set out to explore Nabokov's attempts to draw various other kinds of typographic signs into his stylistic arsenal. These include punctuation such as exclamation points, question marks, ellipses; figures, such as parentheses; and even type faces such as italic.

We shall see that Nabokov, the consummate artist, employs these almost subliminal signs and symbols and integrates them into the architecture of his art.


GENERAL SESSION
July 15

Alexander Zholkovsky, University of Southern California, USA
On the Genre of Nabokov's "First Poem"

As has been noted, Chapter 11 of Speak, Memory (= "First Poem"; 1949) is not a strictly factual account of the author's creative debut; in fact, the very poem in question has not been identified among the extant Nabokov corpus. In a recent article (see The Nabokovian 47), I added the issue of the text's arch interplay with several poetic pre-texts, including Bunin's, and most notably Khodasevich's "monkey" poems, as well as some Tiutchev and Fet lyrics, especially the latter's "Na stoge sena noch'iu iuzhnoi." [In a haystack on a southern night...].

The paper will focus on the generic parameters informing such fictionalized treatments of 'creative debuts,' by way of comparison primarily with Isaak Babel's "Moi pervyi gonorar"/"Spravka" [My first fee/Answer to Inquiry]). Nabokov could have been familiar with Babel's story, which appeared in English only in the Soviet International Literature in 1937.

Despite obvious differences (e. g., the absence in Nabokov's text of the 'sexual initiation' motif, so central to Babel's), the two stories share several constitutive topoi: semi-ironic first-person reminiscing mode; acknowledgement of juvenile imitativeness; role of real-life parent figures; subversive Bloomian play with a major literary "father"; and some others. Even the time frames seem to coincide: the year 1914.

Both the affinities and differences help to sketch out a tentative definition of the 'debut' genre of quasi-autobiographical prose. Further study will involve a wider set of similar texts.


GENERAL SESSION
July 15

Samuel Schuman, University of Minnesota, Morris, USA
"A poem, a poem, forsooth:" Immortality and Transformation in Shakespeare's Sonnets and Nabokov's Novels

In the Sonnets, especially numbers 15-20, Wm. Shakespeare evokes the motif of immortality at several levels. Nabokov's novels are similarly evocative. Both authors see in the work of art a means of eternalizing the subject of the poem or novel, and its author as well. And, in works such as Sonnet 18, and Lolita or Ada, this immortality is achieved through a kind of transmutation of the author and the beloved "into" the literary work. For both writers, this theme seems to combine literary technique and autobiographical intensity. The force which creates these transformations is the power of love and the magic of language.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Savely Senderovich, Yelena Shvarts, Cornell University, USA
"The Tongue, that Punchinello"

A little stage is inventively placed upon Pnin himself-in the manner of a street show Petrushka whose puppetmaster carried a little stage right on his head:

The organs concerned in the production of English speech sounds are the larynx, the velum, the lips, the tongue (that punchinello in the troupe), and last but not least, the lower jaw; mainly upon its overenergetic and somewhat ruminant motion did Pnin rely when translating in class passages in the Russian grammar or some poem by Pushkin. If his Russian was music, his English was murder. (P 66)

A detailed description of Pnin's English follows in such a manner that the narrator invites the reader to perform a pantomime of Pninian articulatory motions grotesquely inadequate for English sounds, to play out the murder against the background music of his Russian. We can unmistakably recognize here a tragicomedy of life in a foreign language.

Timofei Pnin, a sublime champion of his native tongue, appears on the anglophone stage as a farcical protagonist. Various comical reflexes distort this figure throughout the novel. Pnin is not monolingual-he has an excellent command of French, which-in accordance with the laws of tragicomic context-serves to his disadvantage.

As always in Nabokov, his balagan, his fairground stage is intimately associated with the avant-garde theater of the Russian Silver Age, which, in search of pure theatricality, unadulterated by ideas and not degenerated in the service of imitation of reality, lifted up the crude traditional popular forms of entertainment to the level of the most refined art and reworked them into the last word of art. Reflexes of the thought of great masters of Russian avant-garde theater can be detected in Pnin.

The balagan has been a major context of Nabokov's entire work since the beginning of his prose writing, and he did a good deal of punning and other tongue twisting in his Russian period, but as he switched to English, linguistic clowning, verbal harlequinage, becomes compulsive like an uncontrollable twitch, more and more given to private games, until, in Ada and Look at the Harlequins!, his text becomes overwhelmingly hermetic.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Galya Diment, University of Washington, USA
The Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. Pnin in the Land of the North Americans

In a 1924 Lev Kuleshov film, The Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. West in the Land of the Bolsheviks, Mr. West comes to Soviet Russia full of preconceived notions of what he is going to find, only to discover at the end of the film - to the great satisfaction of audiences and censors alike - what a great country it is.

According to Vladimir Nabokov, that very same year one of his protagonists, Timofey Pnin, having actually fled this "great" Land of the Bolsheviks, was in Prague, studying sociology and political economy. Twenty years later, Pnin would reverse Mr. West's itinerary and make his journey to the United States, where his adventures would be every bit as "extraordinary."

It is to these adventures in a different culture and a different language, adventures often shared both by the protagonist of one of Nabokov's liveliest novels and by its creator, that my paper will be devoted.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Eric Naiman, University of California, Berkeley, USA
Perversion in Pnin

My paper identifies perversion as the fundamental thematic and hermeneutic concept in Nabokov's seemingly most sentimental work. I argue that Pnin plays an important role in Nabokov's life-long project of a cultivation of a perverse reader, a reader who will read aggressively, twist normal usage and risk shaming himself by exposing his own potentially excessive interpretive desire. The paper begins by identifying a number of hidden lewd moments in Pnin, most of which are associated with either French puns or with perverse echoes of scenes with Ophelia from Hamlet. Just as a pun twists meaning and the novel distorts Shakespeare's plot, so the narrator of Pnin seeks to pervert Pnin's story, to turn him the wrong way. I then proceed to show how two more crucial themes in Pnin, the image of the squirrel and the homograph (and Shakespearean homonym) fit in to the topic of perversion. Ultimately, perversion becomes both the crime for which the narrator is "punished" and the essential task set for the "good" reader, who finds himself uncomfortably linked to the distorting genius of the text.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Stephen H. Blackwell, University of Tennessee, USA
Aubrey Beardsley and Lolita

The distinctive, if not quite prominent, placement of fin-de-siecle artist Aubrey Beardsley within Lolita's pages receives slight notice from annotator Alfred Appel, whose treatment concerns primarily the prurient qualities of some of Beardsley's works. Similarly, A. Luxemburg's commentary in the Sympozium Russian edition refers to Beardsley's reception as an artist whose work was "utterly frivolous" (ves'ma frivol'noe: St P., 1999, v. 2, 618). However, it turns out that the renowned draftsman's interest for Nabokov probably extended well beyond his sexually explicit drawings. Beardsley was well known in Russia during the "Silver Age"; his works were printed in Mir iskusstva (World of Art), while his letters, diaries, and other writings were translated into Russian. Several books and articles were written about Beardsley by Russian critics, including one in 1912 by Nikolai Evreinov, a figure whose work Nabokov certainly knew. In addition to being a master of the brush, Beardsley also published a few literary compositions, some of which were also translated into Russian during Nabokov's childhood. Two of these, "Story of a Confession Album" (which seems not to have been translated) and a poem entitled "Ballad of a Barber" (which was), have particular significance within Nabokov's notorious novel. The current paper explores the light these texts shed on our understanding of Lolita, especially in view of recent debates (dominated by Alexander Dolinin and Brian Boyd) over the novel's status as a fictive utterance. Beardsley's numerous depictions of butterflies are also briefly addressed.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Sarah Funke, Glenn Horowitz Bookseller, Inc., USA
"Mirages and Nightmares": The Narrative Lessons of Lolita from Novel to Script to Screen

In this paper I will examine how Nabokov grappled not with what have been traditionally seen as the greatest problems in adapting Lolita to film - the plot and the style - but with something still more difficult to convey visually: the narrative content of the novel. With this examination I seek to establish that through Lolita's transition from novel, to script, to screen, Nabokov concretely illustrates the conflict and communion of word and image that is central to his use of memory as a narrative device in much of his prose.

Using chapter eight of his memoir, entitled "Lantern Slides," as the definitional example of Nabokov's favored narrative device-the verbal translation of visual memories - I will show that the power of language to recreate images in the reader's mind dominates Lolita, as well. However, the evolution of Speak, Memory from Conclusive Evidence to Other shores, to the proposed Speak, Mnemosyne, to the final Speak, Memory illustrates a shift in the perceived narrative role of both the concrete images used as mnemonic devices and the mental images of memory. The first suggest that a story can be derived from visual evidence; the second, that one is alternately inspired and dictated by verbally recreated visual memories. The narrative authority similarly shifts with the transfer of visual memories - and visual devices which often stand in for memories, even if false or faded - from the novel to the film.

I begin with an overview of the ways in which memory as a narrative device is thwarted, intentionally, in the novel by the fact that mental images must be recreated verbally, since Humbert has "only words to play with." I then explore the ways in which visual media - not verbal imagery, but photographs, film devices, and the like - contribute to the construction of the narrative of Lolita, unmasking HH the memoirist as something of a scenarist as well. An examination of Nabokov's screenplay - both the published and unpublished versions - reveals the admirable strides he took in translating these devices to film to tell Humbert's story. I conclude by examining Kubrick's tainting of the narrative content of the novel through his cuts to VN's script, as well as his inspired enhancement of certain aspects of the novel - including the fetishizing of the writing process, and the revelation of interior thought - through subtle visual elements.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Jenefer Coates, Middlesex University, London, UK
La Morte d'Humbert - Nabokov's Medieval Texts

"The vocabulary of knight-errantry is new to many [American] readers," wrote Nabokov to the New Yorker in 1951. "I have taken great pains to get these minutiae right. I took an Honors degree in Medieval French at Cambridge and am foolishly proud of these pedantic trifles."

Medieval myth, legend and the courtly romances of Europe form a consistent frame of reference in Nabokov, but their marked presence in his compositions of the 1950s, notably Lolita, suggest a mid-life rereading of the formative texts of youth. What are those archaic codes, conceits and conventions doing in a tale that is set so firmly in our times?

Intertextual sleuths have already revealed innumerable keys to Lolita, but the linked allusions to early English and French texts, where the ideals of love are fused with religious symbolism, have been largely overlooked. Nabokov, by invoking the mythical, magical worlds of Le Morte d'Arthur and prior "architextes", recapitulates Joyce-wise - although less schematically - a tradition that reaches back to Le Roman de la Rose.

This literary genealogy is delineated in the dynamic of the surface narrative: Humbert's journey, which begins in Provence and ends in an American jail, maps a parallel inner transition from the solipsistic idealism of romance to the (relative) objectivity of realism, consciousness and conscience. Nabokov thus challenges the "mythic method" advocated by T.S. Eliot on various planes other than overt parody, whilst also taking surreptitious aim at associated shapers of modernism (e.g. Pound and Sir James Frazer).





NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Juliette Taylor, University of Warwick, UK
Nabokov's Aesthetic of Mistranslation

Central to Nabokov's art is the paradoxical coexistence of two apparently contradictory perspectives on translation and multilingualism. On the one hand Nabokov is dedicated to absolute literal fidelity in translation, associating the miscegenation of languages, misinterpretation and mistranslation with the crazy inversions of a dystopian state (Bend Sinister) and with a Kinbotian disrespect for art (Pale Fire). On the other hand, however, is his appreciation of the creativity inherent in such distortions and semantic confusion. His fictional practice thus makes full use of the productive interaction of different languages: the strange allure of hybrid tongues, the complexities of multilingual puns, and bizarre accidents of mistranslation.

Ada, Nabokov's most multilingual novel, sums up such an ambivalence towards multilingualism: translation is an important theme in the novel, and Nabokov here artfully parodies the practice of liberal or 'readerly' translation. Ada is also, however, the apotheosis of Nabokov's multilingual aesthetic: the clever mistranslations of Van and Ada are not merely parodies, but reflect the language of the novel itself.

This paper therefore examines mistranslation in Ada, not only as a theme within the novel, but as central to its style. My analysis also looks outwards to Nabokov's other English novels, and how an aesthetic of mistranslation as found in Ada can be related to the forms of defamiliarisation produced by Nabokov's multilingualism.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Corinne Scheiner, Colorado College, USA
In Place of a Preface: Reading Chapter One of Nabokov's Laughter in the Dark as a Foreword to the English Translation

During the twelve-year period from 1959 to 1971, Nabokov produced eight of the nine self-translations that comprised what he called "the series of definitive English versions in which [my] entire set of nine Russian novels [. . .] is available to American and British readers" (Vladimir Nabokov, foreword, Glory [New York: Vintage Books, 1991] ix). Of significance to this discussion, is that all eight of these self-translations contain authorial prefaces. Thus, the only one of Nabokov's self-translations not to include a preface is Kamera obskura/Laughter in the Dark, which he translated prior to this period in 1938.

In this paper, I argue that the first few pages of the English version may be read as a foreword (conscious or not) to the novel. I begin by examining Charles Nicol's paradigm for Nabokov's introductions, paying particular attention to what he calls polemic statements and statements concerning the translation (Charles Nicol, "Necessary Instruction or Fatal Fatuity: Nabokov's Introductions and Bend Sinister," Nabokov Studies 1[1994]: 115-129).

Using the theories of the paratext put forth by Gerard Genette and others, I further explore the integral role of the foreword or preface in Nabokov's novels. In particular, I suggest that two of the primary functions that these forewords serve are: 1) to provide Nabokov with an opportunity to guide the reader away from certain interpretations of the text (in particular, Freudian or socio-political) and towards his own conception of the text and 2) to allow Nabokov to comment directly on the act of self-translation in which he is engaged. I then provide a close analysis of the opening pages of Laughter in the Dark in which I illustrate that they perform the same two functions of the prefaces that follow: they serve as meta-commentary on the text and on the act of self-translation.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Maxim D. Shrayer, Boston College, USA
Vladimir Nabokov's Impact on American Post-Modernists: The Case of John Hawkes

To the best of my knowledge, I was the first to articulate, in the introduction to my book The World of Nabokov's Stories (1999), that Nabokov was a cult figure among the American post-modernists who entered the literary mainstream in the late 1940s-early 1950s. In my paper, I would like to assess the impact of Nabokov's works and his literary myth upon the careers of Donald Barthleme, Robert Coover, Stanley Elkin, John Hawkes and other writers of their generation and artistic interests. The paper will include personal reflections on the place of Nabokov in the career of the late John Hawkes whom I got to know in 1988 as a student in his fiction writing seminar at Brown University.








NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Paul Benedict Grant, University of Glasgow, Crichton Campus, UK
Nabokov and Transcendentalism

In an interview with Alfred Appel Jr. in 1967, Nabokov praised Ralph Waldo Emerson's poetry. His mention of Emerson, whose poems habitually served as vehicles for his metaphysical beliefs, suggests a possible link with American Transcendentalism, the religious and literary movement for which Emerson was the chief spokesman.

Given Nabokov's familiarity with the literature of his 'adopted country', it seems highly unlikely that he was unaware of the philosophical roots of Emerson's verse, or of the leading figures of that movement: he had, in fact, referred to one of these figures, Henry David Thoreau, in his biography of Gogol 23 years earlier, and in his commentary to Eugene Onegin in 1964. A small number of critics (Alexandrov, Boyd, Delizia, Sisson and Toker) have, in passing, compared Nabokov's work to that of both Emerson and Thoreau, but no study has confirmed his philosophical and aesthetic links with Transcendentalism, despite some intriguing parallels.

My paper will examine Nabokov's affinities with these two writers, and the movement they spearheaded, in greater detail. I will begin by identifying aspects of Emerson's poetry that Nabokov may have found congenial, and what particular poems might have appealed. In the course of doing so, I will refer to key texts in the Transcendental canon, such as Emerson's Nature (1836) and Thoreau's Walden (1854), in order to establish a wider context from which to trace congruities.


NABOKOV AND THE UNITED STATES
July 16

Galina Glushanok, Independent Researcher, St. Petersburg, Russia
Nabokov and the Chekhov Publishing House: New Materials from American Archives

The Chekhov Publishing House, which was founded in 1951 with the support of the Ford Foundation in New York, was the largest book publishing company of that era whose goal was to publish the best works of modern Russian fiction and non-fiction written by both émigrés and writers still in Russia.

The Chekhov Publishing House stayed in business for six years. During that time, they published some very important works by Nabokov:

1952 - for the first time the unabridged version of Dar as well as the Introduction to Gogol's Peterburgskiye povesti;
1954 - Drugiye Berega, Nabokov's autobiography in Russian;
1956 - the collection of short stories, Vesna v Fial'te.

Two American archives, The Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East European History and Culture (Columbia University, New York) and the Nabokov Archive (Berg Collection, New York Public Library), hold in their collections the six-year-long correspondence between Nabokov and the publishing house. The archives have 158 pieces of correspondence that give us an idea of how Nabokov worked on preparing those books for publication. Nabokov addressed his letters to four people at Chekhov Publishing House: Director, Nikolas Wreden; Associate Director, Lilian Dillon Plante; and two Editors-in-Chief: V. A. Alexandrova and T. G. Terentyeva. The letters focus on book publication dates, galleys, copyrights, and honorariums.

