Describing his first love, Humbert Humbert (the narrator and main character in VN's novel Lolita, 1955) mentions Annabel's fat, powdered mother, born Vanessa van Ness:
Annabel was, like the writer, of mixed parentage: half-English, half-Dutch, in her case. I remember her features far less distinctly today than I did a few years ago, before I knew Lolita. There are two kinds of visual memory: one when you skillfully recreate an image in the laboratory of your mind, with your eyes open (and then I see Annabel in such general terms as: “honey-colored skin,” “thin arms,” “brown bobbed hair,” “long lashes,” “big bright mouth”); and the other when you instantly evoke, with shut eyes, on the dark inner side of your eyelids, the objective, absolutely optical replica of a beloved face, a little ghost in natural colors (and this is how I see Lolita).
Let me therefore primly limit myself, in describing Annabel, to saying she was a lovely child a few months my junior. Her parents were old friends of my aunt’s, and as stuffy as she. They had rented a villa not far from Hotel Mirana. Bald brown Mr. Leigh and fat, powdered Mrs. Leigh (born Vanessa van Ness). How I loathed them! At first, Annabel and I talked of peripheral affairs. She kept lifting handfuls of fine sand and letting it pour through her fingers. Our brains were tuned the way those of intelligent European pre-adolescents were in our day and set, and I doubt if much individual genius should be assigned to our interest in the plurality of inhabited worlds, competitive tennis, infinity, solipsism and so on. The softness and fragility of baby animals caused us the same intense pain. She wanted to be a nurse in some famished Asiatic country; I wanted to be a famous spy. (1.3)
Vanessa atalanta, the red admiral or, previously, the red admirable, is a well-characterized, medium-sized butterfly with black wings, red bands, and white spots. Van Ness Avenue is a major north-south thoroughfare in San Francisco, California (in 1855-1856 James Van Ness, an American politician, served as the seventh mayor of San Francisco). In VN's novel Dar ("The Gift," 1937) Fyodor Konstantinovich Godunov-Cherdyntsev (the narrator and main character) mentions the first yellow butterfly flying high over the carriages on the Nevski Avenue in St. Petersburg (VN's home city):
Нет, -- мне почему-то кажется, что я всё-таки помню всё это, может быть потому, что впоследствии о нем часто говорилось. Вообще весь наш быт был проникнут рассказами об отце, тревогой о нем, ожиданием его возвращения, скрытой грустью проводов и дикой радостью встреч. Отсвет его страсти лежал на всех нас, по разному окрашенный, по разному воспринимаемый, но постоянный и привычный. Его домовый музей, где стояли рядами узкие дубовые шкалы с выдвижными стеклянными ящиками, полными распятых бабочек (остальное -- растения, жуков, птиц, грызунов и змей -- он отдавал на изучение коллегам), где пахло так, как пахнет должно-быть в раю, и где у столов вдоль цельных окон работали препараторы, был как бы таинственным срединным очагом, освещавшим снутри весь наш петербургский дом, -- и только гул Петропавловской пушки мог вторгаться в его тишину. Наши родственники, не энтомологические друзья, прислуга, смиренно-обидчивая Ивонна Ивановна говорили о бабочках, не как о чем-то действительно существующем, а как о некоем аттрибуте моего отца, существующем только поскольку он сам существует, или как о недуге, с которым все давно привыкли считаться, так что энтомология у нас превращалась в какую-то обиходную галлюцинацию, вроде домашнего, безвредного привидения, которое, никого уже не удивляя, каждый вечер садится у камелька. И вместе с тем никто среди наших несметных дядьев и теток не только не интересовался его наукой, но вряд ли даже прочел тот его общедоступный труд, который десятки тысяч интеллигентных русских людей читали и перечитывали. Я-то сам и Таня с самого раннего детства оценили отца, и он нам казался еще волшебнее, чем, скажем, Гаральд, о котором он же рассказывал нам, Гаральд, который дрался со львами на Цареградской арене, преследовал разбойников в Сирии, купался в Иордане, брал штурмом восемьдесят
