Re: Nabokov Bibiliography: Jamie L. Olson. "The 'Real Lives of VN: A Critique of three Novels"

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 5:56 AM

Subject: Re: Nabokov Bibiliography: Jamie L. Olson. "The 'Real Lives ofVN: A Critique of three Novels"

Dear Mr (soon to be Dr?) Olson,

What a great abstract! This is exactly what I am interested in. Nabokov anticipates his critics (most clearly in 'Pale Fire') and forces terms such as the extradiegetic-heterodiegetic and the intradiegetic-homodiegetic to become instantly redundant. Rimmon comments (on Sebastian Knight, where the interpenetration is impossible to unravel) that Œas if to complicate matters, the different levels are made analogous to each other, sometimes so much that they seem identical and the borders between them are often blurred by the penetration of one level into another. ¹

What intrigues me, however, is the critical need (still) to 'unravel' the novel into its parts. This is beautifully impossible in 'Sebastian Knight,' though that does not stop critics trying. I've even noticed this in the excerpts I've read of the 'Pale Fire' reading; a need to discover an empirical solution...what 'actually happens.' But like Humbert Humbert who manufactures dreams for his Freudian doctors, 'pure classics in style (which make them the dream-extortionists, dream and wake up shrieking),' Nabokov anticipates the critical response and makes it impossible.

Here's an example that I think, partly, sums up a form of 'Pale Fire' criticism. In the index of Pale Fire, the notation under ŒLass¹ reads Œsee Mass,¹ the note for ŒMass¹ orders the reader to Œsee Male,¹ then ŒMale¹ says Œsee Word Golf¹ (the reader starts to get the joke) and ŒWord Golf¹ leads full circle giving the notation Œsee Lass.¹ Thus, through literally searching for an answer and elucidation, the reader is lead in a circle of maddening Œword golf,¹ that parallels the vain critical search for a definite reality in 'Pale Fire.' It's easy to do though, and it's easy to be found at the end of the novel, still spinning from 'Lass,' to 'mass' to 'male' etc. Yet this form of 'paper chase' criticism is surely misguided; a wonderful, cunning diversion. True engagement with the novel, I think, occurs when one considers the effect of these multiple and overlapped narrative layers; when the reader accepts the plurality of realities and disallows one to take precedence over the other; allowing an examination of the effect this multiplicity has upon the reader, how it possibly comments upon art, artifice, identity and reality.

Your thoughts?

Best Wishes
James

The “Real” Lives of Vladimir Nabokov: A Critique of Three Novels

Jamie L. Olson, English

Thomas Zelman, Ph.D., Department of English, U. of Michigan

ABSTRACT

The distinction between truth and fiction in the interpretation of literature is not always clear, particularly in light of the reader’s tendency to subjectively “read into” the text information that may not be intrinsic. In the novels Lolita, Pale Fire, and The Real Life of Sebastian Knight, Vladimir Nabokov exploits this tendency to the fullest extent, blurring the reality/art dichotomy by means of narrative deceit and often parodying the reader’s relationship to the text. The implications of these techniques and of solipsistic reading are explored in this paper, and ultimately extended to encompass literary analysis in general, thereby examining how one should interact with a fictional piece of literature.