Nabokov's work on preparing texts for publication seems most interesting. The cuts and changes that the publishing house suggested were thoroughly discussed in the letters. Those work discussions show a rare type of understanding between an author and a publishing house. When making justified changes and correcting small mistakes in the text of Drugiye Berega, V. Alexandrova wrote to Nabokov: ".I am asking you to trust me, my deeply respected Vladimir Vladimirovich, in my sharing your opinion that the 'summit of art' can often be reached by one's 'minimizing great things and maximizing details'; therefore I have reduced to a minimum the list of words that I found unusual."

Not only is the history of Nabokov's writing and publications reflected in his correspondence with the publishing house: it also shows how fruitful the publishing program was in opposing the Communist dictatorship.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Sergei Davydov, Middlebury College, USA
Shishki on Adam's Head: Literary Hoaxes by Khodasevitch and Nabokov

My talk deals with a series of hoaxes perpetrated by V. Khodasevich and V. Nabokov on their fellow émigré writers. Nabokov targets his arch-enemies, G. Adamovich and G. Ivanov (in "Iz Kalmbrudovoj poemy", in the poem "Poety", and in the stories, "Usta k ustam" and "Vasilij Shishkov"). Khodasevich exposed in his hoaxes G. Adamovich and M. Gorky by inventing the writers Vasilij Travnikov. and Vasilij Sizov. My paper attempts to place Nabokov's and Khodasevich's practical jokes in the context of the literary polemics as it developed in Russian Diaspora during the 1920's and 1930's.
ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Yuichi Isahaya, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan
Nabokov and Georgiy Ivanov - Two Conflicting Petersburgs

The cult of Petersburg was widespread in the poetry of the Silver Age in Russia. And young VN started his literary career as a lyric poet who sang nostalgia for his native land, including Petersburg. He wrote four poems named "Petersburg" (or "St. Petersburg") in 1921-24, but soon abandoned this theme and headed for wider and more abstract themes such as Russia, homeland, youth, and so forth.

On the other hand, Georgiy Ivanov, VN's literary enemy, grew out of the influence of Acmeism and continued to write about Petersburg until his death in 1958. In spite of their hostility, they had much in common; for example, Petersburg was an important background for their works; they both wished to return to Russia by means of art or literature; they both loved the sunset above the Neva. But we can't but notice the large difference in their portraits of Petersburg.

For example, while Ivanov's Petersburg bears highly apocalyptic color and he sees the city as a person, VN's Petersburg is picturesque and sketches of Nevsky are the main focus of his works. To contrast VN's Petersburg with Ivanov's Petersburg will help us to understand the peculiarity of VN's Petersburg and to judge fairly VN's comments about émigré poets dispersed among VN's later prose works.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Ole Nyegaard, University of Aarhus, Denmark
On Bely's and Nabokov's Use of Space in Fiction

In discussions of similarities between the prose of Andrei Bely and Vladimir Nabokov the most obvious and often mentioned link is the use of poetic prose - in the shape of alliteration, rhythm and passages written in meter. As Vladimir Alexandrov has shown, this connection goes further than mere stylistic practice and is seen in metaphysical themes and the emphasis made on the ethical consequences of aesthetics.

Another approach to the study of both authors could be through their use of space, to analyse and compare their chronotopes. By an inventive use of spatial descriptions both writers define the psychological traits of fictional characters. - cf. Bakhtin: "The image of man is always intrinsically chronotopic". In Petersburg descriptions of the Ableukhov household emblematise the mentality of the family-members and the emotional coldness after the departure of Anna Petrovna. Likewise, in Lolita, where 342 Lawn Street not only serves as a showcase of the poshlust of Charlotte Haze but also as a spatial example of Humbert Humbert's amoral world view and failure to comprehend his surroundings.

The aim of a spatial reading is not so much the "how" - the tools of fictional portraits - as an attempt to uncover the roots of Nabokovian poetics (in the Silver Age); that is, to shed light on Nabokov's westernized version of his Russian literary heritage.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Dana Dragunoiu, Princeton University, USA
Russian Neo-Idealism and Vladimir Nabokov's Philosophical Domain

Nabokov frequently lamented the lack of awareness among European and American intellectuals of the Russian liberal tradition that flourished during the two decades that preceded the 1917 revolution. Liberal thinkers such as Nabokov's father, V.D. Nabokov, and his colleagues made significant contributions to Russian intellectual history, and yet these contributions have been marginalized by the tendency to see turn-of-the-century Russian politics as polarized between tsarist autocracy and Marxist-Leninist revolution. The philosophical foundations of Russian liberalism (whose most influential theoreticians were closely affiliated with V. D. Nabokov) have been marginalized to an even greater extent, and do not usually receive the attention they deserve.

The first section of my paper reconstructs Nabokov's personal and professional contact with some of the most important thinkers in the movement now known as the Russian Religious-Philosophical Renaissance. Pyotr Struve and Pavel Novgorodtsev, for instance, were key contributors to the foundational work of Russian liberalism Problemy idealizma (1902), and they were also V.D. Nabokov's close allies in the Kadet Party. During his European exile, Nabokov counted among his friends and acquaintances neo-idealists (such as Nikolai Berdiaev and Yuli Aikhenval'd) and the sons of neo-idealists (such as Gleb Struve and Georgy Vernadskii).

The second part of my paper ventures an interpretation of Nabokov's philosophical and political declarations in the context of Russian neo-idealism. I will argue that acknowledging the neo-idealist elements in Nabokov's oeuvre helps explain two of the most puzzling aspects of his work. The first of these centers on his dual commitment to science and metaphysics, and his assertion that all fields of knowledge are ultimately responsible to philosophy (qtd. in Johnson and Coates 330). I will argue that this position is inspired by the neo-idealists' anti-positivist arguments that science and metaphysics co-exist and co-operate under the greater authority of philosophy.

The second aspect I will single out for discussion concerns the paradoxical relationship between Nabokov's overtly political writings (Invitation to a Beheading, Bend Sinister) and his life-long refusal to belong to political parties and special-interest groups. I will argue that this position is grounded in the neo-idealist attempt to found liberalism upon a spiritualist world view in which individual consciousness (as the irreducible prime site of human value and freedom) becomes the precondition for a democratic form of social organization.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Olga Voronina, Herzen University, St. Petersburg, Russia
Dream as a Structural Device in Pushkin, Tolstoy and Nabokov

When studying the literary works of his predecessors, Nabokov paid special attention to dreams, which interested him both as a peculiar state in which human consciousness reveals its secrets and as a literary device that allows an author to refine and elaborate upon the structure of his work.

In my paper I will compare Nabokov's analysis of dreams in Pushkin's Eugene Onegin and Tolstoy's Anna Karenina with his ideas about the author's presence in a work of literature, hidden in or exposed through an intricate web of motifs and sub-plots. From there I will proceed to analyzing Fyodor's dream about his father in The Gift.

Following motifs of death and return (both spatial and spectral), I will show how Fyodor's dream, that cornerstone of the complicated structure of The Gift, joins together its five story-lines and helps the reader to resolve the mystery of its authorship. By comparing the dreams of characters in Anna Karenina to that of Fyodor, I will demonstrate that Nabokov, unlike Tolstoy, instead of trying to hide his presence, used the dream as a means of establishing his position as a God-like, omnipresent figure in the novel.






ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Paul Morris, Universitaet des Saarlandes, Germany
The Poetry of Nabokov's Drama The Waltz Invention

Although perhaps most widely known as a writer of innovative prose works, Vladimir Nabokov was also an accomplished poet and dramatist. The paper proposed for presentation here will seek to demonstrate the central relevance of poetry to Nabokov's most thematically puzzling play, The Waltz Invention (Izobreteniye Val'sa).

A close reading of the play, which emphasizes its poetic qualities, will be suggested to indicate the thematic interconnectedness of Nabokov's oeuvre. It will be shown that Nabokov's play of 1938 draws upon a core cluster of themes and motifs derived from Nabokov's poetry. In particular, four specific moments of poetry will be examined to indicate their expression of the specific quandary of the play's poet manqué and central character, Waltz-Tourvalski - the desire to escape the torments of life for a purer realm while not wishing to forego the beauty of the living world.

In examining the way poetry is used both thematically and formally in The Waltz Invention, I intend to contribute to a fuller understanding of a little studied work by Nabokov and Nabokov's poetics of the theatre, while suggesting the poetic inter-relatedness of his oeuvre as a whole.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Stanislav Shvabrin, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Vladimir Vladimirovich N., Ivan Petrovich Pnin: an Earlier Encounter?

In her Pniniad. Vladimir Nabokov and Marc Szeftel (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997) Galya Diment has attempted to locate various sources for Pnin. Following the lead of Andrew Field, Diment discusses the role Nabokov's Cornell colleague, Mark Szeftel, played as a prototype for the novel's protagonist. Diment also suggests that the protagonist's name might have been borrowed from Vl. Orlov's Russkie prosvetiteli 1790-1800-kh godov (L: Goslitizdat, 1950, 1953), a book that Nabokov could hardly have missed while doing research on Eugene Onegin's literary background. The second edition of Orlov's book came out in 1953, coinciding with the earliest reference to what was to yet to become Pnin in the writer's correspondence with Edmund Wilson.

The actual rediscovery of Ivan Petrovich Pnin by Soviet literary scholars took place in 1934 when Orlov and I.K. Luppol put together a collection of his works. Reviewed in the Russian émigré press in detail, this book could have provided the writer with an excellent opportunity to make the acquaintance of his famous character's literary protagonist.

The proposed paper explores how the Orlov/Luppol collection and its émigré reviews are echoed in Pnin.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Vera Polischouk, Herzen University, St. Petersburg, Russia
Under the Badge of Nabokov (VN's Influence on Modern Russian Literature)

1. The problem of different sources of influence on Vladimir Nabokov has been widely discussed in many critical studies for many years. However, there has been no attempt to outline another important problem: Nabokov's influence on modern literature. This article is aimed to describe one particular aspect of the phenomena, that is, Russian literature at the end of the 20th and in the beginning of the 21st century, developing "under the badge of Nabokov". Analyzing this problem gives us a perfect opportunity to establish a new point of view on teaching Nabokov as a key figure for modern Russian literature.

2. There are a number of historical circumstances which can partly explain Nabokov's special status for modern Russian writers. One of them is his belonging to a long list of "forbidden books", which for years and years were available only in photocopies and Ardis editions. As a result, the very mentioning of his name and/or showing the knowledge of his works became a sign of belonging to "the initiated".

3. Analyzing some texts of modern Russian literature, we can name several models of Nabokov's presence in them. One of them consists of using the very "myth" of Nabokov as the world-famous author of Lolita, arrogant loner, inhabitant of Montreux Palace; it can be found in Sergey Dovlatov's story "Life Is Short" and some other texts. The other can be described as an occasional parody or travesty of Nabokov's plots, mostly Ada and Lolita and/or using stylistic devices, which are aimed at indicating an author's connection to Nabokov. The list of modern texts analyzed includes short stories by Tatiana Tolstaya ("Night", "You love me - you don't", "Sweet Shura", etc.); Angel's Bite, a novel by Pavel Krusanov; "Alone in the Mirror" by Olga Slavnikova; "The Works of Pheognide" by Alexei Purin; Pioneer Lolita, a novel by Boris Nosik; the short stories "Honey" and "Bron'ka" by Ludmila Ulitskaya; There's a House near the Neva River, a novel in verse by Vladimir Gandelsman; and "Version", a poem by Dmitrii Bykov.

4. There is no doubt that the process of creative rereading and rewriting Vladimir Nabokov will be continued in the 21st century Russian literature.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Agnès Edel-Roy, University of Paris III, Censier, France
The Meaning of Russianness in the Fictional System of Some of Nabokov's "Russian" Novels

When The Defense was first published, partly in 1929, then in 1930, the main exiled Russian critics wrote that Sirin's style was devoid of soul and heart. His style was that of a stranger, that is to say, a non-Russian style.

However Russia, and into Russia specially St. Petersburg, fills some of Sirin's "Russian" novels. In the first part, we will characterize the different modes of Russia's figuration in chosen novels : for Russia's presence takes diversified forms (remembered Russia, literary Russia, transposed Russia, .) and even ambivalent forms.

Russia's various presence in Sirin's novels is never folkloric, but on the contrary always firmly linked with the fictional system of the novels. We think that specific mode of Russia's figuration participates in the novels' construction and working. In the second part, we will analyze precisely the Russia's (St. Petersburg's when necessary) modes of integration into the chosen novels' fictional system.

From the uncomfortable place of exile, which, however, was welcomed by Nabokov as it gave him some creative liberty, he undertook to renew (Russian ?) fiction. This dialogue with Russia isn't a technical one but is led so that the literary work upon Russia becomes a discriminating one. Taking two examples, extremely different, we will study how Sirin's novels can be considered as aesthetic arms. Nabokov, novel after novel, has become a "Russian" writer - not typically Russian, but universally so.


ST. PETERSBURG AND RUSSIA IN NABOKOV'S OEUVRE
July 17

Alexei Sklyarenko, Independent Researcher, St. Petersburg, Russia
Hidden Russian Allusions in Nabokov's Ada

This paper will consider the multiple hidden allusions to the works of Russian writers (both Russian classics and the little-known works of almost forgotten authors) and to other Russian historical books and sources of genealogical knowledge (e. g. the so-called Barkhatnaya kniga, the Family Register of Russian Princes and Nobles) that play a more or less significant part in Ada or Ardor: A Family Chronicle. These important allusions are still very little studied and many of them, though lying at the bottom of Ada's design and composition, are not annotated anywhere. Their elucidation will make possible the discovery of both new layers of meaning in the novel and solutions of many of its puzzles, which may be of particular interest to the Western scholars whose field of work encompasses that novel and who have taken such pains to cast light on its English and French background and sources. On the other hand, this paper will help to bring the novel, one of the most ambitious of Nabokov's English novels (in the opinion of many, the best novel) back to the context of Russian culture and literature.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Michael Wood, Princeton University, USA
The Politics of Zembla

What would it mean to imagine that Nabokov's metaphysics were also a politics? We would have to think of the metaphysics as rather less unworldly than they have often been portrayed, even by Nabokov himself. This is not difficult to do, however, given Nabokov's evident love of the details ('no delight without the detail') of this world, and the at least arguable sense that the hope of another world might arise because of rather than in spite of an awareness of this world's finality.

But surely Nabokov's politics are quite obvious, and not at all metaphysical? There are two answers to this question, although the paper will address only the second. First, Nabokov's own politics were far more subtle and far-ranging than we have thought. Second, the politics of the novels, often fantastic, apparently a refusal of all politics except those of escape or capacious disapproval, are always, even at the heart of the fantasy, intimately connected to the stubborn facts of contemporary history. To say this is not crudely to 'historicize' Nabokov's fiction, or to claim that Pale Fire, for instance, is at bottom a Cold War novel. It is to say that, through Pale Fire, we may understand the Cold War, and much else in the world of politics, in ways that have so far eluded us. Or at least, that is the hypothesis this paper wishes to test.

I shall concentrate on the novel I have just mentioned, but of course Invitation to a Beheading and Bend Sinister cannot be left out of such considerations.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Lyubov' Bugayeva, Herzen University, Russia
Philosophy and Politics in Nabokov's Bend Sinister

At the beginning of the 20th century, the metaphorical role of Orpheus, as one who possessed mystical knowledge, stood out as a mediating influence between two worlds. The growing interest in the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice is due to the treatment of Orphism as a theory of the extension of the boundaries of the phenomenological body and the interpretation of Orpheus as a hero who crosses the gap between the living and the dead. Bend Sinister is an integral part of Nabokov's hypertext based on this mythological plot that includes such works as "The Return of Chorb", "Terror", "Ultima Thule" and "Transparent Things". Like Orpheus, the hero of the novel, Adam Krug, reveals his urgent desire to break away from the confinement of the body and to expand beyond the familiar bodily experience. The interpretation of the LIFE vs. DEATH concept attracts Krug's thought by its potential to solve "the riddle of the universe" and to record the mystical insights of an individual in the course of the transition. Through such attempts death would acquire the nature of a scientific experiment aimed at exploring the areas from where "no traveler returns". The aspiring mind of Krug as well as the motif of time is reminiscent of Faust in the versions of the Faust legend by both Marlowe and Goethe:
"I found and touched this - a selected combination, details of the bas-relief. I had never touched this particular knob before and shall never find it again. This moment of conscious contact holds a drop of solace. The emergency brake of time. Whatever the present moment is, I have stopped it. Too late" (Nabokov, V. Bend Sinister. Aylesbury, 1974. P. 21-22).

In addition to literary allusions to the legends of Orpheus and Faust, there is a complicated philosophical background in the novel that is also connected with the problem of mortality and immortality. In his aesthetic search for the solution of the problem Nabokov moves in the direction of replacing the soul/body opposites with the spirit/body opposites. Thus he develops Cartesian ideas expressed in Meditationes de Prima Philosophia (1641). But at the same time Nabokov leaves in his text the possibility of an afterlife. On one hand, Nabokov's hero, in his philosophical speculations, follows Kant in asserting the existence of the objective world outside our consciousness. On the other hand, he tries to break down the perception into simple elements in order to find proof of immortality. The tragedy of Krug is in his incapacity to solve any of the four Kantian antinomies.

