Jamie McEwan
wrote:
In spite of Mr. Twiggs'
eloquent essay, I cannot bring myself to believe the Shade poem is a piece
of deliberate kitsch …… I could easily imagine scoffing, for example, at
this convoluted sentence, product of another of VN's unreliable
narrators--yet I believe it is intended seriously (and I quite like it): "I
know that the common pebble you find in your fist after having thrust your
arm shoulder deep into water, where a jewel seemed to gleam on pale sand,
is really the coveted gem though it looks like a pebble as it dries in the
sun of the everyday." Similarly, I believe that Shade's poem
has genuine merit, though it may seem common kitsch when exposed to the eye
of ridicule.
Jim Twiggs
wrote:
On the question of the
merits of John Shade’s poem, I stand with such doubters as Walter and Charles.
In my view Pale Fire is a brilliant, pitch-black comic novel that contains an
artfully constructed but deliberately --- and often deliciously --- bad
poem.
[one of] my all-time
favorites: The Stuffed Owl: An Anthology of Bad Verse, edited by D.B. Wyndham
Lewis and Charles Lee …
To my mind at least,
and to my ear as well, John Shade’s poem--despite some good lines, some striking
images, and some genuinely moving passages—bears most, if not all, of the marks
of bad verse as set forth by Wyndham Lewis.
Not unnaturally, I enjoyed Jim
Twiggs’ essay. Unsurprisingly, I go right along with him on those criticisms
that he applies to those parts which don’t contain good lines, striking images
or moving passages; which is quite a substantial chunk of the whole. It is
a curate’s egg, but I do find I have to make quite an
effort to match the deference of the
curate.
Where I’m not so convinced is in
JT's interpretation of the Hodge epigraph, but that can perhaps be left to later
discussion.
Few, I suspect, involved in any
creative endeavour remain totally unassailed by self-doubt at some point. Their
egos are sufficiently strong to trust themselves, but, unless they are
abnormally thick-skinned, they will make allowance for the doubting of others,
too.
With Jamie McEwan, I don’t quite
believe that the verse is entirely a piece of deliberate kitsch, through and
through. Nevertheless, it does positively invite some ridicule, and many have
accepted the invitation. How this has come about, I’m not sure, but it also
seems to me that in many parts of the commentary Kinbote is actually speaking
with VN’s voice. This strikes me most, perhaps, in his final note (to the
non-existent line 1000); eg “I reread Pale Fire more carefully. I liked it
better when expecting less.” It is
almost as if VN were applying some form of self-criticism to his own
composition. I often have the feeling when looking at something I have written
myself, that it is as if it had been written by another person. Sometimes it
seems bad, at other times it seems not as bad as all that. Sometimes, but only
very occasionally, it seems quite good. I believe that VN had doubts about the
quality of his own English verse. It is his English prose which is genuinely
poetic.
As for the sentence quoted by JMcE:
"I know that the common pebble you find in your
fist after having thrust your arm shoulder deep into water, where a jewel
seemed to gleam on pale sand, is really the coveted gem though it looks
like a pebble as it dries in the sun of the everyday", I don’t find
it ridiculous at all; it doesn’t seem to invite any ridicule, and I wouldn’t
want to ridicule it. Is JMcE suggesting that what it is saying could be applied
to Shade’s poem? Could it be that what VN had first envisioned as a
gem later struck him as a pebble, but that he persisted in wanting it be a
gem? And invented Kinbote to help
him?
The mention of Wyndham Lewis’s Stuffed Owl reminded me strongly of
FitzGerald’s frequently quoted comment on his Khayyam: “Better a live sparrow
than a stuffed eagle”. The Stuffed
Owl came out in 1930. As usual, one wonders whether VN knew it, and must
assume that he did.