Dear All,
A quick response to Mark Roth and a quick note about my review of Andrea Pitzer’s The Secret History of Vladimir Nabokov in Salon/LA Review of Books, which is actually not so much of a book review as an essay about theater and history. I take the recent publication of Pitzer’s book and Nabokov’s early play The Tragedy of Mr. Morn as well as the recent interest in Nabokov's dramatic works as an occasion to think about what Siggy Frank has aptly called Nabokov’s “theatrical imagination.” Hence the original title: “Disappearing Acts: Nabokov and the Theater of History.” The Boston Globe piece is a straightforward book review and I’m thankful to Mark Roth for sending it along.
I don’t call Andrea Pitzer herself “a solemn reader” and I write that her archival research is to be admired. I enjoyed the book and wanted to write about it. My main point was to engage in a conversation and to offer another perspective on how to potentially think about what Nabokov might be doing with the wealth of historical material that Pitzer brings to the fore (and which I call helpful in the essay)—a theatrical transformation (a metamorphosis). It would be interesting to hear about other ways of looking at Nabokov’s use of history in his works. I am grateful for Pitzer’s addition to the collective knowledge of Nabokov and hope that her book is an occasion not only for positive or negative book reviews but also for stimulating exchanges and conversations between scholars and lovers of Nabokov. I don’t think such conversations need be thought as “threats to approaches.” Respectful disagreements can be very productive.
With warm wishes,
Alisa