The political background of the novel, Bend Sinister, seems to support the development of the LIFE vs. DEATH concept. The Nordic myth explored in fascist Germany is a focus of attention in Nabokov's novel. The approach to the myth is twofold. Taking into consideration the social reality of the 1930s and 1940s, the Nordic associations are connected with the DEATH concept. In view of Thule mythology they are incorporated into the LIFE concept.

Therefore, the philosophical and political backgrounds of the novel, Bend Sinister, complement each other partly because they are both centered on the problems of mortality and immortality.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Igor Smirnov, Universitaet Konstanz, Germany
Samozvantsy in Nabokov's Despair

Despair, a narrative about the criminal appropriation of other's personality, contains hidden allusions to several scandalous samozvantsy (impostors) stories that took place in Western and Eastern Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries. One of the real samozvantsy referred to in the novel is Timozhka Akundinov (drawn and quartered in 1653), about whom Nabokov learned, most likely, from Adam Olearius' work about his travels to Moscovia and Persia. According to Olearius, Ankundinov, after being caught for theft, staged his own death and fled Moscow; Nabokov's Herman is on the brink of bankruptcy, which he wants to escape by "disappearing" from life. Both Akundinov (who claimed he was a son of Vassily Shuisky) and Herman say that they belong to a princely family. Herman can skillfully change his handwriting; Olearius writes that Akundinov could do that, too. Although, at first glance, Despair looks like a modern story, it could be, in fact, considered a historic novel that looks back at the early 19th century tradition, when the phenomenon of samozvantsy became an important literary subject.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Julian W. Connolly, University of Virginia, USA
The Elemental Nabokov: The Role of Natural Elements in Nabokov's Fiction

The natural world in Nabokov's fiction is the object of loving and detailed attention by the author (a serious naturalist as well as creative writer). Yet a close reading of Nabokov's fiction reveals that behind the precise descriptions of natural phenomena lies a deeper layer of metaphorical (and metaphysical) meaning.

Even a casual reader may be aware of the prominence of the natural elements in Nabokov's work. "Earth" finds obvious representation in concepts such as "Terra" and "Anti-Terra" in Ada, or "Zembla" in Pale Fire. "Fire," of course, figures conspicuously in the title of the latter novel, and in strange distortions of characters' names (e.g. "Thayer" in Pnin). The element "air" takes a number of forms in Nabokov's fiction; with the most important of these being the tumultuous irruptions of wind gusts at key points in several works. "Water," however, may be the element that carries the most significant and complex associations in Nabokov's oeuvre, and this paper will pay special attention to some of the ways that water images are reflected in his work (as, for example, in the rusalka theme).

It is hoped that this examination of natural elements will illuminate Nabokov's intricate and idiosyncratic vision of the cosmos.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Zoran Kuzmanovich, Davidson College, USA
"A Blissful Abyss:" Nabokov's Imagination of Limits

James Laughlin describes how in the summer of 1943 Nabokov's deft use of a butterfly net saved Laughlin's life by arresting his "sheer drop into the abyss." That "the" in front of "abyss" strikes me as singularly un-Nabokovian. Nabokov may have saved Laughlin from plunging to his death off Lone Peak, but Nabokov's abysses are rarely as definitive as Laughlin's words imply his own would have been. Nabokov had rather elastic notions of space, place, and time, and thus the abysmal in Nabokov is variously blissful and inadmissible, solipsismal and transparent, faceless and friendly, brief and absolute, watery and wooden, dizzy yet voluptuous.

In my paper, as a way of theorizing Nabokov's imagination of limits (and
the limitless), I examine

a) passages from Nabokov's own works (primarily The Gift, Lolita, Speak Memory, and "The Aurelian") in which "abyss" co-occurs with "bliss," and
b) works by other writers (Kathryn Harrison, Linda Kauffman, Billy Collins, Alice Fulton, Jane Kenyon) who have addressed themselves to Nabokov's use of these terms and concepts.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Yuri Leving, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem / University of Southern California, Israel/USA
The Metaphysics of the Garage (Nabokov and Automobile Aesthetics)

In 20th century literature the automobile presented a kind of alternative that had been offered by the 19th "century of iron" (A. Blok's definition of 1917). It is not by mere coincidence that the Time magazine journalist noticed with surprise in his interview of 1969 that some of the most thrilling moments in Nabokov's recent novels were related to the problem of driving. The central moment in understanding the Automobile archetype in Nabokov's fiction is deciphering the idea of an unwritten novel on the poetics of the automobile (the only surviving evidence of it is a long description in Nabokov's letter to his wife in 1932) - an enigma which has not received much attention from Nabokov scholars. Although the number of Nabokov's unfulfilled literary plans is very limited, this theme had been disclosed and it resounded in his prose in the following decades, including Lolita and Pnin. One cannot ignore the fact that Nabokov, who himself owned a dozen cars during his life (though always driven by his wife), appears to be one of the first novelists in the history of Russian literature who grew up in a family which had a number of luxurious automobiles.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Liudmila Ryaguzova, Kuban' State University, Russia
Substantial Ontological Foundations of Nabokov's Fiction

The existential experience of Nabokov's characters can be related to the mental sphere of the universal. Researchers are yet to make an in-depth analysis of the ontological themes in Nabokov's works from the historical and categorical perspective. I believe that one can compare some of Nabokov's concepts, especially those rooted in archaic ideas, to the neo-mythologism and neo-syncretism of art that was contemporary with Nabokov. For instance, neo-syncretism was expressed in Nabokov's fiction in the sensory image of the world he created, in the cyclical structure of his time and space, and in the principle of synesthesia he adopted. One of the elements of the "ancient [folk] complex" (M. Bakhtin) in Nabokov's fiction is of equal importance and significance to the big events in one's life as well as of its smallest details. This non-hierarchy of Nabokov's model of the world is revealed particularly in the "presumption of all-inspiredness" (prezumptsia vseodushevlyonnosti, U. Levin), which stands for giving equal rights to people and things, the small details of life and great instances of being, micro- and macro-cosmos. The past is present in every particle of Nabokov's fictional world, which gives it the "taste of eternity".

Nabokov's artistic consciousness lingers on the substantial and mythological brink, especially when he explores such themes as incest, life after death, reversal of birth and death, and the interconnection of ends and beginnings. Nabokov's ontological dream of eternal life is connected to such archaic ideas as "pre-life abyss", "afterlife", and birth as reversed dying. It's no accident that Bakhtin's "jolly death" (vesyolaya smert') - that is, death, placed in the context of the beginning of a new life (the "wheel of births" [koleso rozhdeniy]), which is so typical in folklore and the carnival-like self-understanding of the Middle Ages, reminds us of the "fearless death" (nestrashnaya smert') in Nabokov's fiction, where death is often just a matter of style or a whim of the author. In his language as well as in his approach to life Nabokov preserves the logic of initial correlation of meanings, the ambivalence and self-reversal quality of images. The "funny horror" (smeshnoye strashnoye) and the "balagan of death" in Nabokov's texts lead to a certain "catharsis of poshlust" (M. Bakhtin). Some of Nabokov's stylistical devices and aesthetic principles acquire a different meaning in this reversed symmetrical harmony. For instance, this is true of the principle of the inner self-transformation of his texts, which can be compared to the principle of reversed perspective in fine art, to Bakhtin's concept of "historic inversion", or to the grotesque type of imagery.

Nabokov's expression "the magic of style" can be taken literally (in archaic art a word had magical power, it provided the ideological substitute of an object, though the object itself could replace a greater object or concept). Nabokov objected to our interpreting his words as symbols ("labels") that could kill the magic of his text. For him, a word was neither a technical instrument nor a rhetorical figure; it was a "rudiment of a metaphor", "an echo of creative feeling", or the "live bit of a whole picture". This also includes Nabokov's ability to perceive and convey the smell and the taste of words. He lets us feel the words as special spiritual substances, the very fabric of which has its own meaning. We can add to this that Nabokov deeply feels the ontological roots of words and the importance of naming; in his interpretation of words he tried to reach down to the very beginning, to "follow the ancestor to his lair".

Nabokov's text can be studied as a palimpsest. Its cultural overlays (the overlaying of various signs and codes) reach down to the ancient and thus reveal, rather than hide, the meta-essence of life, the "dark root of being" (tyomnyi koren' mirovogo bytia - V. Solovyov).


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Jacqueline Hamrit, Université Charles-de-Gaulle, Lille 3, France
Do you believe in ghosts? Nabokov and French Thought

The analysis of "The Art of Literature and Commonsense" published in 1980 in Lectures on Literature has allowed Richard Rorty and Vladimir Alexandrov to treat Nabokov's metaphysics. For Rorty, it is characterized by a contradiction between his "Platonic a-temporalism and his anti-platonic sensualism", and for Alexandrov, it gives evidence of "a faith in a transcendent realm", a belief in "the otherworld", "the beyond". However, Nabokov has always denied any relation of his works with Plato's "cave business" and replied with extreme ambiguity about his belief in God. The paper proposes to show that Nabokov's metaphysics is not based on the idea of a separation between the otherworld and this world, the beyond and the space within but on a poetics of a space located "elsewhere" which encloses the beyond in this world through the interlocking of a double bind which creates and emerges from constant alternations. Indeed, contamination characterizes his conception of the opposition between life and death, reality and fiction, as death is present in life and there remains something after death. As for "reality", it is haunted by specters, and his fiction plays on the artifice of simulacrums. Evidence of this contamination can be apprehended in the deconstruction he performs of the opposites Belief/Disbelief which go beyond mere doubt.


BEYOND NABOKOV'S METAPHYSICS
July 18

Juliette de Dieuleveult, Université de la Sorbonne-Nouvelle, France
Proustian Echoes in Nabokov's Novels: In Search of the Truth of Art

When a journalist asked Vladimir Nabokov to name his favorite authors, he mentioned Marcel Proust among three others. Proust is indeed a writer whom he admired and, as often in Nabokov's case, also liked to quote, mock, or even use for pastiche.

The presence of Proust in Nabokov's novels is manifold: it encompasses simple allusions, precise quotes, references to definite characters, parodies and pastiches, such as Segelkranz' purple patch in Kamera Obskura, or "The Texture of Time" in Ada.

If Proust tends to become a character in some of Nabokov's novels, it is because Nabokov and he share a common goal. Both constantly expressed their passion for art and both saw in their novels a means to unveil the truth of art. The fact that Proust and Nabokov created a whole population of fictional artists, from Vinteuil to Melle Larivière and Bergotte to Fyodor testifies to their urge to import art into life. Consequently, the novel is turned into a self-sufficient universe which contains every jewel created by nature and art.

Thus, by studying the various metamorphoses of the Proustian theme in Nabokov's novels (from Kamera Obskura and The Gift to Lolita and Ada), we will be able to learn about the aims Nabokov assigned to art.

NABOKOV'S BUTTERFLIES
July 18

Dieter Zimmer, Translator / Editor / Commentator of Nabokov, Berlin, Germany
Chinese Rhubarb and Caterpillars

A personal account of how, in the course of the entomohistorical inquiries for my book A Guide to Nabokov's Butterflies and Moths, I happened to find the recondite answers to a few puzzling questions that proved to be interrelated. Who is that Father Dejean whose lot Pilgram (in the story "The Aurelian") envies? Is there a caterpillar that mimics the root of rhubarb? Where is the place near which Fyodor's father (in The Gift) perished? Why is the Berlin room where Fyodor in his dream meets his dead father decorated with a butterfly called Thecla bieti?


NABOKOV'S BUTTERFLIES
July 18

Victoria Alexander, Dactyl Foundation (NY), Santa Fe Institute (NM), USA
Neutral Evolution, Teleology and Nabokov on Insect Mimicry

"The mysteries of mimicry had a special attraction for me. Its phenomena showed an artistic perfection usually associated with man-wrought things ... 'Natural selection,' in the Darwinian sense, could not explain the miraculous coincidence of imitative aspect and imitative behavior, nor could one appeal to the theory of 'the struggle for life' when a protective device was carried to a point of mimetic subtlety, exuberance, and luxury far in excess of a predator's power of appreciation. I discovered in nature the non-utilitarian delights that I sought in art. Both were a form of magic, both were a game of intricate enchantment and deception." -VN

Nabokov argued, rather heretically, that some instances of insect mimicry did not result from Darwinian survival strategies; that is, slight resemblances could not be furthered by the function or purpose they served, leading gradually to better resemblances. I contend Nabokov was partially correct in his belief. Recent advances in evolutionary biology, namely structural evolution and neutral evolution, can be shown to support his views. I also argue it was Nabokov's aesthetic interest in the mechanisms behind teleological phenomena that gave him the insight to think about mimicry in a way that was quite progressive for his time.







NABOKOV'S BUTTERFLIES
July 18

Konstantin Efetov, Crimean Medical University, Ukraine
The Family Zygaenidae (Lepidoptera) in Nabokov's Works

There is a problem with the identification of Lepidoptera that Nabokov mentioned in his works without scientific or vernacular names. In this case only an entomologist can recognize what Nabokov means. Nabokov has not been a specialist in the family Zygaenidae (Lepidoptera), but he mentioned these moths in his writings a few times. There are two known records of this family: in the poem "Krym" and in The Gift (see Efetov, 2001: 32-33; Zimmer, 2001: 283-284); the author has found another one. In his work Speak, Memory, Nabokov writes: "Several moths, too, were flying - gaudy sun lovers that sail from flower to flower like painted flies". It is absolutely clear that this sentence is about the species of the genus Zygaena, which are day-flying ("sun lovers"), small ("like flies"), brightly colored ("gaudy", "painted") moths (not butterflies!) with characteristic slow flight ("that sail from flower to flower").


NABOKOV'S BUTTERFLIES
July 18
Andrei Ena, Crimean State Agrarian University; Konstantin Efetov, Crimean Medical University, Ukraine
The Other Trees: Crimean Flora in Nabokov's Poetry

When living in Crimea, Nabokov seemed not to notice the local flora, although he constantly referred to the plants of Middle Russia such as birch, bird cherry tree, linden, and lilacs. Only after he emigrated did the "wild and fragrant land" begin to sparkle in his memory like a butterfly that had emerged from its chrysalis. In his narrative poem "Crimea" (Krym), inspired by the spirits of Pan and Pushkin, Nabokov put together a bouquet of flash-like memories, in which, among precise landscape sketches, he placed "thick bunches of euphorbia, / the taste of warm Cornelian cherries", "Bakhchisarai's poplars", "dingy Juda's trees", "and the sweet-smelling cypress, / and the waxen medlar."

Lilies of the valley, cornflowers, and dandelions - "the poor man's gold" - appear in Nabokov's poetry most frequently. This dramatic theme of herbs culminates in the motif of "dark lilac petals of violets / scattered on the marble", which may be a reference to of Cyprian Norwid ("Here violets grow amidst the rocky plain, / And we gather them, like tears, for memory.") This is such a Mediterranean image and yet it is also a wonderful, touching reality that every botanist would notice: ancient Greek ruins are drowned in violets in the spring.







POSTER PAPER

Margarit Tadevosyan and Maxim D. Shrayer (Boston
College)


"Thou Are Not Thou": Nabokov and Evelyn Waugh

For the first time in literary scholarship, this
paper explores the prominent connections between
Vladimir Nabokov?s Real Life of Sebastian Knight and
Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited.

Waugh's novel, which came out in 1945, three and a
half years following the publication of RLSK,
reveals similarities with Nabokov?s novel on
multiple levels.

The paper examines the structural and textual
similarities of the two novels as well as some of
the mythological and ecclesiastical themes that they
share.  The similarities include the novels? first
person narrators and their relationships with the
respective principal characters named "Sebastian."
The paper argues for the centrality of the myth of
St. Sebastian in the construction of the characters
of Sebastian Knight and Sebastian Flyte.
Additionally, the two novels share the myth of
Narcissus in the construction of these two
characters.  Finally, the paper focuses on the
prevalence of heart disease in the families of
Sebastian Knight and Sebastian Flyte, as well as the
influence of heart disease on the lives of these
characters.  Following a close examination of the
similarities between the two novels, the paper
considers the degree to which Waugh and Nabokov
might have been familiar with each other?s works.
In its conclusions, the paper asserts the heretofore
unrecognized (and unadmitted) influence of RLSK on
BR.

tadevosy@bc.edu
shrayerm@bc.edu





POSTER PAPER

Daniela Monica Oancea, The University of Paris 7, France
A Portrait of the Artist as a Child: Vladimir Nabokov and Steven Millhauser

In this paper I would like to explore what seems to me an undeniable literary kinship between Nabokov's art of fiction and a number of recurrent formal and thematic features present in the work of Steven Millhauser, author of several novels and collections of short stories and winner of the 1997 Pulitzer Prize for Martin Dressler.

I would like to focus more specifically on Millhauser's acclaimed novel Edwin Mullhouse. The Life and Death of an American Writer 1943-1954 by Jeffrey Cartwright (1972), which collects an impressive amount of echoes coming from various Nabokovian novels (Ada, The Real Life of Sebastian Knight, Speak, Memory and especially Pale Fire).

Edwin Mullhouse appears as the biography of a brilliant child-writer, Edwin Mullhouse, recorded by his equally brilliant coeval friend and peeping neighbour, Jeffrey Cartwright, a Kinbote-like figure who constantly constructs Edwin's present life from the perspective of a future recollection (a jocular strategy evoked in Speak, Memory) ready to be metamorphosed into a biographical item useful to the budding biographer who, significantly, is a veiled tyrant aware of having the last word. Edwin Mullhouse is inhabited by Nabokovian children of genius who read Shakespeare at a tender age and nurture the precocious desire to exhaust the world linguistically by naming all its details (Ada obviously comes to mind).

