I offered this as one of five possible interpretation of how Botkin fits into "Pale Fire":
4) As a variation on #3, Zembla is not real, but all the rest applies: that is, Botkin invents both Zembla and the Kinbote persona, which delusion is inexplicably tolerated at Wordsmith, encouraged by Shade, etc.
And Jerry Friedman responded:
This endorsement
of the above “real story of Botkin” is interesting and sensible, though it
leaves unanswered questions about Kinbote/Botkin’s adventures in New Wye, as
Jerry points out later in his post.
Here are a few others:
Is CK/VB
kidding, or lying, in the several places where he quotes others as addressing
him as “Charles” or “Dr. Kinbote”?
I’m thinking, for instance, of Sybil Shade’s first words to our
commentator: “You are Dr. Kinbote, aren’t you?” (p. 23) (By the way, I love the way this question is
posed, since the accurate answer would be "No"!) Are we to
imagine that Shade has briefed his wife on Botkin’s delusion, and asked her to
humor it? Or is it CK/VB himself
who, in writing his commentary, makes the substitution?
Then there’s the
party at the Hurleys, where Mrs. H. says, “You must help us, Mr. Kinbote . . .”
(238) This is an especially
noteworthy instance because it occurs in the context of Shade’s having just
defended CK/VB as “a person who peels off a drab and unhappy past and replaces
it with a brilliant invention.”
Mrs. H., embarrassed at CK/VB’s sudden appearance, tries to dissimulate,
pretending that they were speaking of a “loony” at the Exton railway
station. CK/VB probably doesn’t
understand that he’s the “loony” they were actually talking about, but we
do. Does Mrs. H., guided by Shade,
also humor Botkin here by calling him Kinbote? It seems far-fetched. I take the point that faculty members
have to tolerate a good deal of eccentricity, but would they really go so far as
to call their mad colleague by a false name?
Most curious of
all is the commentary to line 894 in which CK/VB maintains that he is often
half-recognized as King Charles, and narrates a scene in which Shade and several
other faculty members discuss Zembla and the King. (266-69). Is there a way to interpret this scene
consistently with the “no Zembla in the world of ‘Pale Fire’”
theory?
Zembla’s
existence or non-existence may be connected with the generally skewed geography
of “Pale Fire”’s world. A
face-value reading of the Commentary gives us a world that contains New Wye,
Cedarn, and a number of other unreal places – along with Zembla. Is this all part of CK/VB’s delusion?
Has CK/VB invented a fanciful
geography for his adopted country, in addition to a fanciful country of
origin? There’s an interesting
passage in the commentary to line 287 in which Sybil tells CK/VB that they are
traveling to either Wyoming or Utah or Montana. Ten minutes later, Dr. A. tells CK/VB
“in stolid detail” that in fact the Shades will stay at a ranch at Cedarn in
Utana on the Idoming border. Thus,
within less than a page, we go from the geography of our own world to the
invented geography of “Pale Fire.”
We might read this as another attempt to “blur the reality” of what
happens in the novel, confronting us with mutually exclusive geographies in the
same way that both Zembla and not-Zembla appear to
coexist.
The question
remains, though, how Kinbote and not-Kinbote (that is, Botkin) can coexist. I’ll take Jerry Friedman’s question “Is
Botkin straight or gay?” as a shortened form of all the questions I have about
Botkin. What they really amount to
is: Is V. Botkin the Great Beaver?
Is he the flamboyant character we know as Charles Kinbote? Is that all he is? Is there another personality called
“Botkin” who leads some other, presumably quieter, life? Understanding these questions might take
us a long way toward incorporating Botkin into the novel’s
world.
Best,
John