Re: “the nasty  commentator is not an ex-King of Zembla nor is he professor Kinbote. He
is professor Botkin, or Botkine, a Russian and a madman.”

 

In off-list discussion with Jerry I have come round to a present understanding that the whole bang-shoot, poem and commentary, is indeed the creation of Botkin the Russian madman. This suggests to me that Botkin is extremely close to VN, the Russian sane man.

 

As my mother used to say: “How can you tell whether a man is sane? Answer: if he has a sense of humour. How can you tell if he has a sense of humour? Answer: if he is prepared to laugh at himself.”  It occurs to me that VN is having jolly fun in his masterpiece; not only laughing at the house of cards of earnest, solemn scholarship, but also at himself.

 

In a message dated 16/11/2006 03:53:16 GMT Standard Time, Matthew Ross writes:

 

As for VN's assertion that Botkin is "a Russian and a madman,"  I've always found this assertion to be puzzling at best, at worst completely misleading. In the index, Botkin is an
"American scholar of Russian descent." To me, this very plainly  means that Botkin is not a Russian but an American whose ancestors were Russian.

 

I’d tended to believe that the fully committed immigrant to the New World would, on arrival, throw off the trammels of the past, and swear to himself: “I’m an American”. In Europe the word “descent” might perhaps signify 4 or 5 generations, but I suppose in America it might signify one generation. So maybe the index entry implies that Botkin was born in America. However, the index not reliable. 

 

In a message dated 11/11/2006 04:44:13 GMT Standard Time, Matt Roth writes:

 

Responding to a question about the pronunciation of his name, VN says the following: "Every author whose name is  fairly often mentioned in periodicals develops a bird-watcher's  or caterpillar-picker's knack when scanning an article.  But in my case I always get caught by the word 'nobody'  when capitalized at the beginning of a sentence."

So VN often mistook "Nobody" for "Nabokov."

In view of the possibility that VN identified himself, sometimes, with Nobody, some of the following has suggested (possibly OT) association with this self-identification.

 

In a message dated 13/11/2006 16:29:27 GMT Standard Time, Carolyn  writes:

 

I mean nobody would be mistaken for Nabokov. It's the same joke - - Polyphemus's and the Looking Glass king's - - hm. Hadn't thought of it before - - Kinbote is the Looking Glass king?


The long ancestry of the Nobody joke, from Homer to PF, via Carroll, can be filled in a little with these two instances:

 

 

Stevens, in his Lectures upon Heads, 1799, by extending his comments to include Mr Somebody, seems to be saying that important people are congenitally two-faced, thus anticipating Dr Jekyll and Dorian Grey --- as well as Shade and Kinbote? Who can tell whether VN ever clapped eyes on these images?  I do think it’s worth considering if he’d definitely decided to don the jester’s cap, if only for a while. See “goliart”, n 681.

 

Other thoughts:


In a message dated 16/11/2006 21:38:39 GMT Standard Time, Jerry Friedman writes:

 

Nabokov's saying in that interview that Mary McCarthy couldn't find the "pale fire" quotation.
According to one of the articles in /The Garland Companion to Nabokov/ (which I got yesterday), the correct identification of the "pale fire" quotation didn't appear in Mary McCarthy's essay till a revision of 1970, I think.

 

The Penguin 1991 edition is obviously seriously misleading. There are other misprints, eg p.126, “not having to read the required book” which puzzled me for a long time, until I checked it against another edition, and realized the “to” was intrusive.

 

In writing, 17/11/06, “by no means no worse” I also realize I’d intended “by no means any worse” or “no worse by any means”; but the solecism still strikes me as amusing.

 

In a message dated 17/11/2006 16:25:16 GMT Standard Time, Jim Twiggs  writes:

 

As a follow-up to Don Johnson's suggestion to consult Zembla, I recommend the discussion of Pale Fire by William Monroe, especially page 3. Here's the link:

http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/monroe2.htm

 

This also impresses me as an excellent analysis of the quality of Shade’s composition, only very faintly marred by occasional lapses into academe-speak. Shade’s style only resembles that of Pope by virtue of its rhyming couplets, and quite lacks the antithetical balance of Pope’s ultra-smooth lines. It is, however, as Monroe comments, precisely the pursuit of rhyme which causes, inter alia, the Shadeian autobiography to stumble.

 

Charles

 

Prefacing a posting with one’s name doesn’t, on second thoughts, seem a good idea, as it tends to imply that the sender is more important than the message.

Search the Nabokv-L archive at UCSB

Contact the Editors

All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both co-editors.

Visit Zembla

View Nabokv-L Policies