Millhauser's fictional universe is also characterized by a certain number of Nabokovian formal devices, among which the love for puns and games, for word-play reminiscent of word-golf, a special sensitivity to the visual and spatial quality of sounds and above all the fondness for details and miniatures which binds the two authors in literary brotherhood.


POSTER PAPER

Anita Kondoyanidi, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA
Transcendence of Exile: Nabokov's St. Petersburg

In her memoirs, Kursiv Moi, Nina Berberova proudly accentuates her connection with Vladimir Nabokov as a Russian writer, a writer who elevated Russian immigrant literature and made other Russian immigrant artists immortal by the sheer fact that they knew him. Nabokov's ascent is not accidental. He, as other representatives of the first wave of the Russian immigration, possessed an incredible ability to survive in exile without succumbing and feeling inferior towards the Western world, thus standing out on the horizon of immigrants in Europe, making his way into immortality. The devotion and faith in art -- as well as pride in their own national origins that Nabokov, Berberova, Stravinsky, Rachmaninov, Bunin and Khodasevich exhibited and managed to maintain -- was and is striking in comparison with later exiled artists from different parts of the world. Julia Kristeva emphasizes recent immigrants' feelings of inferiority towards the West in her study of exile, Strangers to Ourselves. Pierre Bourdieu in his novel work, La Double Absence, claims that in order for immigrants to survive in exile, they need to inherit or acquire at least two of three kinds of capital: financial, cultural, or social. At the beginning of the twentieth century, most Russian immigrants "took" only cultural and social capital with them when they left St. Petersburg, a tormented, anguished city that remained nonetheless dear to them. This city, as a magnificent cultural center, "awarded" them with ever-lasting nostalgia and social capital (numerous friends, colleagues who lived, thrived in art and public life), as well as cultural capital (Pushkin's legacy, the grandeur of St. Petersburg's architecture, modern developments in literature, painting, theatre, ballet, opera, and music). Katherine Clark astutely notes: "Petersburg was originally conceived as a seat of power, and also a city of science and culture. . . . [It] was always considered more secular and cosmopolitan" (6-7).

Vladimir Nabokov absorbed the stirring, exciting, and seething atmosphere -- later materialized as cultural capital -- that reigned in St. Petersburg, so that when he found himself on a foreign soil, he longed for his former (preznij) St. Petersburg. Alas, this meeting could have never happened in reality, but only on the pages of his many works, as Aleksei Zverev states in his article "Literary Return to Russia." As David Bethea suggests, Nabokov's kinship with Khodasevich -- which represents social capital -- laid the foundation for the dawn of Nabokov as a modern prose writer. Aleksandr Dolinin numerous times has underscored that it is Russian literature that underlies Sirin's oeuvre: "Whatever Parisian Adamovich or American Nabokov would say, Sirin's works are fed by Russian literature, and in turn, feed Russian literature; these works develop only in a dialogue with it; in pushing off from what seems to him alien and dead, and in claiming as one's own what he recognizes as related (rodstvennij) and alive" (translation mine, 13-14).

In this paper, I will analyze Nabokov's poems, The Gift and Ada, to show how Nabokov uses his social and cultural capital to portray grand St. Petersburg, how these rich recollections saved him in exile and gave him a sense of mission -- the revival of dying Russian culture in the West.





POSTER PAPER

Christoph Henry-Thommes, University of Mainz, Germany
Nabokov's Neoplatonist Views of "This World" and "The Other World" in His Poem "Death"

Nabokov's discursive writings, his autobiography and his fictions, show that he shared certain commonly held beliefs of the Platonic tradition: the belief in the non-materiality of the highest form of reality, the belief that there must be a higher level of reality than visible and sensible things and the belief in some form of immortality. Also he was convinced that the existence of such an other world could be inferred from the way, in which nature and human lives are structured. And he thought that since the patterns in nature and human lives were governed by the laws of aesthetics, the same must hold true for the other world, of which 'this world' is only a creative imitation. Speaking with Ricoeur, in his art Nabokov set himself the task to creatively imitate the nonutilitarian delights he found in nature. In so doing he not merely redoubled the presence of 'this' world and the other world in his fiction, but designed representations that opened the space for fiction, while at the same time carrying intimations of the transcendent worlds beauty. I will illustrate this point by briefly discussing Nabokov's poem "Death."


POSTER PAPER

Elena Dorofeyeva, Taurida National University, Ukraine
"Consciousness, Locked in a Book": A Problem of Opposition between Writer and Language in Nabokov

Academic thought at various times has offered various concepts of the nature of language- from the idea of the "binding" power of language (F. Schleermacher, later F. Boas, R. Jacobson) to the idea that language, being primary to an individual, classifies and structures the world in a certain way (M. Heidegger) as well as fixes the only objective aspect of sensation and thus leads away from living individuality (A. Bergson). R. Barthes developed these concepts; he understood that the essence of literature, in its searching consciousness, both relies on language and is, at the same time, limited by it. Thus a writer's creative evolution could be studied as his striving to reach an utopian independence of consciousness by gaining control of language.

According to Nabokov, the writer inevitably submits himself to the sequence of writing as well as realizes that it is not possible to fix thoughts and impressions with sequences of words because the "time element" is always "smudged". For him even such literary device as the flow of consciousness is a "convention of style". On the other hand, Nabokov is never satisfied with naming, a function of language that places an individualized object in this or that general category. In his own art, he tries to achieve excessive precision of definition, thus providing every named object with its own individuality. Nabokov's efforts to free himself from the binding power of language result in his brilliant mastery of literary techniques, which allow him to redefine the laws of language and literature on a meta-level and thus achieve creative freedom.

??????????? ?????????
15 ????

?????? ????, ?????????? ???????????, ????? ????????
??????? ??? ??????????

????? ?????? ? ??????????? ????????????, ??????? ???? ????????? ????????? ??????? ????????? ? ???? ????? ?????? - ??? ????????????, ???????? ? ???????????. ?????? ???????? ??? ???????? ??????? ?????? ? ????????? ??? ???????????, ?????, ? 60-? - 70-? ????, ??????? ????? ?????????? ? ???? ??? ? ?????????? (???? ? ???? ??????? ????????? ??? ???????????? ? ?????????????? ??????), ? ? 80-? - 90-? - ??? ? ??????? - ????????? ? ??????????.

?? ???? ??????? ? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??????? ? ? ????? ???????????, ?????????? ? ???? ????? ? ??? ? ???????? ???????????, ??? ????????????????? ???????? ?? ???????? ?????? ????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????????.

? ?????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ?????? ???????? ?????????? ????????????, ??????????? ??????? ??????????? ????????????, ???????????? ????????, ?????? ???????????? ?????????????, ? ?? ???? ?????? ????????? ?????????, ?????? ??? ?????????? ????? ?????? ?????, ? ?? ???? ?????. ? ??????? ??????????? ???????? ?????? ???????, ?????? ?? ??????????, ??? ????????? ? ???????? ?????? ??? ?? ??, ??? ??????????? ?? ????? ????????.


??????????? ?????????
15 ????

????????? ???????, ??????????? ????? ????????? - ???????, ???
???????, ??????? ? ?????? (? ??????? ? ??????????? ??????? ?????????)

???????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ????????? "????? - ??????", ? ????????? ?? ????? ??????, ??? ?? ??????? ????????? ???????????? ???????? ????? ??? ?????????? ???? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ???? ?? ??????.

? ?????????? ?????? ???????? ?. ????, ??? ???? ???? ? "??????? ????", ??????? ?? ?????? ??????????, ??? ????????? ??? ???????? ????????? "?? ????????, ???????? ???????? ?????? ? ??????? ?????? ???????? ? ????????????? ? ?????????????? (??? ?????? ?? ???)", ?? ? ?????????, ??? ? ????? ??????? ? ????? ?????? ??????? ????? ?? ??????????? ???, ??????? ???????? ????? ??????????????? ??? ????, ????? ????????? ??????? "??????".

? ???? ????? ??????, ????????????????? "?????????", ?????????????? ? "??????? ????", ?? ??????? ???????????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? "??????? ???????", ????????? ? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? "??????? ????? ???????".

? ??????? ? ????????? ????? ????????? ???? ????????? - "???", "???-?? ??? ? ??????." ? "????? ? ???????", - ?????????? ?? ???? ????????? ?????, ??????????????? ?????????? ? ?????: ??????????????, ????????????????? ? ???????????????? ??????????????. ? ?????????? ? ???????? ?????? ? "??????? ??????" ? "??????", ?????????, ??? ????????????????? ????????? ???????? ? ???? ?????? ???????????? ????????????? ???????????, ??????????????? ?????????? ?????? ??? ???????? ???????? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????????????.


??????????? ?????????
15 ????

??????? ?????? ???????, ?????????????? ??????????? - ?????-???????, ???
"????? ? ???????": ??????? ? ???????????

??????????? - ???? ?? ???????, ??????? ??????? ?????????? ??? ????, ????? ????? ?? ???????, ???????????? ????????? ??????????. ??????? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???????, ?? ???? ????????? ??????? ??????????? ????? ?????. ????? ? ???????? ?????? ???????????? ??? ?????????? ??????? ?/??? ???? ?????????????.

????? ???????? ?????? ?????????????? ??????????? ?????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ????? ???????? ?? ???????? ? ???? ?????????????? ??????? ? ?????? ???????????? ???????, ??????? ????? ?????????? - ? ???????, ??????????????? ? ??????????????, ???????, ? ????? ??????? ????????? ?????? ? ???? ????? ??????, ? ???????, ??????.

?? ??????, ??? ???????, ?????????? ????????, ?????????? ??? ????? ? ???????, ??????????? ??????? ?? ???????? ?????????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??????????????? ??????, ? ???????? ?? ? ??????????? ????? ????????????.




??????????? ?????????
15 ????

????????? ??????????, ??????????? ????? ??????????, ???
? ????? «??????? ?????????????» ????????

??? ??? ??????????, ????? 11 "Speak, Memory" / «??????, ??????» («?????? ?????????????», 1949) ?? ???????? ?????????????? ?????? ??????? ? ?????????? ?????? ????????; ?? ???? ????, ?? ?????????? ????, ? ????? ?????? ????????????? ? ???????? ?? ??? ??????????? ??????? ???? ????. ? ???????? ?????? (??. The Nabokovian 47) ? ???????? ?????? ? ??????? ?????????? ?????? ? ?????????? ??? ???????????? ?????????????????, ? ??? ????? ??????? ??????????????? ??????? ?????? ? ? ??????????? ??????????, ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ??????????????? ???? ? ???????, ???????? «?? ????? ???? ????? ?????», ????????????? ???? ??????????.

?????? ???????? ????? ?????????, ??????????????? ????????????? ?????? ? ????????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????. ???? ?????? ? ???????? ? ????????????? ?????? ???????? ? ????????? ?????? «??? ?????? ???????» / «???????». ??????? ??? ???? ?????? ? ????????? ??????, ?????????????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ????? ? "Soviet International Literature" ? 1937 ????. ????? ????????? ????????, ????????, ?????????? ? ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????????? ?????????, ???????????? ? ??????, ??? ??? ???????? ?????????? ????? ???????????????? ?????: ??????????????? ?????????????-???????????? ?? ??????? ????, ????????? ? ????????? ????????????????, ???? ???????? ???????????? ?????, ?????????????? ??????????? ???? ? «???????????? ?????» ? ????????? ??????. ?????????, ?? ???? ?????????, ???? ????????? ????? - 1914 ???. ???????? ? ???????? ??????? ?????????? ???? «??????» ? ?????-?????????????????? ?????. ?????????? ???????????? ????????? ????? ??????? ???????? ???????? ???????.


??????????? ?????????
15 ????

??????? ?????, ??????????? ????? ????????? - ??????, ???
"?????, ????? ?????": ?????????? ? ?????????????? ? ??????? ???????? ? ??????? ????????

? ????? ??????? (???????? ? XV ?? XX) ??????? ?? ?????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ?????? ??????????; ? ???? ?? ?????????? ? ?????? ????????. ??? ???????? ????? ? ???????????? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ?????????? ??? ????????? ????????, ??? ? ????? ???????. ? ????? ?????????????, ??? XVIII ?????, ? ????? ???????, ? "??????" ? "???" - ? ??????, ?????????? ??????????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ? ???????? ??? ????? "?" ???????????? ????????????. ??? ????? ??????? ??? ????, ??? ??????????????, ???????? ???????????? ?????????? ? ?????????????????? ???????? ???????????. ????, ???????? ?????????? ???????? ??????????????, - ???? ????? ? ????? ?????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

??????? ??????????, ????? ?????, ???????????? ???????????, ???
«???? (??????????? ???? ??????).»

????? ?????????????? ?????????? ?????? ????? ? ??????????? ?????, ??????? ???? ??? ? ?????????? ?????????????? ???????? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????:
«????????, ??????????? ?? ?????????? ?????? ?????????? ????, ????????: ???????, ????, ????, ???? (??????????? ???? ??????) ? ????????? (?? ???????, ?? ?? ?? ????????) - ?????? ???????; ?? ??-?? ????????????????? ? ??????? ??????????? ???????? ? ????????? ??????? ??????? ????, ???????? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????????? ??? ?????-?????? ????????????? ???????. ???? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ???????, ?? ?????????? - ?????????» («????»,III-3)

????????? ???????? ????, ??? ???? ??????? ??-?????????, ??????? ???, ??? ?????????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????? ?????, ????????? ?? ??????????????? ?????????? ??????, - ????????? ???????? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ????. ????? ?? ????? ??????????? ????????? ???????????? ????? ? ??????????? ????? ? ????????? ?????.

??????? ????, ????????? ?????? ??????? ?????, ?? ??????????? ????? ????????? ? ?????? ??????-????????????. ?? ?????????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????????? ?????????????? ??????????? ???????????. ???? ????? ? ?????? ????? - ?? ??????????? ??????? ??-??????????, ?? ? ???, ???????? ? ???????? ???????????????? ?????????, ????????? ?????? ??? ? ?????????? ?????????.

??? ? ?????? ? ????????????? ????????, ??? ???????, ??? ?????????? ????????????? ????? ??????? ? ??????????? ??????? ???????? ??????????? ????, ???????, ?? ??????????? ?????? ? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?????????? ??????????, ?????? ???????? ???????? ????? ??????????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????????????? ?????????, ??????????? ?? ? ????????? ????? ?????????. ? ?????? «?????» ????? ????? ???????? ????????? ?????? ? ??????? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ?????.

?? ???? ??????????? ??????????, ??????? ? ?????? ??????, ????? ???????? ??????? ????? ?????? ?????, ? ? ???? ?? ? ????????????? ???????? ??????? ???????? ????? ????????? ? ?????????? ? ?????? ???????? ?????. ????? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??????????, ??????????????? ???????? ? ???????? ??????? ????? ???????????, ??????????????, ??? ??????? ???, ?????? ?????????? ?? ??? ????? ? ????? ????????? ?????, ????, ???????, ? «???» ? «?????? ?? ?????????!» ????? ???????????? ?? ???? ??????????? ???????????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

???? ??????, ????????????? ???????????, ???
??????????? ??????????? ??????? ????? ? ?????? ???????? ???????????

? ?????? ???? ???????? «??????????? ??????????? ??????? ????? ? ?????? ???????????», ???????? ?? ?????? ? 1924 ????, ?????? ???? ????????? ? ????????? ??????, ?????????????? ?????? ?????, ??? ??? ????????? ???????, ? ? ????? ??????, ? ????? ??????? ? ????????, ? ????????, ????????????, ????? ??????? ??? ??????.

???????? ????????? ????????, ? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??????, ??????? ????, ?????? ?? ???? «???????» «?????? ???????????», ????????? ? ????? ? ??????? ??? ?????????? ? ?????????????. ???????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ??????? ????? ? ???????? ??????????? ? ?????????? ? ??????????? ?????, ??? ??????????? ????? ???????? ?? ???? ?????????? «????????????».

???? ???????????? ? ????? ?????? ? ? ????? ?????, ????????????, ??????? ???????? ?????????? ?????????? ? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ??????? ??????? ????????, ? ??? ?????????, ???????? ??? ??????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

???? ??????, ?????????????? ???????????, ??????, ???
????????? ? ?????? «????»

??? ?????? ?????????? ????????? ??? ???????????? ? ???????????????? ???????, ??????????????? ??? ??????, ?? ?????? ??????, ???????????????? ???????????? ????????????.

? ????????? ?? ????? ??????, ??? ????? «????» ?????? ?????? ???? ? ?????????? ??????????? ????????, ???????? ? ??????????? ??????? ??????, ????????? ??????????? ????????? ? ???????? ???????? ???????????, ????????????????? ???????????, ????????, ?????????? ??????????????? ??????. ??????? ????????? ??????????? ????????? ???????? ??? ???? ?????.

?????? ?????????? ? ????????????? ????????? ??????? ???????????? ???????? ? «?????», ??????????? ??????? ??????? ???? ? ???????????? ???????????, ???? ? ???????????? ??????????? ???? ? ??????? ?? «???????».

