Subject:
[NABOKV-L] Was Nabokov a Hebephile\Ephebophile? |
From:
Jansy Mello <jansy.mello@outlook.com> |
Date:
9/12/2015 11:48 AM |
To:
'Vladimir Nabokov Forum' <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU> |
A.Stadlen: I have not hypothesized that Nabokov was a
"paedophile". This
word is used ambiguously to describe both sexual desire for
children and actual sexual molestation of children. A man
who desires children sexually may behave impeccably. He is
entitled to keep quiet about his desire. But, if he makes a
point of denying it, he is a liar. I am not sure if this is the case with Nabokov,
but it does rather look as if it may have been.Nabokov is
clear in his condemnation of child abuse -- though, if it
doesn't matter whether what he said is true or not, why
should those who are disagreeing with me believe his
condemnation? Why,
indeed, should they believe anything he ever said?
Jansy Mello: I cannot grasp your point concerning Nabokov’s “denials” or your
questions about V.N’s deliberate moments of
“unreliableness”, parody, satire and humor. NB: as I observed before, the extension of this word
outside the field of “unreliable narrators” is highly
disputable.
You seem to demand a “confession” from Nabokov when non-social fantasies (pedophilia, sadism, masochism,
whatever) are expressed in his novels and probed from the
outside by his interviewers (when they try to act as
“inquisitors”).
After Freud described the mechanisms of mental defense
against psychic suffering it became widely recognized that such
mechanisms, like splitting, repression causing negation and denial (“Verneinung” in our case reigning supreme), are unconscious. In such circumstances, VN wouldn’t be able to
consciously recognize when, how and to what extent the events he described in words were
related to his image of himself ( we know he saw himself as a
moralist “cuffing sin” who could expel evil like the
protruding gargoyles from a cathedral).
I don’t need to remind you of S.Freud’s words
about neurotic fantasies (I couldn’t find the exact
quotes right now, but words about them: “ It is worth noting, however, that
Freud wasn't particularly interested in curing what he
called "perversions," i.e. sexual behaviors that don't fit
into the non-incestuous reproductive heterosexual model.
He addresses the question of where "perversions" come from
in the first essay in Three Essays. Freud is more interested in the
problem of NEUROSIS, which he defines as the negative
version of perversion. Perversions might be thought of
as libidinal drives that may be socially inappropriate (or
even illegal), but which get expressed and acted on;
neuroses, by contrast, are libidinal drives that get
repressed into the unconscious, but which are so powerful
that the unconscious has to spend a lot of energy to keep
these drives from coming back into consciousness. The effort
required to keep such ideas or drives repressed can cause
HYSTERIA, PARANOIA, OBSESSION-COMPULSION, and other neurotic
disorders./”* http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~sflores/KlagesFreud.html
), or about the dream-work. V.Nabokov’s novels often develop in a
“dreamlike” style, with alternating states of successful and
unsuccessful dream-censorship when perverse themes are still
safely protected from being acted out in the external world
because of their appearance through the medium of writing and
language.
And, returning to my last posting: why do most
readers try to identify the author of “Lolita” with the aggressor HH and not in the victim,
Lo? (the conscious representation of painful or traumatic
experiences may result from a double reversion of figures and roles: from adult to child, from girl into boy, from victim to aggressor).
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
*-
I’m not sure that I can fully agree with “Klages Freud,” employed in
the quoted lines. The exact words are to be found in Freud’s
“Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality”.