On May 10, 2012, at 4:07 AM,
Anthony Stadlen wrote:
... it may
be worth recalling that VN in an interview in October 1971
said:
"...I believe that one day a
reappraiser will come and declare that, far from having been a frivolous
firebird, I was a rigid moralist kicking sin, cuffing stupidity, ridiculing
the vulgar and cruel -- and assigning sovereign power to tenderness, talent,
and pride." [Strong Opinions (1973), McGraw-Hill, p. 193.]
Anthony Stadlen
... Unlike you, I
don't particularly see any Vladimirian literary extensions to be gleaned
from Kalmakov's painting (except the precious information that the painting
was owned by his parents and hung somewhere in the house). Nevertheless, the
firebird and mermaid/seasand nymph associations in ADA seem to confirm your
hunch! (There are a lot of aquatic images, words, worlds in
ADA.)
Dear Mr Stadlen,
Because of the layout of your last post, it's not clear whom you are
addressing when you write "unlike you" - but I'll take it to mean me. I don't
know what you mean by "Vladimirian literary extensions" - but I think I can
assure you I did not intend to make any such. My pursuit of Kalmakov in the
"Vladimirian" (I would rather say Nabokovian) context, is more directly
biographical and only secondarily literary. Probably this is because my least
favorite of VN's works is definitely Ada. I never intend to read it
again, that's for damned sure.
But I am very interested in Kalmakov as representative of the myriad
artistic and literary movements swirling around Russia before the revolution,
and how VN may have perceived himself in relation to those. The possible
reference I detected in the quote from Ada sent in Jansy's recent post
("Firebird ... Apollo") to the two pre- and post-revolutionary magazines in
which those artistic and literary movements were manifested, that's what
interests me. Also what role VN's family may have played in our author's
relation to those movements. Up until now, the only familial literary
connection that I was aware of was the presence of Box, a direct descendant of
Chekhov's dackel, in the Nabokov household. How did that happen? I have asked
in the past, but have received no reply to date.
By the way, there is no evidence that the Kalmakov painting was "hung
somewhere in the house." We don't know that for a fact. They may have
purchased it to do a favor for a starving artist, for example. Or Kalmakov may
have given it to them in hopes of furthering his carrer. It may have been
stashed in the attic so far as we know. There is no evidence of how or why the
painting came into the family's possession. Perhaps something will turn up -
let's hope so.
As for VN's denial of any firebird identity, I'd take that and put it in
a box with his similar denial of any interests in doubles. It's a pretty big
box, and the label I'd put on it would be "TO BE TAKEN WITH A GRAIN OF
SALT."
respectfully yours,
All private
editorial communications are read by both co-editors.