??? ?? ??? ???????? ????????????? ?????, ? ????? ???????? ????????????? ?????, ?????????????? «?????» ????????? ???????? ??????? ?????, ???????? ??? ?? ?????? ????. ????? ? ??????? ? ???????????? ????, ??? ??? ???????? ???? ?????? - ????? ????? ? ???????? (? ????????????? ???????) - ????????????? ???? ?????????. ???????, ? ??????, ??? ????????? ?????????? ? ?????????????, ?? ??????? «???????» ??????????, ? ????????? ???????, ???????????? ????? «???????» ?????????, ??????? ????????????, ??? ?????????? ??????? ?????? ? ??????????? ????? ??????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

?????? ?. ????????, ??????????? ????? ????????, ???
???? ???????? ? «??????»

??????????? ??????? ??????-??????? ????? ?? ??????? ???????? ????????? ? «??????» ?????, ???? ? ?? ??????????? ? ????? ???????? ?? ?????? ????????? ????? XIX ???????? ???? ????????, ???????? ???????? ? ???????? ????????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????????. ???????? ??????? ? ??????????? ?. ??????????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????? ???????????? «?????????» ??????? ? ?????????? ?????????????? ?????????? ??? «?????? ???????????». ?????? ??????????, ??? ??????? ???????? ? ??????????? ??????? ??????????? ?????? ?? ??????? ?????????? ??????????? ????????.

?? ??????? ??????????? ???? ???????? ??? ?????? ???????? ? ??????; «??? ?????????» ?????????? ??? ???????, ? ??????, ???????? ? ?????? ????????? ????????? ???? ?????????? ?? ??????? ????. ??????? ??????? ???????????? ? ???????? ????????? ???? ? ??????, ???? ?? ??? ??????? ? 1912 ???? ??????? ????????, ? ???????? ???????? ???????, ??????????, ??? ??????. ???????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????????? ??????????, ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????????? ????????????, ??????? ????? ???? ?????????? ?? ???????, ????? ??????? ??? ??? ????????. ??? ?? ???, "Story of a Confession Album" (???????, ???????? ???????? ????? ?????? ?? ??????????) ? ????????????? «??????? ? ?????????» (???, ????????, ???? ??????????), ????? ??? ????????? ??????????? ?????? ???????? ????????? ????????. ????????? ?????? ?????????, ????? ???? ??? ???????????? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ????????? «??????», ???????? ? ????? ? ????????????? ? ????????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ?. ????????? ? ?. ?????? ? ??????? ????? ?????? ??? ?????????? ????????????. ?? ????? ???????? ?????????????? ????????????? ??????????? ???????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

???? ????, "????? ??????? ????????? ???.", ???
«?????? ? ???????»: ????????????????? ????? «??????» ?? ?????? ?? ???????????? ? ??????

? ???? ??????? ? ???????????? ?? ???????, ???????? ??????? ??????? ????????? ????????, ??????????? ????????????????? ??? ????????? «??????» ??? ???????????? ??? ???????? ??????? - ???????? ????? ? ??????, - ? ??, ??? ??? ??????? ???????? ??? ?????? ?????????: ????????????????? ?????? ??????.

????????? ????????????? ? ???? ????????, ??? ???????????? «??????» ?? ?????? ? ???????????? ? ????? ? ????? ??????? ????????? ??????? ???????????? ??????? ???????? ? ?????? ????? ? ??????, ???????, ?????????? ??????????? ??? ??????????? ??? ???????????? ???????????? ??? ????????????? ???????????? ??? ?????????????????? ??????.

????????? ??????? ????? ??? ???????? ("Lantern Slides" / «????????? ??????») ? ???????? ?????????? ??????? ???????????? ???????????? ?????????????????? ?????? - ?????????? ???????? ?????????? ????????????, - ? ?????????, ??? ? «??????» ????? ?????????? ??????????? ????? ????????? ? ???????????? ?????? ? ???????? ????????.

?????? ???????? "Speak, Memory" ?? "Conclusive Evidence " ? "?????? ???????", ??????????? "Speak, Mnemosyne" ? ?????????????? ???????? "Speak, Memory" ????????????? ????? ? ???????? ????????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? ???????, ?????????????? ??? ??????????? ??? ???????????, ? ?????????? ??????? ??????.

? ???????????, ??-??????, ??? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ?? ??????????? ?????????????, ?, ??-??????, ??? ????? ??????????? ?? ????????????? ??????????? ????????, ???????????? ? ????????? ?????, ?? ??????????? ??. ?? ?????? ? ?????? ????????? ????????????? ???????? ?? ??????? ????????? ? ????????? ?????????? ???????????? (????? ???? ????????? ??? ??????) ? ?????????? ???????, ????? ??????????? ????? ????????????.

? ????? ? ?????? ????, ??? ????????????? ??? ?????????????????? ?????? ? ?????? ????????? ?????? ??? ????, ??? ????????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???????? ?????????, ????????? ??????? «????? ?????? ?????? ???????».

????? ? ????????? ???????, ???????? ?????????? ???????? - ?? ?????????? ??????????, ? ??????????, ???? ? ?.?. - ??????????? ???????? ?????? «??????», ?????????, ??? ??? ?????? ????????-?????????? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????????.

???????????? ???????????? ???????????? (? ???????????????, ? ????????????????? ????????) ???? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ?????????? ????, ??????? ?????????? ????????, ????? ???????? ??? ???????? ? ????? ? ??? ????????? ??????????? ??????? ????????.

? ?????????? ? ?????????, ??? ?????? ??????????? ??????? ???????????? ???????? ????????? ????????????????? ?????????? ?????? ? ??????????? ?????????? ????????? ??????? ??????, - ? ??? ????? ??????????? ???????? ?????????? ? ????????? ????????? ??????, - ??????????? ?????? ?????????? ????????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

????????? ?????, ????????????? ???????????, ??????, ??????????????
La Morte d'Humbert - ????????????? ?????? ????????

«??????? ????????? ??????? ??? ?????? [????????????] ????????? - ????? ?????, - ????? ??????? ? ???????? ??????? «???-??????» ? 1951 ????. - ?????????? ???????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???????????. ? ????????? ? ??????? ??????? ?? ???????? ?????????????? ???????????? ? ???????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??? ????????? ?????? ??????».

????????????? ??????????? ????, ??????? ? ?????????? ?????? ? ??????????? ????? ???????? ?????????? ???, ?????? ? ????????????? 1950-? ?????, ???????? ? «??????», ?? ??????? ?????????? ????? ?????, ? ??? ?????????? ????????????, ??? ? ???????? ????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ??????, ????????? ?? ???? ???????????? ??????? ? ??????. ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??????????? ????, ?????? ? ?????????? ? ??????, ? ????? ?????????? ??????????? ? ?????? ????????

????????????????? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ? «??????», ?????? ??????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ? ??????????? ??????, ??? ???? ????? ????? ???????? ? ??????????? ???????????, ??? ???????, ????? ?? ????????. ????????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ????? «?????? ??????» ? ????? ?????? «???????????», ???????, ??????? ??????, ?? ?? ????????? ??????????, ???????? ???? ????????, ?????????? ? «?????? ? ????».

??? ???????????? ?????????? ???????? ? ???????? ?????????????? ?????????????: ??????????? ????????, ??????? ?????????? ? ???????? ? ????????????? ? ???????????? ??????, ?????? ???????????? ?????????? ??????? ?? ?????????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????????? ? (?????????????) ????????????? ????????, ?????????????? ? ???????.

????? ???????, ??????? ??????? ????? «??????????? ??????», ????????????? ?. ?. ???????, ?? ????????? ???????, ???????? ?? ??????????? ???????, ????? ?????? ??? ???? ?????? ? ?????? ???????????????? ?????????? ? ????? (????????, ?????? ? ???? ??????? ???????).


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

???????? ??????, ?????????? ???????????, ??????????????
??????????? ???????? ????????? ????????

??? ?????????? ???????? ??????????? ???????? ?????????????? ??????????????? ???? ? ???????????? ?????????????? ???? ????? ???????? ?? ??????? ? ???????????. ? ????? ???????, ??????? ????????? ?????? ?? ????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ????????, ???????? ???????????? ?????????????, ??????????? ????????????? ? ?????? ? ???????? ? ?????????? ?????????????? ????? («??? ?????? ??????????????????») ? ? ???????????? ??????????? ? ????????? («??????? ?????»). ? ?????? ???????, ??????, ?????? ???????? ? ??????????? ?????????? ?????? ? ????????? ??????????? ? ????????????? ?????????. ????? ???????, ? ??? ?????????? ???????? ? ?????? ???? ???????????? ?????????????? ?????? ??????: ???????? ??????? ??????-????????, ????????? ????????????? ??????????, ??????????? ?????? ? ?????????.

????? ???????????? ?? ??????? ???????? - «???» - ???????? ???? ???????? ??????????????? ? ????????? ???????????: ??????? ???????? ????? ?? ????????? ??? ??????, ? ??????? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ?????????? «???????????????» ????????. ????? ????, «???» - ??????? ???????????? ???????? ????????: ?????????? ??????????? ????????????? ?????? ????? ? ???? - ?? ?????? ???????, ?? ? ????????? ????? ?????? ??????.

????????? ?????? ????????? ?????? ???????? ? «???» ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??????, ?? ? ??? ??????????? ?????? ??? ?????. ??? ???????????? ?????????? ? ? ?????? ???????????? ??????? ????????, ? ? ????????? ????????, ??? ???????? ?????? ? ???????? ? ??? ????, ? ??????? ??? ???????????? ? «???», ????? ???? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????????, ????????????? ???????????? ????????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

??????? ??????, ???????? ???????, ???
?????? ???????????: ????????? ?????? ????? «Laughter in the Dark» ???????? ??? ??????????? ? ??????????? ????????

?? ?????????? ??? - ? 1959 ?? 1971 ???? - ??????? ?????? ?????? ?? ?????? ????????? ??????????? ????????????, ??????????? ??, ??? ??? ?? ??????? «?????? ????????????? ?????????? ??????, ? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??????? [...] ?????? ???????? ???????????? ? ?????????? ?????????».

??? ?????? ???????????? ?????, ??? ??? ?????? ????????? ???????? ????????? ???????????. ????? ???????, ???????????? ????????? ?????????, ?????????? ??? ???????????, ???????? «?????? ???????» ("Laughter in the Dark"), ?????, ???????????? ? 1938 ????, ??????? ?? ???????????????? ???????. ???? ???????? ? ????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ????????? ??????? ?????????? ?????? ????? ??????? ???????????? ? ?????? (???????????? ??? ????????????).

??????? ? ????????? ???????????? ???????? ??????? ????????? ??????????? ???????????, ??????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??, ??? ?? ??????? ????????????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ? ???????? (Charles Nicol, "Necessary Instruction or Fatal Fatuity: Nabokov's Introductions and Bend Sinister," Nabokov Studies 1[1994]: 115-129).

???????? ?? ?????? ??????????, ???????????? ??????? ???? ? ???????, ? ???????? ???? ??????????? ? ???????? ? ??????? ???????? ? ?????. ? ?????????, ? ???????????, ??? ??????????? ? ???????? ?????????? ????????? ????: 1) ???? ??????????? ???????? ?????? ???????? ?? ???????????? ?????????? ?????? (? ??????????? ?? ????????????? ???????????? ??? ?????????????????) ? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ???????????? ? 2) ????????? ???????? ????? ???????????????? ??????? ?????????? ????????. ????? ? ???????? ????????????? ?????? ???????? "Laughter in the Dark" ? ??????, ??? ??? ?????????? ?? ?? ??? ????: ?????? ????-???????????? ? ?????? ? ? ???? ?????????? ????????.
??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

?????? ?. ?????, ?????? ???????, ???
??????? ????????? ???????? ?? ???????????? ???????????????: ?????? ????? ?????

????????? ??? ????????, ? ??? ??????, ??? ????????????? ?? ???????? ? ???? ????? "The World of Nabokov's Stories" (1999), ??? ??????? ??? ????????? ??????? ????? ???????????? ???????????????, ???????????? ?????????????? ????????? ? ?????????? ? ????? 40 - ?????? 50 ????? XX ????. ? ???? ??????? ? ????? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ? ??? ???????????? ????????? ?? ?????????? ???????? ????????, ??????? ??????, ?????? ??????, ????? ????? ? ?????? ????????? ???? ?? ????????? ? ??????? ???????????? ?????????. ? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??????????? ? ????? ???????? ? ???????????? ??????? ????????? ????? ?????, ? ??????? ? ???????????? ? 1988 ????, ?????? ?????????? ??? ????????????? ???????? ? ???????????? ?????.


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

??? ???????? ?????, ??????????? ??????, ??????? ??????, ??????????????
??????? ? ?????????????????

? ????????, ?????? ???????? ??????-???????? ? 1967 ????, ??????? ?????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ????????. ?????????? ????????, ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ??????????? ??? ?????????????? ?????????, ???????????? ????????? ????? ? ???????????? ???????????????????, ??????????? ? ???????????? ?????????, ????????? ???????? ? ??? ???????. ??????? ??? ????????? ??????? ?????? ? ??????????? ????? «???????? ??????», ??? ??????? ???? ?? ?????????, ????? ?? ?? ???? ? ??????????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ? ?????? ?????? ?????????? ????? ????????: ? ????? ????, ?? ????? ?? ???, ????? ?????? ????, ?? ????????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?????? ? ? ??????????? ? «??????? ???????» ? 1964 ????. ????? ???????? ????????????? (???????????, ????, ???????, ?????? ? ?????) ????????? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ? ?????????????? ? ????????, ? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ????????; ??????????? ? ???????????? ????? ???????? ? ???????????????????, ????? ????????? ??????????? ??????????, ??????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ? ?? ?????????????.

??? ?????? ????? ???????? ????? ?????????? ???????????? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ? ?????????????? ???? ?????????????? ????????? ? ? ????????????? ??? ?????????. ? ????? ? ??????????? ??? ???????? ?????????? ????????, ??????? ????? ?? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ?? ????, ? ? ????, ? ????? ????????? ?????????????? ??? ????? ??????????. ????? ?????????? ????? ??????? ???????? ??? ?????? ????????????, ? ???????? ???????? ?????? ?????????????????????? ??????, ????? ??? «???????» ???????? (1836) ? «??????» ???? (1854).


??????? ? ??????????? ?????
16 ????

?????? ????????, ??????????? ?????????????, ?????-?????????, ??????
?.??????? ? ???????????? ????? ??????: ?? ?????????? ???????????? ???????

???????????? ????? ?????? (Chekhov Publishing House), ?????????? ? 1951 ???? ? ???-????? ??? ????????? ????? ?????, ???? ?????????? ??????? ????????????? ????????????? ???????, ??? ??????? ???? ??????????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ???????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ????????????, ?????????? ? ? ?????????, ? ?? ?????? ? ????????? ???????????.

???????????? ??????????????? ????? ???; ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???????????? ???????? ???????????? ???????????? ????????:
1952 ?. - ??????? ? ?????? ?????? ????? «???»;
??????????? ? ????? ?. ?. ?????? «????????????? ???????»;
1954 ?. - ?????????????????? ????? «?????? ??????»;
1956 ?. - ??????? ????????? «????? ? ???????».

??????????? ????????? ???????? ? ????????????? ???????? ? ???? ???????????? ???????: Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East European History and Culture, Columbia University, New York, ? Nabokov Archive, Berg Collection, New York Public Library. ??? ??????? ?? 158 ??????????????? ? ???? ????????????? ? ???? ?????? ???????? ??? ???????. ?????? ???????? ?????????? ??????? ?????????????? ????????????: Nikolas Wreden (director), Lilian Dillon Plante (associate director) ? ???? ?????????? - ?. ?. ????????????? ? ?. ?. ???????????. ? ??? ??????????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ????, ??????? ?????????, ????????? ????? ? ????????? ???????.

?????? ??????? ???????????? ???????????? ?????? ? ???????? ????????: ???????????? ?????????? ??? ????????? ????????? ??????????? ? ???????, ? ??? ??????? ????????? ???????????? ?????? ??????????????? ????? ????????? ? ?????????????. ????? ???????????? ???????? ? ????????? ?????????? ? ?????? ????? «?????? ??????», ?. ???????????? ?????? ????????: «...????? ??? ??????, ?????????????? ???????? ????????????, ??? ? ???????? ??? ??????, ??? «????? ?????????» ????? ??????????? «??????????? ??????? ????? ? ??????????? ?????», ? ??????? ????? ? ???????? ???????? ????, ??????? ??? ?????????? ??????????...»

? ????????? ???????? ? ????????????? ???????? ?? ?????? ??????? ??????? ??? ????????????, ?? ? ???????????? ???????????? ?????????, ?????????????? ???????????????? ?????????.

?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

?????? ???????, ????????? ???????, ???
????? ?? ??????? ??????: ???????????? ????? ?????????? ? ????????

? ???? ??????? ???? ?????? ? ???, ??? ????????? ? ??????? ?????????? ????? ?????? - ?????????-??????????. ??????? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??????? ??????, ?. ????????? ? ?. ??????? (? «?? ???????????? ?????», ????????????? «?????» ? ????????? «???? ? ?????» ? «??????? ??????»). ????????? ?????????? ?? ????????? ?. ????????? ? ?. ????????, ??????? ????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????. ???? ????? ??????? - ??????? ???????? ???????? ? ?????????? ? ???????? ???????????? ????????, ?????????????? ? ????? ??????? ???????? ? 1920 - 30-? ????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

???? ??????, ??????????? ??????, ?????, ??????
??????? ? ??????? ?????? - ??? ?????????????????? ??????????

