Thanks to all who have made this such a lively
thread. I think Jim Twiggs' points are excellent. My own position
can be summed up this way: VN intended John Shade to be exactly as good a poet
as he (VN) believed himself to be. And on that question -- just how good a
poet was VN? -- there are widely divergent opinions. I strongly
favor a reading of the novel in which Shade is a decent and sympathetic
character, also an almost-but-not-quite-first-rate poet. I believe,
and have argued, that this would have been VN's evaluation of his own
character and poetic talents. I can't see how to read the novel in a way
that reduces this identification between Shade and VN, but I know many others
have, and the debate will go on as long as there are good readers. (And by
the way, I think this interpretation would hold true whether or not one is a
"Shadean" -- a proponent of Shade as author of both poem and
commentary.)
Best,
J.