Subject
GLORY: Moon's homosexuality (fwd)
Date
Body
From: "Peter A. Kartsev" <petr@glas.apc.org>
I do not think Nabokov's treatment of homosexual characters is
stereotipical, as Anat Ben-Amos maintains. Archibald Moon possesses some
very peculiar traits, granted, but if we assume that they necessarily
correlate with his homosexuality, it is we who create stereotipes, not the
author. Nabokov's interest was always in the particular, the individual,
the unique, and Moon is one of the most memorable characters in the novel.
Could a stereotype be memorable? The fact of his sexual preferences here
is an artistic detail, not grounds for any classification. And it is not
Nabokov who "unceremoniously dismisses" Moon, it is Martin who starts to
avoid his tutor after the uncomfortable revelation. Martin's reasons are
quite clear, I think, and while his attitude might not be PC, this is
hardly a matter for literary analysis. (As Ben-Amos notices, Moon becomes
"ridiculous and repulsive" only after the discovery is made, so that's
Martin's understandable view of him, not the author's).
By the way, on a totally different level, I would think that repressed
homosexuality (in the early 1920s and in England in particular) is far
more likely to produce eccentric, peculiar or unconventional behaviour and
personal traits than open homosexuality. Not being an expert, and not even
much interested, I pursue this no further.
All in all, I believe that stereotypes are much more likely to be found in
the eye of the beholder than in Nabokov's books. Then again, they might
just be a trick of vision.
As for "a cheap way to avoid a serious discussion", Nabokov needed neither
a cheap nor any other way for that; I do not believe he saw literature as
a forum for "serious discussion" of whatever problems (understatement of
the month?).
Peter A. Kartsev
Moscow, Russia
> From: A BenAmos <abenam@essex.ac.uk>
>
> VN's treatment of homosexual characters is stereotypical and prejudiced.
> I am at the moment especially interested in the case of Moon in _Podvig_
> (_Glory_). This character presents a serious question about the
> possibility of a non-Russian Slavist to understand Russia, or Russian
> culture, or to participate in them. I find the description of this
> problem in _Glory_, through Moon and Martin's reactions to him as a
> teacher, one of the most brilliant treatments of the subject I ever
> came across. It is exactly because of my respect to the creation of
> this character that I am dismayed by his unceremonious dismissal as an
> homosexual. It seems to me a cheap way to avoid a serious discussion as
> to whether Martin, who's born in Russia, or Moon, who studied Russia,
> have some similarities between them (even if Martin cannot see these
> similarities). To bring the theme of homosexuality in order to make
> Moon ridiculous and repulsive (which is the way he is portrayed after
> this discovery is made in the novel) seems to me not only prejudiced,
> but worse - damaging to the literary quality of the novel.
> I would be very happy to have comments on and thoughts about all this.
I do not think Nabokov's treatment of homosexual characters is
stereotipical, as Anat Ben-Amos maintains. Archibald Moon possesses some
very peculiar traits, granted, but if we assume that they necessarily
correlate with his homosexuality, it is we who create stereotipes, not the
author. Nabokov's interest was always in the particular, the individual,
the unique, and Moon is one of the most memorable characters in the novel.
Could a stereotype be memorable? The fact of his sexual preferences here
is an artistic detail, not grounds for any classification. And it is not
Nabokov who "unceremoniously dismisses" Moon, it is Martin who starts to
avoid his tutor after the uncomfortable revelation. Martin's reasons are
quite clear, I think, and while his attitude might not be PC, this is
hardly a matter for literary analysis. (As Ben-Amos notices, Moon becomes
"ridiculous and repulsive" only after the discovery is made, so that's
Martin's understandable view of him, not the author's).
By the way, on a totally different level, I would think that repressed
homosexuality (in the early 1920s and in England in particular) is far
more likely to produce eccentric, peculiar or unconventional behaviour and
personal traits than open homosexuality. Not being an expert, and not even
much interested, I pursue this no further.
All in all, I believe that stereotypes are much more likely to be found in
the eye of the beholder than in Nabokov's books. Then again, they might
just be a trick of vision.
As for "a cheap way to avoid a serious discussion", Nabokov needed neither
a cheap nor any other way for that; I do not believe he saw literature as
a forum for "serious discussion" of whatever problems (understatement of
the month?).
Peter A. Kartsev
Moscow, Russia
> From: A BenAmos <abenam@essex.ac.uk>
>
> VN's treatment of homosexual characters is stereotypical and prejudiced.
> I am at the moment especially interested in the case of Moon in _Podvig_
> (_Glory_). This character presents a serious question about the
> possibility of a non-Russian Slavist to understand Russia, or Russian
> culture, or to participate in them. I find the description of this
> problem in _Glory_, through Moon and Martin's reactions to him as a
> teacher, one of the most brilliant treatments of the subject I ever
> came across. It is exactly because of my respect to the creation of
> this character that I am dismayed by his unceremonious dismissal as an
> homosexual. It seems to me a cheap way to avoid a serious discussion as
> to whether Martin, who's born in Russia, or Moon, who studied Russia,
> have some similarities between them (even if Martin cannot see these
> similarities). To bring the theme of homosexuality in order to make
> Moon ridiculous and repulsive (which is the way he is portrayed after
> this discovery is made in the novel) seems to me not only prejudiced,
> but worse - damaging to the literary quality of the novel.
> I would be very happy to have comments on and thoughts about all this.