? ?????? ??????????? ??????????? ???? ????? ?????????? ??? ????????????? ????? ??????. ??????? ???????? ??????? ??????? ???????????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ????, ????????? ?? ?????? ? ?? ?????????? ? ?????????. ? 1921 - 24-? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ?????????????, ????????????? «?????????» ??? «?????-?????????», ?????? ?????? ??????? ??? ???? ? ????????? ? ????????? ????? ??????? ? ??????????? - ? ????? ??????, ??????, ?????? ? ?.?. ? ?????? ???????, ??????? ??????, ???????????? ???? ????????? ????????, ????????? ??? ???????? ???????? ? ???????? ????????? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ? 1958 ????. ???????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????, ???????? ?? ???? ??????, ????? ????? ??????. ??????? ????????? ????????: ????????? ??? ????? ??? ???????????? ????? ???????; ??? ??? ??????? ????????? ? ?????? ??????????? ?????????? ??? ?????????; ??? ?????? ????? ??? ?????. ?????? ???????????? ??????? ? ?? ???????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ????????.

????????? ???????, ? ???????, ??????? ? ???????????????? ????, ? ???????? ????????? ? ?????? ??? ? ????????, ? ?? ????? ??? ????????? ???????? ?????????, ? ??? ???????????? ????????????? ?? ????????? ? ?????? ???????? ?????????. ?????????????????? ?????????? ???????? ?????????? ??????? ??????? ??? ???????? ??????????? ?????????? ???????? ? ?? ?????????????? ?????? ? ???????????? ???????? ? ??????-??????????, ???????? ???????? ??? ??????? ???????????? ????????????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

??? ?????, ????????? ???????????, ?????
?? ????????????? ???????????? ? ????????????? ?????? ? ????????

????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ???????? ???? ????? ?????, ??????????? ? ????? ??? ????? ??????????? ???? ????: ??? ????????????? ? ????? ??????????? ??????? - ???????????, ?????, ?????????? ?????????????? ????????. ???????? ??????????? ?????????????????, ??? ??? ???????? - ????? ???????, ??? ?????????????? ??????????, ? ??????????? ? ? ?????????? ? ? ?????? ????????????? ????????? ????????? ???????????? ??????????.

?????? ???????????? ???? ??????? ????? ?????????? ? ? ?????? ????? ?????? - ????????? ??????????? ? ??, ??? ??? ?????????? ????????????, ????????????? ? ???????? ?? ?????????. ???????? ?????????????? ???????????????? ???????? ??? ???????? ?????????? ??????????????? ????? ??????????? ?????????? (??. ??????: «????? ???????? ?????? ?? ???????? ????????????»). ? ?????? «?????????» ???????? ???? ????????? ?????? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????? ? ????????????? ?????????? ????? ????? ???? ????????. ???????? ??????? ? «??????» ??? ????? 342 ?? ????-????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??? ???????????? ???????? ???????? ????, ?? ? ???????? ???????????????? ???????????? ??????????? ????????????? ???????? ???????? ? ??? ????????????? ?????? ???? ?????????.

????? ?????? ????????????????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ?????? «????» - ???????????? ??????? ???????? ??????????? ??????????????? ?????????, - ??????? ??????? ?????????? ????? ??????????? ??????? (???????? ? ?????????? ???), ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ???????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? ???????? ????????????? ????????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

???? ????????, ???????????? ???????????, ???
??????? ???-???????? ? ??????????? ???????? ????????? ????????

??????? ????? ??????? ?????????, ??? ??????????? ? ???????????? ????????????? ???????????? ??????????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ????????, ???????????? ? ??????? ???? ???????????, ???????????????? ????????? 1917 ????. ??????????? ?????????, ???????? ?. ?. ????????, ???? ????????, ? ??? ????????????????, ?????? ???????????? ????? ? ???????????????? ??????? ??????, ?? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????????? ?????? ? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ????? ?????????????? ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????????-????????? ?????????. ??????????? ????????? ???????? ???????????, ???????? ??????????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????????? ???????? ?. ?. ????????, ????????? ? ???? ? ??????????? ?? ????????????? ???? ????????, ???????? ??? ???????????.

?????? ????? ????? ??????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? ? ???????????????? ????????? ???????? ? ?????????? ???????? ????????????? ??????????? ????????, ?????????? ?????? ??? ????????? «?????????? ??????????-???????? ???????????». ???? ?????? ? ????? ???????????, ? ???????, ???? ???????? ??????????? ????????????????? ????? ???????? ??????????? «???????? ?????????» (1902) ? ??? ???? ?????????? ?????????? ?. ?. ???????? ? ????????? ??????. ?? ????? ???????????? ???????? ????? ?????? ? ???????? ???????? ???? ???-????????? (??????? ???????, ???? ??????????) ? ??????? ???-?????????? (???? ??????, ??????? ??????????).

?? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ? ????????? ??????????? ??????????? ? ???????????? ???????? ???????? ? ????????? ???????? ???-?????????, ????????? ?? ????? ??????, ??? ????????? ???-??????????????? ????????? ? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????????? ??? ???????? ?????????? ??????? ??? ??????????. ?????? ?? ??? - ??? ?????????????? ???????? ??? ???????, ??? ? ?????????????? ???????? ? ??? ??????????? ? ???, ??? ??? ??????? ?????? ????????? ??????? ????????? ????? ?????????????? (???. ?? Johnson and Coates 330). ? ?????????, ??? ????? ??????? ???????? ??? ???????? ???-??????????????? ????-?????????????? ??????? ? ???, ??? ????? ? ?????????? ???????????? ? ???????????? ??? ??????? ?????????.

?????? ??????, ?????????? ???? ??? ??????????, ????????? ? ?????????????? ?????????? ????? ???? ????????????? ??????????? ???????? («??????????? ?? ?????», «??? ?????? ??????????????????») ? ??? ??????????????? ????????? ???????? ? ???????????? ??????? ? ??????? ???? ???????????? ?? ?????????. ? ?????????, ??? ??? ??????? ???????? ?? ???-??????????????? ??????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ??????????????????? ?????????????, ???????? ???????? ?????????????? ???????? ??? ???????????????? ??????????? ????????????? ??????????? ? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ????????????? ??????????????? ????? ???????????? ???????????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

????? ????????, ?????????? ??????????????? ?????????????? ??????????? ??. ?. ?. ???????, ??????
??? ??? ??????????? ????? ? ???????, ???????? ? ????????

?????? ???????????? ???????????? ????? ????????????????, ??????? ??????? ?????? ???????? ?? ???, ??????? ???????????? ??? ? ??? ?????????, ? ??????? ???????????? ???????? ?????????? ???? ???????, ? ??? ?????????????? ?????, ??????????? ?????? ????????? ? ???????????????? ????????? ??? ????????????.

? ????? ??????? ? ?????? ??????????? ?????? ???? ? «??????? ???????» ??????? ? «???? ?????????» ???????? ? ??? ?????? ?? ????????? ??????????? ? ?????? - ??????? ? ?????????????? ??????????? ?????????? ??????? ??????? ? ???????? ?????.

????? ? ??????? ? ??????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ? «????». ??????????? ?????? ?????? ? ??????????? (??? «???????», ??? ? «?????????????»), ? ???????????????, ??? ??? ??????, ???? ???????????? ?????? ????????? «????», ?????????? ???? ???????? ????? ?????? ? ???????? ???????? ????????? ??????? ??? ?????????. ????????? ??? ?????????? ? «???? ?????????» ?? ???? ??????, ? ??????, ??? ???????, ? ??????? ?? ????????, ?? ????????? ?????? ???? ??????????? ? ??????. ?????? ????? ?? ?????????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????, ??????????? ??? ????????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????-
???? ? ????????? ?????????.
?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

????? ??????, ???????????? ???????????, ????????
??????? ????? ???????? «??????????? ??????»

???????? ??????? ??? ?? ?????? ??????? ???????????? ?????????, ?? ? ?????????? ?????? ? ???????????. ?????????????? ????? ???????? ? ????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ????? ??????????? ???????? ? ????? ?????????? ? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? - «?????????? ??????». ????????? ?????? ?????, ??? ??????? ?????? ???????? ????? ??????? ?? ??????????? ?????????, ??????? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????? ? ???????? ????? ?????????? ????????.

????? ????????, ??? ?????, ?????????? ? 1938 ????, ????????? ?? ????? ???????? ??? ? ???????, ???????? ?????? ????????. ? ?????????, ????? ??????????? ?????? ???????????? ??????????? ???????, ????? ???????? ?????? ???????, ??????? ?????? ???????? ?????, ????????????? ?????, ?????-???????????? - ??????? ???????? ???????? ????? ? ???????? ? ????, ????? ?????? ????, ?? ???????????, ??????, ??? ???? ???????? ???? ?????????.

???????? ??????? ? ?????????????, ? ??????????? ????????????? ??????????? ??????? ? «??????????? ??????», ? ??????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????? ? ??? ???? ? ?????? - ???? ?????? ???????????? ???????????? ????, - ? ???????????? ??????? ???????????? ????????????????? ?????? ? ??? ?????????? ? ?????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

????????? ???????, ?????????????? ???????????, ???-???????, ???
???????? ???????????? ?., ???? ???????? ????: ????? ?????? ???????????

? ????? ????? "Pniniad. Vladimir Nabokov and Marc Szeftel" (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997) ???? ?????? ?????????? ?????????? ????????? ?????????????? ?????? «????». ????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ????????????? ??????? ???????? ????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ????????? ???????? ????? ??????. ?????? ???????????? ?????, ??? ??? ???????????? ????? ???? ?????????????? ?? ????? ??. ?????? "??????? ???????????? 1790-1800-? ?????" (?., ???????????, 1950, 1953), ?????, ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ????????? ??? ???????????? ????????????? ???? «??????? ???????». ?????? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ? 1953 ????, ??? ??? ?????, ????? ? ????????? ???????? ? ???????? ???????? ??????? ?????????? ????? ?? ??, ??? ???????????? ?????? ??????? «????».

???? ???????? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ?????????? ???????????????? ? 1934 ????, ????? ????? ? ?. ?. ??????? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????. ??? ?????, ???????? ????????????? ? ???????????? ??????, ????? ???? ???????? ?????????? ??????????? ????????????? ? ???????????? ???????????????? ??? ??????????? ?????.

????????? ?????? ??????????, ??? ???????? ?????? ? ??????? ? ??????? ?? ???? ? ??????????? ????? ?????????? ? ?????? «?????».


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

???? ???????, ?????????? ??????????????? ?????????????? ??????????? ??. ?. ?. ???????, ?????-?????????, ??????
??? ?????? ???????? (??????? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ??????????)

1. ???? ?????? ? ?????????????? ?????????? ??????? ?? ?????????? ?. ???????? ??????????????? ?????????? ????? ? ?????? ???????????, ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??????????????? ??????? ???????????????? «????????? ???????» ????????, ? ??????, ??????? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????????. ?????? ???????????? ???? ?? ???????? ????? «???????? ???????» - ?????????? ????????? ???????? ?????????? ????? ?? - ?????? ??I ???? «??? ?????? ????????».

2. ? ???? ???? ???????????? ????????????? ???????, ???????????? ???????? ??????? ? ??????? ?????? ??????????? ?????????? ? ??????? ???? ????????? ? ?????? ? ????? ????????? ?/??? ? ?????????? ??????????? ????????, ???????? ?????? ?????? ??? ??????????? ??????? ?????????. ? ?????????? ???? ???? ?????????? ????? ???????? ??? ??????????? ??????? ? ??? ???????????? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ?????????????? ? «???????????».

3. ?????? ???? ???????????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ????????? ??????? ????????? ??????? ??????? ???????????? «???????????». ???? ?? ??? ??????? ? ?????????????? «???????????? ????», ??? ???????????? ?????, ????????? ??????????? ?? ? 60-70-? ??. ? ???????????????? ? ???????? ? ???????? ???? ??????????? ? ???????? ?.????????? «????? ???????». ??? ???? ?????? ???????????? ????? ????????????/?????????? ????????????? ??????????? ??????? ? ???? (? ???????? ???????????? ?? «???» ? «??????») ?/??? ????????????? ????????? ???????, ??????????? ??? ???????? ? ?????????? ??????????? «???????????? ???????» ? ???. ????? ????????????? ???????????? - ???????? ?. ??????? («??????-?? ??????», «????? ????», «?? ??????? ??????? ??????», «????» ? ??.), ????? ?. ????????? «???? ??????», ????? ?. ??????????? «???? ? ???????», ???????????? ???????????? ?. ?????? «????? ????????», ???????? ? ?????? ?. ???????, ????? ? ?????? ?. ???????????? «??? ?? ???? ???» ? ????????????? ??. ?????? «??????».

4. ????????????????? ????????? ???????????, ????????????? ?????????????? ????????????, ?????? ? ????? ??????????? ???? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ?, ??? ????????, ??????? ????????????? ? ?????????????? ?????????? ???????? ???????????? ? ? ??I ????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

????? ?????-???, ????????? ??????????? - III, ??????, ???????
???????? «?????????» ? ????????? ????????? «???????» ??????? ????????

????? ?????? ?????????? «?????? ??????» - ???????? ? 1929, ? ????? ? 1930 ???? - ??????? ??????? ??????? ????????? ??????, ??? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ? ??????. ??? ??? ????? ??????????, ??-??????? ?????. ?????? ?????? ? ???????? ?????-????????? ??????????? ????????? «???????» ?????? ??????. ? ?????? ????? ?????? ??????? ?? ?????????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? ? ????????? ???? ???????: ?????? ???????????? ? ??? ? ????????????? ?????? (?????? ? ?????????????, ???????????? ??????, ???????????? ?????? ? ?.?.), ?????? ???? ?????????????.

????????????? ????????????? ?????? ? ??????? ?????? ?? ????? ???????? ????????? ? ?????????, ?, ???????, ????? ??????? ?? ?????????? ???????. ?? ????????, ??? ?????? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ???? ? ?????? ??? ???????? ? ? ?? ??????????. ?? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ?????????? ??????? ????????? ??????? ?????? ?, ???, ??? ??? ???????? ???????????, ?????-?????????? ? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????.???????, ???????? ? ????????, ? ?????, ??? ?? ?????????? ???? ??????????? ? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??????????? ?? ??, ??? ??? ?? ????? ?????????? ???????, ?????????? ??????? ???????? ??????? ??????????. ???? ?????? ? ??????? ?? ???????? ??????????? ????????, ? ???????? ???, ??? ???????????? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ?????????? ??????????. ???????? ??? ?????????? ?????? ???????, ?? ?????????, ?????? ?????? ?????? ????? ??????? ???????????? ???????. ?? ?????? ? ?????? ??????? ?????????? ??? ????? ? ????? «???????» ?????????, ?? ?? ??????????, ? ????????????-???????.


?????-????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????? ????????
17 ????

??????? ?????????, ??????????? ?????????????, ?????-?????????, ??????
??????? ??????? ??????? ? ?????? ???????? «???»

????????? ?????? ???????? ????????????? ???????? ?? ???????????? ??????? ????????? (??? ?? ????????? ??????? ?????????, ??? ? ?? ????????????? ??? ??????????? ??????? ?????????) ? ?? ????????? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ? ????????? ???????? ?? ?????????? (????????, ?? ??? ?????????? «????????? ?????» - ???????? ?????????? ????????? ? ?????????? ?????, ???????? ????? ??? ????? ???????????? ???? ? ?????? ?????? «??? ??? ???????: ???????? ???????»). ??? ?????? ??????? ??????????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ????, ? ?????? ?? ???, ???? ? ????? ? ?????? ?????????? ? ????????? «???», ?????? ????? ?? ???????? ? ?? ????????????????. ????????? ???? ????????, ??????????? ??????? ????? ????????? ???? ? ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?????? ??? ???????, ????? ???????????? ????????? ??????? ??? ???????? ??????????????, ? ????? ???? ????????? ?????? ??????????????? ????? ? ??????? ????????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ????????? ?????????? ? ??????????? ??? ??????????. ? ?????? ???????, ???? ?????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ???????? ????????????? ?????????? ??????? ???????? (? ?? ?????? ?????????, ????? ?????? ?? ???) ? ???????? ??????? ???????? ? ??????????.


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

????? ???, ???????????? ???????????, ???
???????? ??????

??? ?????????, ???? ??????????? ????, ??? ?????????? ???????? ???????????? ???????? ? ?????????? ??? ???????? ?????? ? ?????????? ??? ? ???-?? ???? ????? ????? ????????? ? ???? ?????, ??? ?????? ?????????????? ? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???????.

?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???????, ???????? ?? ???????? ????????? ?????? ???????? ? ??????? («??? ?? ??????? ??? ??????.») ????? ???? ? ?? ??????? ???? ???????? ???????, ??? ??????? ?? ????????????? ??????? ???? ????????? ?????? ?? ??????? ????????? ?????????? ???? ????, ?????? ??????? ?????? ?????????.

?? ????? ???????????? ??????? ???????? ???????????? ???????? ? ????? ???? ?????-?? ????????? ? ??????????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ??????, ???? ? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ? ?????? ?? ???. ??-??????, ???????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ???? ?????? ? ????????????, ??? ?? ??????. ??-??????, ???????? ? ??? ???????, ????? ?????????????? ? ? ???????????? ??????????? ????????? ???????????? ???????, ????? ???????????? ???, ????????, ????????? ????????????, ?? ????? ???? ??????, ???? ? ????? ??????????? ???????, ????????? ??????? ??????? ? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ???????. ???????? ????????? ?? ????????, ??? ??????? ??????????? «????????????» ??????????? ???????????? ??? ????????, ???, ? ???????, «??????? ?????» ? ?????? ????? - ????? ? ???????? ?????. ??? ??????, ??? «??????? ?????» ???????? ??? ????? ?????? ???????? ????? ? ?????? ?????? ? ???????????? ???? ????????, ??????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ??????? ????, ?????? ????????, ??????? ???? ?????? ?????? ??????????? ??? ????????????.

