L.Hochard: 1. More
generally, the way Khrenov imparts his "visions" is matter-of-fact, without
"stagecraft", as if there was no emotional participation on Khrenov's part,
as if he were only the medium through which an oracle is pronounced;
2. [Wolfe, Natasha] neither of them dismisses the other's fantasies
or visions; on the contrary, this same shared taste for the products
of imagination (in other words: poetry)is what seals their
love. Work-related squabbles...etc... all the things that on a Nabokovian
scale of values have no substance. This is why I don't think the characters
of this story can be seen as pathetic liars; on the contrary, although
their life happens to take place in terrible historical circumstances, they
are able to outlive them nearly untouched.
JM: At first I thought we were in
agreement about "matter-of-fact" visions, mystic visitation by saints and
the poetic transformative power of words. Unless oracles
merely announce squabbles, continuing pain and
wish-fullfillment fantasies, there are no other fabulous revelations to be found
in Kh's unemotional ennunciations.
Wolfe's productions are distinct from
Natasha's trances and this is why I don't think "this same shared
taste for the product of imagination (poetry) is what seals their
love."
I also disagree about "poetry"
versus "the things that on a Nabokovian scale of values have no
substance" [ domestic squabbles, poverty, old age, terrible historical
circumstances...]
How surprising it is to realize that, for me,
Nabokov's genius lies exactly in that he takes his time with
squabbles, small gestures, unclean servants, pathetic lies, worn
shoes, madness, aso... while he simultaneously lets us
glimpse into another ( parallel?) world of "compassion, tenderness, beauty"
and impedes some of his readers to "outlive [his stories]
..nearly untouched" by their related mediocrity,
tyrannies and evil.