Dear Jerry,
This is fun, so let's continue.
Saying that a certain alter ego is a parasite doesn't mean that all parasites are alter egos.
Of course, but doesn't it indicate that VN had the idea that an alternate personality could be described as a parasite on the primary personality? It is an idiosyncratic idea of VN's, and it seems like more than coincidence that he should use the same image in a possibly similar situation unintentionally. Not impossible though, of course.
VNAY, note 4 to Chapter 18 (p. 709): "At the end of his 1962 diary, Nabokov drafted some phrases for possible interviews: 'I wonder if any reader will notice the following details: 1) that the nasty commentator is not an ex-king and not even Dr. Kinbote, but Prof. Vseslav Botkin, a Russian and a madman....'" Ellipsis
Boyd's and a bit tantalizing.
Good point. It would be nice to have this in a more complete form. But I don't see this as necessarily a contradiction to my theory - - just biased, I guess.
I'll believe they struggle for control and spy, but presenting that as banging garbage cans is too much for my willing suspension of disbelief (as Andrew Brown also quoted).
The garbage banging is a metaphor for Kinbote's verging toward Shade's consciousness (and Sybil's too). Similarly Kinbote's escape from Zembla coincides with an illness of Shade's, i.e. when his weakened condition allows the suppressed personality to begin to emerge toward Shade's awareness. Throughout the commentary we have Kinbote persistently pursuing Shade, and Shade either indifferent or rejecting.
I'm still having trouble with someone (Shade? Kinbote?) musing to himself and presenting it as a conversation with his other personality, or with the two personalities calmly discussing the afterlife (for example).
I can think of at least one other literary example of this - - isn't Dodgson's Alice forever arguing with herself when there are no animals about to talk to?
What I see as a problem is your rejection of most of Kinbote's statements as fabrication combined with your belief in other statements as metaphorical versions of fictional truth--without any criterion except whether they fit your theory.
I might be able to better respond if you gave an example of my arbitrariness? But in general it seems to me that Kinbote is believable when he talks about Shade and his family (who was born when, what their names are, what they were like, who had an affair with whom) and less believable when he recounts events that he claims he took part in. In other words he does know a lot about Shade and is truthful on that subject, but his memories of Zembla and his visit to New Wye or those of a maniac.
I'm still hoping for Dmitri Nabokov to say, "Yes, my father did mention something like that," though.
Jerry Friedman
Wishful thinking, I fear. But thanks for the pleasant conversation.
Carolyn