? ???????? ? ???? ???????? ? ???????? ? ?????????????? ??????, ??, ???????, «??????????? ?? ?????» ? «??? ?????? ??????????????????» ??? ???????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ?? ????????? ? ???????.


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

?????? ???????, ?????-????????????? ??????????????? ???????????, ??????
????????? ? ???????? ? ?????? ???????? «Bend Sinister»

??????? ?? ????? ? ????????, ?????? ???????????? ???????? ??????, ?????????, ????????????, ???????????, ???????? ??????????? ????? ??????? ??????????? ????????. ???? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ????? - ??????????? ??????? ????? ?????? ? ???????, ?.?. ?????????? ?????? ??????????????????? ????, ????? ?? ??????? ????? ??????? ??????????. ??????????? ? ?????? «Bend Sinister» ??????? ?? ??????????????? ??????? ?? ????? ? ???????? - ????????? ????? ?????????????????? ? ?????????????? ???????????? ?????? ???? ??????????? ???????????? ??????? ??????????????? ??????. ???????????? ???????? ???????????? ??????????? ???????? ???????? «??????????? ?????», «????», «Ultima Thule», ?????? «Bend Sinister» ? «Transparent Things».

???? ????, ??? ? ?????, ????????? ?????????? ??????? ????-??????, ????????? ?? ??????? ?????????? ????????? ?????. ????? ??????? ?? ????? ? ???????? ????????????? ?????? ? ??????? ????? ? ??????, ?? ?????? ???? ??????????? ??????? ???????. ???????????? ????? ?????????? ?????????????? ???????????? ????? ? ?? ????????? ? ?????????-???????????? ????????? ??????: «<.> ? ????? ??? ? ????????, ????????? ?????????, ?????? ?????????. ??????? ?????? ?? ??????? ? ????? ??????? ? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ?????. ? ???? ??????? ????????????? ???????? ???? ????? ????????. ?????????? ?????? ???????. ????? ?? ?? ???? ????????? ?????????, ? ??? ?????????. ??????? ??????» (??????? ?.?. ????. ???. ? 5 ??. ???., 1997. ?. 1. ?. 212).

????????? ? ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ? ???????? ???????????? ????????? ?? ???????????? ?????, ????????? ????????? ??????????? ?????????? ?????? «Bend Sinister». ???, ???? ???? ?????????? ????? ???????????? ?????? ??? «<..> ??????? ????? ? ???????????? ? ??????? ???????????? ???? ? ?????? ?? ?????? ?????; ?????? ?? - ??? ???? ?????????? ????????? ???????????? ?????? <.> ???? ?????????? ?????, nichto» (??? ??. ?. 345). ? ?????? ???????????? ?? ?????? ??? ????????? ?????? («????????? ???????????? ??????» ? «?????????? ?????, nichto»), ?? ? - ??? ??????????? - ??? ????????? ??????????.

? ????? ?????????????? ?????? ???????? ????? ?????? ? ?????????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??????? ? ??????????? ????? ????????? ????/???? ?????????? ???/????, ??? ? ???? ??? ??????????? ???????? ? ???????? ? ??????????, ?? ???????? ? ???????? ??????????? ???? ? ????? ??????????, - ????, ?????????? ??? ?. ???????? ? «Meditationes de Prima Philosophia» (1641). ??????????? ? «??????? ??????? ??????» ?????, ??????? ????????????? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ????? ??? ???????? ?????????????????? ???????, «??????????????????? ???????». ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ????????????? ???????????? ???? («???? ? ????») ?????????? ?? ?????? ????????. ???????? ?????, ??????????? ????????? ?????????? ?? ??????? ???????? ? ??????? ?????????????? ??????????, - ? ????????????? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ?????????? ?????????. ???? ??????? ????? ? ? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ? ???.

??????????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ?????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????????????? ??????????? ? ???????????? ?????. ?????? ?? ???????????????? ?????????? ????????, ? ?????? ???????, ?? ?? ???????????? ?????????, ???????? ?? ?????? ????????????? ????????. ??????????? ? ??????? ?????????, ???????? ???????? ????? ???????????? ???????????? ???????????, ? ?.?. ? ????????????????? ???????? ????????? ??????, ? ????? ?????. ? ??????????, ??????????? ???? ? ???? ?? ????? ? ?????? «Bend Sinister» ??????????? ?? ?????? ? ?? ??????? ? ?????????? ??????? ?????/???????????, ??????? ? ????????????????? ?????????? ????????. ????? ???????, ??????????? ? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ???????? «Bend Sinister» ????????? ???? ?????, ? ?????? ???????, ????? ?????????? ? ????????? ?????? ? ??????????.


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

????? ???????, ???????????? ???????????, ????????
?????????? ? «????????» ????????

«????????» - ????????????? ? ?????????? ????????????? ????? ????????????, ???????? ? ???? ??????? ??????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ????????, ????????????? ? ???????? ? ????????? ?????? ? XVI-XVII ?????. ???? ?? ??????????? ???????????, ??????????????? ? ?????? - ??????? ????????? (??????????? ? 1653 ?.) ???????? ? ??????? ???????? ?????????, ?????? ?????, ?? ????????? ????? ??????? ? ???????????? ? ???????? ? ??????. ?? ????????????? ???????, ?????????, ??????????????, ????? ?? ??????, ???????????? ??????????? ??????; ?????? ? ???????? ?????? ? ???????????, ?? ???????? ????? ????????, ????? ???????? ?? ?????. ? ????????? (????? ??? ??????? ????????), ? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ?????????????? ?????????? ????. ?????? ????????? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? - ????? ??? ??, ??? ?? ???? ?????????, ???? ?????? ???????. ?????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ? ?????????????, «????????» ?????? ???????????? ????? ????? ????? ????????????? ??????, ??????????? ? ????????? ?????? XIX ?., ????? ???????????? ????????? ???????? ?????????? ???????????? ?????.

?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

??????? ?. ????????, ??????????? ????? ?????????, ???
????????? ???????: ???? ??????? ?????? ? ????????? ????????

??? ??????? ? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????????? ???????????? ? ?????????? ???????? ?????? - ?????????? ???????-??????????? ?? ? ??????? ???????, ??? ????????. ?????? ???????????? ?????? ???????????? ???????? ??????????, ??? ?? ??????? ?????????? ????????? ??????? ?????????? ????? ???????? ????? ??????????????? ? ??????????????? ????????. ????????? ???? ??????? ?????? ? ?????????? ???????? ????????? ? ????? ???? ????????????? ????????: ????? ??????? ????????? ????????? ? ????????? «?????» ? «????-?????» ? ?????? «???» ? «??????» ? «??????? ????». ?????, ??????????, ?????????? ? ???????? ?????? ??? ??????????? ?????? ? - ? ??????????-?????????? ???? - ? ?????? ????????? ?????? (????????, «Thayer» ? ?????? «????»). ?????? ??????? ????????? ? ?????????? ???????? ????? ????????????? ?????, ???? ?? ?? ???????????? ???? ??????????? ???? ????????? ?????? ??????? ?????, ??????????? ? ???????? ??????? ?????????? ????????????. ?????? ????? ?????? ???????, ???????? ?? ????? ???????? ??????? ? ???????? ??????????, ??? ???????? ???????? ????, ? ?????? ???????? ? ???? ??????? ????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ????????? ? ?????? ???????, ????????? ? ????? (????????, ???? ???????). ???????, ??? ??? ???????????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ??????????? ??????? ??????? - ??????? ? ??????????.


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

????? ??????????, ???????? ???????, ???
«????????? ??????»: ??????????? ????????????? ? ????????

?????? ?????? ?????????, ??? ????? 1943 ???? ???????, ????? ??????????????? ?????? ??? ????? ???????, ???? ??? ?????, ?? ??? «?????? ? ??????», ?????? ????? ?????? "abyss" («??????») ?????? ???????? ???????????? ??????? the. ??? the ????????? ??? ? ????? ??? ????? ??????? ??-???????????. ????? ??????? ? ???? ??????? ?? ?????????? ??????? ? ????-???, ?? ?????? ???????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????????????, ????? ???????? ?????? ???????, ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??????????? ??????. ????????????? ???????? ? ????????????, ??????? ? ????? ???????? ?????????, ? ????? ??????? ????????? ? ???????? ?????? ???????????? - ????????????? ? ???????????, ?????????? ? ?????????, ??????? ? ??????????, ?????? ? ????????, ?????? ? ?????????, ????????????????? ? ??? ?? ??????????.

? ???? ???????, ??????? ??????????????? ????????????? ???????? ? ???????? (? ? ?????????????), ? ????????????

?) ?? ????? ?? ???????????? ?????? ???????? (? ?????? ??????? ?? «????», «??????», «Speak Memory» ? «?????????»), ??? ??????????? ????? «??????» ("abyss" ) ? «??????????» ("bliss"), ?

?) ???????????? ?????? ????????? (?????? ???????, ????? ????????, ????? ???????, ???? ??????, ????? ??????), ??????? ????????, ??? ?????????? ??? ??????? ? ???????? ? ??????????? ??????.


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

???? ??????, ????????????? ????????? ???????????/ ??????????? ????? ??????????, ???????/???
?????????? ?????? (??????? ? ????????????? ????????)

? ?????????? ?? ???? ?????????? ???????????? ????? ????????????, ???????????? XIX ????? - «???????? ?????», ?? ???????????, ??????? ??? ? 1917 ???? ????????? ????. ?????? ?? ????????, ??? ????????????? ?????? «????» ? ???????? 1969 ???? ? ?????????? ???????, ??? ?????? ???????? ????????? ??????? ? ????????? ??????? ???????? ??????? ? ?????????? ????????????. ??????????? ?????? ? ????????? «???????? ??????????» ? ?????????? ???????? - ??????????? ??????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????? ? ??????? ?????????? (??????????? ???????????? ????????????? ????? ??????? - ??????? ???????? ? ?????? ???????? ???? ?? 1932 ?.): ??????? ????? ?????? ??????-?????????? ??????? ???? ????????. ????? ????????????? ???????????? ?????? ???????? ?????? ???????????, ? ???? ?????????? ????? ??????????? ? ???????????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ???????????, ? ??? ????? ? «??????» ? ? «?????». ?????? ????? ?????????? ??? ??????, ??? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ??????????? (???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????) ?, ?? ???? ?????????, ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????, ???????? ? ?????, ?????????? ?????????? ????????????.



?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

??????? ????????, ????????? ??????????????? ???????????, ??????
??????????????-?????????????? ?????? ????? ?.?. ????????

???????????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????? ????????? ? ?????????? ?????? ?????????. ??????????????-?????????????? ???????? ? ????????????? ???????? ? ????????-?????????????? ??????? ???????? ? ????? ??? ???????????? ????? ? ???????. ????? ???????? ????????? ????? ???????????????, ????????? ??????? ? ??????????? ??????, ? ???????????????, ??????????????? ???????????? ???????? ?????????. ????????????? ????? ????????? ? ???????? ? ????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?????? ????, ? ??????????? ??????? ? ????????????, ? ???????? ??????????. ????? ?? ????????? «???????? (????????????) ?????????» (?.?. ??????) ???????? ???????????????? ???? ???????????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????? ?????, ??????? ????????? ????? ? ???????????. ??????????????? ??????????? ?????? ???? ???????????, ? ?????????, ? «?????????? ?????????????????» (?. ?. ?????), ????????? ? ?????? ????? ? ?????, ????? ???????????? ????? ? ??????? ??????? ????? (?????- ? ??????????). ? ?????? ????? ??? ??????????????? ???? ????? ???????, ???????????? ???? «??????? ????????».

?????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????? ? ??????????????-??????????????? ??????? ? ?????????? ??? ???????, ????????????, ????????????????? ???????? ? ??????, ????? ? ????????. ? ???????? ?????????????? ??????? ?? ?????????? ??????? ? ???????????? ??????????????? ? «????????????? ??????», «????????????», ???????? ??? ???????? ????????.. ?? ???????? «??????? ??????» (?.?. ??????) - ??????, ?????? ? ????????? ? ????????? ????? ????? («??????? ????????»), ???????????? ???????????? ????????? ? ????????????? ???????????? ?????????????, ?????????? «?????????? ??????» ? ????????????? ????????, ??? ????? ?????? - ??????? ????? ?????, ??????? ??????. ? ????? ? ??????? ? ???? ? ???????? ??????????? ?????? ??????????????? ????????? ???????, ??????????????? ? ??????????? ???????. «??????? ????????», «??????? ??????» ??????? ? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? «???????? ????????» (?.?. ??????). ? «???????-?????????????? ????????» ??-??????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ?????? ? ???????????? ???????? ?.?. ????????, ? ?????????, ??????? ?????????? ??????????? ??? ???????, ??????? ????? ????????? ? ???? ??????? ? ??????? «???????? ???????????» ? ?????????? ???????????, ? ???????? «???????????? ????????» (?. ?. ??????), ??? ? ?????????? ????? ??????????.

??????????? ??????? «????? ?????» ????? ???? ???????????????? ????????? (????????, ??? ????? ? ??????????? ????????? ????? ?????????? ???? ??????????????? ?????????, ? ???? ??????????? ???????????? ??????). ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ???? ??? ???????? («???????», «??????????»), ????????? «?????» ??????. ??? ???? ????? - ?? ??????????? ???????? ???????????, ?? ???????????? ??????, ? «???????? ????????», «????????? ??????????? ???????», «????? ??????? ????????? ???????». ??????????? ????????????? ? ????????? ?????????? ???? ????? ? ????? ????? ???????????????? ?? ?????????????. ????? ?????????????? ??? ?????? ???????? ????????, ???? ??????? ??????? ??????????????? ???????????? ?????. ??????? ??????? ?????? ?????????????? ????? ?????, ?????????? ???????? ?????, ? ?????????? ???? ????????? ????? ?? ???????, «?????????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ??????».

??????????? ????? ????? ????????????? ??? «??????????», ??? ?????????? ????????? (??????????? ????????? ?????? ? ?????) ?????? ? ??????? ?????? ? ?? ??????? ????????, ??????? ???????? ???????????? ???????, «?????? ?????? ???????? ?????» (??. ????????).


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

?????? ????, ??????????? ????? ????? ?? ?????, ????? 3, ???????
?????? ?? ?? ? ?????????? ??????? ? ??????????? ??????????? ?????

?????? ?????? «????????? ?????????? ? ??????? ?????», ?????????????? ? 1980 ?. ? ????? «?????? ?? ??????????», ??? ??????????? ??????? ????? ? ????????? ???????????? ??????????? ?????????? ????????. ??? ????? ??? ??????????????? ????????????? ????? «???????????? ?????????????? ? ???????????????? ????????????», ??? ???????????? - ??????????????? ? «???? ? ??????????????? ?????????», ? ????????????? «? ?????? ????», «? ?????????????». ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ????? ? ???????????? ??????? ?????? ? ??????? ?? ??????? ? ???? ? ???? ?????? ????????????.

???? ??????? - ????????, ??? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????? ???? ? ??????, ?? ?? ?????????????????? ?????????????? ? ??????? ????????????, ??????????? ???? ?????????????, ? ?? ??????? ????????????, ?????????????? ??? ??????, ??????? ???????? ????????????? ? ???? ??? ??????????? ??????? ?????, ????????? ????????????? ?????????????????? ? ??????????? ?? ???. ????? ???????????? ????????????? ??? ????????????? ?? ?????????? «?????-??????», «??????????-???????» ??? ????????????? ? ??????, ?????????????? ? ?????, ? ? ???, ??? ????? ???????? ????? ??????. ??? ???????? «??????????», ?? ?? ???????? ???????, ? ??????? ?????? ?? ???????? ???????????? ?????????. ????????????? ????? ???????????? ????? ???? ?????? ? ?????????????? ????????? ?????????? ????????????? ????????? «????-???????».


?? ????????? ??????????? ??????????
18 ????

???????? ?? ???????, ??????????? ????????-??????, ???????
????????? ?????? ? ??????? ????????: ? ??????? ?????? ?????????

?? ?????? ?????????? ? ??????? ???????? ??????? ? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ??????? ??????. ??????????, ??????? ?????????? ??????? ?, ??? ????? ? ??? ??????, ????? ??? ??????????, ?????????? ? ???? ???????????.

??????????? ?????? ? ??????? ???????? ???????????: ??? ? ??????? ???????, ? ?????? ??????, ??????? ? ???????????? ??????????, ??????? ? ??????????, ????? ??????? ???????? ???????????? ? «?????? ???????» ??? «???????? ???????» ? «???».

???? ? ????????? ??????? ???????? ????? ????? ?????????? ??????????, ??? ?????????? ??????, ??? ? ???? ? ? ???????? ????? ????. ??? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????? ? ????????? ? ??? ?????? ? ????? ??????? ???????? ??? ???????? ?????? ?????????. ??? ????, ??? ??????? ? ????? ??????? ????? ????? ??????????? ??????????, ???????????? ?? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ? ?????. ?????????????, ????? ???????????? ? ??????????????? ?????????, ?????????? ??? ?? ???????????, ??? ??????? ? ????????, ? ??????????.

