From Anthony Stadlen:
I have a nearly complete collection of Encounter, and I looked through it to find (1) the identification of the source of "pale fire" and (2) the letter from Michael Scammel (see below), both of which struck me when they were first published. I have also included some other material I found. 
1. Mary McCarthy, in her article in Encounter 109: 71-84 (October 1962), does indeed correctly identify the source of "pale fire" (McCarthy 1962: 82).
2. A letter (April 1963) from Michael Scammel: "I was fascinated and enthralled by Vladimir Nabokov's brilliant exegesis of his new novel, but why was it published under Mary McCarthy's name? Whoever has read Miss McCarthy's pale polemics on other subjects could not possibly mistake this fiery essay for her handiwork, besides which the present piece is absolutely steeped in traditonal Nabokovian imagery (clockwork toys, refelecting morrors, chess moves) and presupposes an intimate knowledge of such diversified subjects as philology, emtomology, lepidoptery, Pope, Shakespeare and the Russian language....There are precedent, of course, for Nabokov criticising his own work--for example one of his early Russian novels, Dar (The Gift), the preface and afterword to "Lolita" and certain parts of his autobiographical memoirs--and I hope that one day this piece may appear in one volume with Pale Fire."
[Could this be why it does? Anthony Stadlen]
3. A letter from Arnold Goldman (December 1962) transforms McCarthy into Nabokov by word golf:
McCARTHY-- harm cyt [sc. cit.] (notable tendency)
book van--NABOKOV (ditto).
4. A letter (January 1963) from Dr Peadar Mac Maghnais castigates Mary McCarthy for her misuse of scientific terms and "painful transgressions of optical principles".
5. The July 1962 issue contains VN's essay "Pushkin and Gannibal".
6. In a letter (September 1962), Dwight MacDonald describes it as "an inchoate accumulation of scholarly trivia in the worst tradition of American academic research", and "one of those recent manifestations, which seem to be controlled by the spirit of that Dr. Kinbote whom he thinks he is satirising in Pale Fire but who seems to have taken possession of his creator, so that the book and the present article are in the Kinbotean rather than the Nabokovian mode". Mr MacDonald asked: "...would the editors have printed Mr. Nabokov's fifteen pages had they been submitted by an unknown graduate student at, say, Cornell University?"
7. In the same issue, Vladimir Nabokov replies from Zermatt: "Criticism is valid only when illustrated with examples. Mr. Dwight D. MacDonald offers none. Hence his criticism can apply only to a delusion (especially as he conjures up an "unknown graduate student"--who would have been the redemption and glory of my years of professorship, had that student ever existed)."
8. In a letter (May 1963), Norman Dorsen writes: "Far from departing from the Nabokovian spirit, "Pushkin and Gannibal"--which was obviously a spoof--seems just the kind of paper that Mr. MacDonald's hypothetical Cornell student might have submitted to Professor Pnin, and with it warmed his heart."
9. In April 1963, Mary McCarthy's piece on William Burroughs's The Naked Lunch appears. At the International Writers Conference in Edinburgh the previous year, she had said, she says, that "in thinking over the novels of the last few years, I was struck by the fact that the only ones that had not simply given me pleasure but interested me had been those of Burroughs and Nabokov". She also says: "Of the novels based on statelessness, I gave as examples William Burroughs' The Naked Lunch, Vladimir Nabokov's Pale Fire and Lolita."
Anthony Stadlen

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