-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Architraves and Remorse (JF)
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:47:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>

Vic Perry wrote:

> ... Looking over the italics I found this curiosity: that
> the "fog" lines are not italicized in line 430-431, but more
> "fog" lines are at 445-447.

The headlights and fog on the Shades' TV (roman) is echoed in
what Hazel rides through (italic), right?

> In reply to JF, Kinbote is a very sly Zemblan - but he also is a classic
> unreliable narrator who inadvertently allows readers any number
> of glimpses of truths beyond him.

No doubt about that. I'm still hoping to hear anyone's theory of
what the truth is behind his re-Englished lines from /Timon/.

> Anyway, the Zemblan translation
> problem gets knottier the more I look at Conmal - in the note to
> line 962 Kinbote makes him resemble John Shade, but Conmal's
> "extraordinary sonnet" in "colorful,if not quite correct, English,"
> takes a viewpoint that is precisely Kinbotean, namely that the
> study of botany (acanthus) is no match for the study of nobility
> (architrave).

I thought that was simple--in the Corinthian order (as Jansy
notes), the acanthus leaves are all pretty much the same, but
the architrave is a creative carving. Imagine my surprise
to learn that a Corinthian architrave is merely three blank
vertical surfaces (fascia); the word for the carving I was
thinking of is "frieze". Now I wonder what contrast (Kinbote
wanted us to think) Conmal had in mind. Maybe this is what the
psychologists call projection, but I suspect Conmal made the
same mistake I did. Such a mistake in English would be typical
of him. (I know that's a straight line.)

I don't think Conmal's point is Kinbotean. He is putting
himself forward as Shakespeare's collaborator, but Kinbote
favors pedantic "copy"ing in translation (at least where Sybil
is concerned), just as Nabokov did.

On the subject of /Remorse/, I'm convinced that Dieter Zimmer
is right to connect it with /The Prince and the Showgirl/.
But "is" (that word again) it that movie? Does it make sense
to call the film "famous" (line 452) before it appears? Were
films previewed on TV in those days?

I also wonder whether TP&tS had a shot in which "the famous
face flowed in".

Instead of a deliberate reference by Shade or Kinbote, this
looks to me like something neither character is aware of,
similar to Hurricane Lolita.

Andrew Brown mentioned Garbo and Dietrich, but Dieter Zimmer
says VN's letters show he had Monroe in mind. Even in the
text--I haven't seen any Garbo or Dietrich movies (except a
bit of /Ninotchka/), but could either be described as having
a "soft form" (line 456)? There's no doubt that describes
Monroe.

Jerry Friedman



____________________________________________________________________________________

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