????? ???????, ???????? ????????? ??????????? ??????????? ???? ? ??????? ???????? (?? «?????? ???????» ? «????» ?? «??????» ? «???»), ?? ?????? ??????, ??????, ?? ?????? ????????, ?????????????? ?????????.


??????? ????????
18 ????

????? ??????, ??????????, ???????? ? ??????????? ????????, ??????, ????????
????????? ?????? ? ????????

??????? ? ???, ??? ? ???????? ???????????????? ????????? ??? ?????????? ????? «???????????? ?? ??????????? ???????? ? ?????????» ??? ????????? ????? ??????????? ?????? ?? ?????? ???????, ??????? ????????? ??????? ? ???? ?????????. ??? ????? Father Dejean / ???? ?????, ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ? ?????????? ?????? ???????? "The Aurelian"? ?????????? ?? ????????, ????????????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? (? ?????? «???»)? ?????? ??????? ? ???????, ??? ????? ?? ??? ????????? ????, ???????? ????????? ??? ????????? Thecla bieti?


??????? ????????
18 ????

???????? ??????????, ???? ??????? (???? ???-????), ???????? ?????-?? (???? ???-???????), ???
??????????? ????????, ?????????? ? ???????? ???????? ? ???????? ?????????

«??????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????. ?? ????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ????????????, ??????????? ?????? ???? ? ?????????? ????????. [.] «???????????? ????? ? ???????????? ?????? ?? ????? ??????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????????? ?????????? ???????? ? ??????????????? ?????????; ? ?????? ?? ???????, ? ? «?????? ?? ?????????????» ???????????? ??????????, ????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? ????? ????? ???????????? ????????????, ???????????? ? ???????, ??????? ????????? ?????? ?? ????????? ????, ??? ???????? ??????? ???? ?????. ? ????? ? ??????? ?? «???????????» ???????, ??????? ????? ? ?????????. ? ?? ? ?????? ???? ????? ?????, ? ?? ? ?????? - ????, ?????? ????????????? ?????????? ? ?????????». - ??.

??????? ????????? ???????? ??????????? ????? ??????, ???????? ??????? ????????? ?????? ???????? ????????? ?? ????? ???? ??????????? ????????????? ?????? ?????????; ??????? ? ????, ??? ???????? ??????? ?? ?????, ????? ??????? ??? ????, ?????????? ??????????, ????????? ???????? ????? ??????. ? ????????? ? ?????, ??? ? ???? ??????? ??? ??????? ????. ????? ????????, ??? ????? ??????????? ???????????? ????????, ? ?????? ??????????? ???????? ? ??????????? ????????, ???????????? ???????? ???????. ? ????? ?????????, ??? ?????? ???????????? ??????? ???????? ? ??????????, ??????? ?? ???????????????? ??????????, ???????? ??? ?????????? ?????? ????????????? ??? ??? ??????? ?????? ?? ???????? ????????.


??????? ????????
18 ????

?????????? ??????, ???????? ??????????? ???????????, ???????
????????? Zygaenidae (Lepidoptera) ? ????????????? ????????

?????????? ???????? ????????????? ????? Lepidoptera, ??????????? ? ????????????? ???????? ??? ??????? ???????? ??????? ??? ???????????? ????????. ? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????????? ????? ???????, ??? ??????? ???? ? ????.

??????? ?? ??? ???????????? ?? ????????? Zygaenidae (Lepidoptera), ?????? ????? ??? ????????? ???? ??????? ? ????? ?????????????. ?????? ???????, ?????? ???? ??? ????????? ?????????? ????? ????????? - ? ????????????? «????» ? ? «????» (??. ??????, 2001: 32-33; ??????, 2001: 283-284), ??????? ????? ??? ????. ? "Speak, Memory" ??????? ?????: "Several moths, too, were flying - gaudy sun lovers that sail from flower to flower like painted flies.". ?????????? ??????? ???????? ????????? ? ?????????? ????????? ??????????, ??? ???? ????? ???? ? ?????????????? ???? Zygaena: ??? ?????? ???? (??????????), ???????? ?? ??????? (??? ????), ????? ??????? (?????, ????????????), ??? "moths" (? ?? "butterflies"!) ? ?????????? ????????? ??????? («??????????? ? ?????? ?? ??????»).


??????? ????????
18 ????

?????? ???, ???????? ??????????????? ???????????????????? ???????????, ?????????? ??????, ???????? ??????????? ???????????, ???????
?????? ??????: ????? ????? ? ?????? ????????

? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????, ????????? ????????? ? ??????? ???????? ??????? ?????? - ??????, ????????, ????, ??????. ?????? ? ?????????, «? ??????», «????? ? ???????? ????» ????????? ? ??? ?????? ?????? ???????, ???????????? ?? ???????. ? ????? «????», ????????????? ?????? ???? ? ???????, ?? ????????? ????? ????? ?????????? ????????????, ??? ????? ?????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? «????? ?????? ???????, / ???? ?????? ???? ??????», «?????????? ??????», «??????? ??????? ????», «? ??????? ????????????, / ? ???????? ???????.»

????? ????????? ??????? ??????????? ?????? ???????? ????? ?????????? ???????, ???????? ? ?????????? - «?????? ???????». ???????????? ? ????????? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??????????? ? ?????? «?????-??????? ????????? ??????, / ???????????? ?? ???????», ?????????? ????????????? ? ????????? ???????? («?????? ????? ?????? ????? ???????? ???????, / ? ?? ?? ?????? ??, ??? ?????, ????????»). ??? ????? ????????????????? ????? ? ???????????? - ????????????, ??????? ??????????, ?????????? ??????????: ??????????????? ????? ?????? ??????? ? ???????.

??????, ??????? ?????? ????????, ? ????? ????? ????????? ?????????????? ?????? ? ???????? ????? ?????????? ???????? ?????????? ?????. ?????????? ????? ???????????????, ??? ???????? ? ?????????? ?????? ?????????????? ??????????????? ???????. ??????, ? ??????? ?? ?????????? ??????????? ??????????? ? ?????????, ?? ??????????? ???????????? «????????? ?????» ???????, ??????? ??? ???? ???????? ?????? «????? ????????? ? ????? ???????», - «????? ????????, ???????? ?????» ????????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ? ??????? «? ??????? ??????», ??????? ??? ??? ? ?? ??????? ???? ?????? ???????.


????????? ??????

???????? ?????????, ?????? ???????, ???
«?? - ?? ??»: ??????? ? ????? ??

??? ?????? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ?????????? ???????? ????????? ????? ????????? ????? «????????? ?????? ?????????? ?????» ????????? ???????? ? «???????????? ? ?????????» ?????? ??.

???????? ?????? ??, ????????? ? 1945 ????, ??? ? ????????? ???? ?????? ????? «????????? ????? ?????????? ?????», ? ??????? ???????? ?????????????? ?? ?????????? ???????. ????????, ???????? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ????????? ?????. ? ??????? ??????????? ??????????? ? ???????????? ????????? ????? ????? ???????? ? ????????? ????? ??? ??? ?????????????? ? ????????????????? ????.

?????? ?????? ? ?????????????? ?? ??????? ????, ? ??????????? ??????????????? ? ???????? ??????? ?????????????? - ? ?????? ????????????. ? ??????? ???????????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ? ??. ?????????? ??? ?? ??????????? ????? ??? ???????? ?????????? ?????????? ????? ? ?????????? ??????. ????? ????, ??? ???????? ????? ?????????? ??? ??????????? ??? ? ????????.

???????, ? ????? ??????? ?????????????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ? ?????? ?????????? ????? ? ?????????? ?????? ? ???? ????????? ??????????? ? ????? ????? ??????????. ???????? ?????????? ???????? ???? ???????, ????? ?????????? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ? ?? ? ??????????? ???? ?????. ? ?????????? ?????? ???????????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????????????????? ? ?? ?????????? ??????? «????????? ????? ?????????? ?????» ?? «??????????? ? ?????????».


????????? ??????

??????? ?????? ?????, ????????? ??????????? - 7, ???????
??????? ????????? ? ???????: ???????? ??????? ? ?????? ???????????

? ???? ??????? ? ???? ??????????? ??, ???, ??? ??? ???????, ???????? ?????????? ???????????? ????????????? ??????? ????? ??????????? ???????? ? ?????????? ??????????? ? ????????????? ???????, ????????? ????????????? ??????? ????????????, ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? ????????? ?????????, ??????????? ?????????????? ?????? 1997 ???? ?? ????? «?????? ????????».

?????? ???????? ? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???????????? "Edwin Mullhouse. The Life and Death of an American Writer 1943-1954 by Jeffrey Cartwright" / «????? ???????. ????? ? ?????? ????????????? ???????? (1943-1954), ???????????? ??????? ??????????» (1972), ? ??????? ?????????? ???????????? ????? ????????????? ? ????????? ??????? ???????? («???», «???????? ????? ?????????? ?????», «Speak, Memory» ? ???????? «??????? ?????»).

«????? ???????» - ??? ????????? ?????????????? ????????-???????, ?????? ????????, ???????????? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ??????-??????????? ? ? ???? ?? ???????-??????????? ??????? ??????????, ??????????????? ???????, ??????? ?????? ????????????? ? ???????? ????? ??????, ?? ?? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???, ??? ?? ????? ????????????? ? ???????? (?????????? ?????????, ????????????? ? "Speak, Memory"), ? ???????????? ???? ????? ???, ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ?????, ??????? ????? ????????? ???????? ??? ????????? ??????? ????????, ???????????, ??? ???????????, ??????????????? ???????? ? ????????, ??? ????????? ????? ????????? ?? ???. «????? ???????» ??????? ???????????? ??????, ????????? ???????? ? ?????? ???????? ? ????????? ???????????? ??????? ?????????? ??? ???????????????? ??????????, ?????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?????? (??? ? ???????????? ?????????? ????????? «???»).

??????????? ????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????? ???????????? ?????? ??????????? ?????????? ???????, ????? ??????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ? ?????????? ? ???? ???????, ???????????? ????????? ?????, ?????? ???????????????? ? ????????? ??????????? ? ????????????????? ???????? ?????? ?, ?????? ?????, - ?????? ? ??????? ? ??????????, ??????? ?????????? ????? ???? ??????? ? ???????????? ????????.


????????? ??????

????? ??????????, ?????????? ?????????????? ???????????, ???
????????????????? ????????: ??????????? ?????-?????????

? ????? ???????? «?????? ???» ???? ????????? ? ????????? ???????????? ???? ?????????? ? ?????????? ????????? ??? ? ??????? ?????????, ??????????? ??????? ???????????? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ?????? ??????? ???????????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ??????????.

?????????? ???????? ?? ????????. ??? ? ? ?????? ?????????????? ?????? ????? ?????????? ?????????, ? ???? ????????? ??????????? ??????????? ? ????????? ? ???????? ??? ????, ????? ??????????? ???? ???-?? ?????? ?? ????????? ? ????????? ???? ? ??????????? ???. ????? ???????, ?? ?????????? ????? ?????? ??????????? ??????????, ???????? ??????????? ???? ? ??????????. ??????????? ????????? ? ???? ? ????, ??? ?? ??? ? ???????? ?? ???? ???????????? ?????, ??????? ??????????????? ? ?????? ???????? ???????, ?????????, ???????????, ??????????, ????? ? ?????????, ???????? ??????? ? ????????? ? ????????? ????????? - ??????????? ????? ???????? ??????? ? ?? ?????? ?????? ?????.

? ???????????? ????????? "Strangers to Ourselves" («?? ???? ???? ?????») ?????? ???????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ??????????? ????? ???????, ??????? ?????????? ??????????. ???? ?????? ? ????? ?????? "La Double Absence" («??????? ??????????») ??????????, ??? ???? ?????????? ????? ?????? ? ????????, ??? ?????? ???????????? ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???????? - ???????????, ??????????? ? ???????????.

? ?????? ?????????? ???? ??????????? ?????????? ??????????, ??????? ?????-????????? - ???????????, ?????????? ?????, ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ????? ?????, «?????» ? ????? ?????? ?????????? ? ?????????? ???????. ???? ?????, ?????? ??????????????? ?????????? ???????, «????????» ?? ?????? ??????????? ? ? ???? ?? ?????????? ????????? (??????????????? ???????? ? ?????????, ??????? ??? ? ??????????? ?????? ????????? ? ????????? ? ???????????? ?????) ? ?????????? ????????? (????????? ???????, ???????????? ?????-????????????? ???????????, ???????????? ????????????? ? ??????????, ????????, ??????, ??????, ????? ? ??????). ??????? ????? ????????????? ????????, ??? «????????? ?????????? ?????????? ??? ?????????? ?????? ? ???????????? ????? ????? ? ????????. (??) ?????? ???????? ????? ???????? ? ???????????????».

???????? ??????? ????????? ???????????, ????????? ? ???????????? ?????????, ???????? ? ??????????, - ???????????? ??? ????? ??? ?????????? ?????????, - ??? ???, ?????????? ? ????? ??????, ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ??????????. ???, ??? ??????? ??? ??????? ? ?? ????????? ? ?????????? ? ????????? ?????? ?? ????????? ?????? ??? ????????????, ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ? ????? ?????? «???????????? ??????????? ? ??????». ?? ????????????? ?????? ?????, ??????? ???????? ? ??????????? - ?????????? ??????? - ????? ? ?????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??? ???????????? ????????. ????????? ??????? ????? ??? ???????????, ??? ? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ????? ??????? ??????????: «??? ?? ?? ???????? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ???????, ????????? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ???????????; ??? ????????? ?????? ? ??????? ? ???, ? ?????????? ?????, ??? ??????? ??? ??????? ? ?????, ? ? ?????????? ????, ??? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ? ???????????».

? ???? ??????? ? ???????? ?????? ???????? «???» ? «???» ? ????? ????????, ??? ??????? ?????????? ???? ?????????? ? ?????????? ??????? ??? ????, ????? ?????????? ??????? ?????-?????????, ? ??? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ?????? ??? ? ???????? ? ????????? ??? ?????? ???? ?????? - ??????????? ?? ?????? ????????? ??????? ????????.


????????? ??????

??????? ?????-?????, ????????? ???????????, ????????
???????????????? ????????????? ???????? ?? «???? ????» ? «?????? ????» ? ????????????? «??????»

???????????? ???????????? ????????, ??? ????????????? ? ?????????????? ?????????, ??????????, ??? ?? ????????? ????????? ????? ????????????? ???????????? ????????: ????????????? ? ???????????????? ?????? ????? ??????????, ? ???, ??? ?????? ???????????? ??????? ?????????? ????? ???????, ?????? ??????? ? ????????? ????????, ? ????????????? ? ?????? ????? ??????????.

????? ?? ??????, ??? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ????, ??? ??????????????? ????? ??????? ? ?????. ? ?? ???????, ??? ????????? ??????? ? ???????????? ????? ??????????? ???????? ????????, ?? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ??????????? ? ??? ??????? ????, ?? ????????? ? ???????? «???? ???» - ?? ????? ??? ?????????? ??????????.

??????? ?????????, ??? ???????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????????? ????????? ????????????? ?? ???-??????????????? ???????, ??????? ?? ??????? ? ???????. ????? ??????? ?? ?? ?????? ????????? ? ????? ????????????? ??????? «?????» ? ??????? ????, ?? ? ?????????? ?????????????, ??????????? ??????? ??? ???????, ? ? ?? ?? ????? ????? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????????????? ?????. ? ?????????????? ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ??????????? ????????????? ???????? «??????».


????????? ??????

????? ?????????, ??????????? ???????????? ??????????? ??. ?. ?. ???????????, ???????
«????????, ??????????? ? ?????»: ???????? ?????????????? ???????? ? ????? ? ????????

??????? ????? ? ?????? ????? ?????????? ? ???????? ??????? ?????, ????????????? ???? ?? «???????????» ?????? ????? (?. ?????????, ??????? ?. ????, ?. ???????), ??????????, ??? ????, ??????????? ????????, ???????????? ??????? ??????????????, ????????? ??? (?. ?????????), ? ????? ????????? ?????? ??????????? ?????? ???????????, ????? ?? ????? ???????????????? (?. ???????).

??? ??????? ???? ??????? ?. ??????, ???????? ? ?????? ????????, ??????? ???????? ?? ???? ? ???????????? ?????????? ??, ???????? ??????????. ???????? ??? ????? ???????? ????? ? ?????????? ??? ??????? ?????, ????? ???????????? ????????????? ?????????. ??????? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ??????????????? ??? ??????????? ? ??????????? ??????????? ???????? ????? ???????? ?????.

?? ?????? ????????, ???????? ????????? ??????????? ??????????? ?????????????????? ??????, ???????? ????????????? ??????????? ????? ? ??????????? ???????????????????? ???? ?????????? «?????????? ?????????? ????????» (?. ???????), ????? ???? ????? ?????? ???????? ??????????? ???? «?????????????? ???????????». ? ?????? ???????, ???????? ?? ????????????? ???????? ????? ?????????, ??????? ?????????????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????????. ? ????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ????????? ? ?????????? ???????? ??????????? ???????, ????? ??? ? ??? ????????????????, ??????? ???????????? ?? ?????????????? ?????? ????? ??????????? ? ????????? ???????? ???????????? ????????, ??? ?????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????????? ???????, ????????????? ?? ???????????????? ?? ?????????? ? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ????.