крепостей в Африке, "Синей Стране", спасал исландцев от голода, -- и был славен от Норвегии до Сицилии, от Йоркшира до Новгорода. Затем, когда и я подпал под обаяние бабочек, в душе у меня что-то раскрылось, и я переживал все путешествия отца, точно их сам совершал, видел во сне вьющуюся дорогу, караван, разноцветные горы, завидовал отцу безумно, мучительно, до слез -- горячих и бурных, которые вдруг вырывались у меня за столом, при обсуждении писем от него с дороги или даже при простом упоминании далекой-далекой местности. Каждый год, с приближением весны, перед переездом в деревню я чувствовал в себе бедную частицу того, что испытал бы перед отбытием в Тибет. На Невском проспекте, в последних числах марта, когда разлив торцов синел от сырости и солнца, высоко пролетала над экипажами вдоль фасадов домов, мимо городской думы, липок сквера, статуи Екатерины, первая желтая бабочка. В классе было отворено большое окно, воробьи садились на подоконник, учителя пропускали уроки, оставляя вместо них как бы квадраты голубого неба, с футбольным мячом, падавшим из голубизны. Почему-то по географии у меня был всегда дурной балл, а ведь с каким выражением наш географ, случалось, упоминал имя моего отца, как при этом обращались ко мне любопытные глаза моих товарищей, как у меня самого от стесненного восторга и боязни восторг выказать приливала и отливала кровь, -- и ныне, когда я думаю о том, как мало знаю, как легко могу совершить где-нибудь дурацкий промах, описывая исследования отца, я вспоминаю себе на пользу и утешение его смешнейший смешок, когда, посмотрев мимоходом книжонку, рекомендованную нам в школе тем же географом, нашел очаровательный ляпсус, сделанный компиляторшей (некой госпожой Лялиной), которая, невинно обрабатывая Пржевальского для средне-учебных заведений, приняла, видимо, солдатскую прямоту слога в одном из его писем за орнитологическую деталь: "Жители Пекина льют все помои на улицу, и здесь постоянно можно видеть, идя по улице, сидящих орлов, то справа, то слева".
No—somehow it seems to me that I do remember all this, perhaps because it was subsequently often mentioned. In general our whole daily life was permeated with stories about Father, with worry about him, expectations of his return, the hidden sorrow of farewells and the wild joy of welcomings. His passion was reflected in all of us, colored in different ways, apprehended in different ways, but permanent and habitual. His home museum, in which stood rows of oak cabinets with glassed drawers, full of crucified butterflies (the rest—the plants, beetles, birds, rodents and reptiles—he gave to his colleagues to study), where it smelled as it probably smells in Paradise, and where the laboratory assistants worked at tables along the one-piece windows, was a kind of mysterious central hearth, illuminating from inside the whole of our St. Petersburg house—and only the noonday roar of the Petro-pavlovsk cannon could invade its quiet. Our relatives, non-entomological friends, the servants and the meekly touchy Yvonna Ivanovna talked of butterflies not as of something really existing but as of a certain attribute of my father, which existed only insofar as he existed, or as of an ailment with which everybody had long since got used to coping, so that with us entomology turned into some sort of routinary hallucination, like a harmless domestic ghost that sits down, no longer surprising anyone, every evening by the fireside. At the same time, none of our countless uncles and aunts took any interest in his science and had hardly even read his popular work, read and reread by dozens of thousands of cultured Russians. Of course Tanya and I had learned to appreciate Father from earliest childhood and he seemed even more enchanting to us than, say, that Harold about whom he told stories to us, Harold who fought with the lions in the Byzantine arena, who pursued brigands in Syria, bathed in the Jordan, took eighty fortresses by storm in Africa, “the Blue Land,” saved the Icelanders from starvation—and was famed from Norway to Sicily, from Yorkshire to Novgorod. Then, when I fell under the spell of butterflies, something unfolded in my soul and I relived all my father’s journeys, as if I myself had made them: in my dreams I saw the winding road, the caravan, the many-hued mountains, and envied my father madly, agonizingly, to the point of tears—hot and violent tears that would suddenly gush out of me at table as we discussed his letters from the road or even at the simple mention of a far, far place. Every year, with the approach of spring, before moving to the country, I would feel within me a pitiful fraction of what I would have felt before departing for Tibet. On the Nevski Avenue, during the last days of March, when the wooden blocks of the spacious street pavements gleamed dark blue from the damp and the sun, one might see, flying high over the carriages, along the façades of the houses, past the city hall, past the lindens in the square, past the statue of Catherine, the first yellow butterfly. In the classroom the large window was open, sparrows perched on the windowsill and teachers let lessons go by, leaving in their stead squares of blue sky, with footballs falling down out of the blueness. For some reason I always had bad marks in geography and what an expression our geography teacher would have when he used to mention my father’s name, how the inquisitive eyes of my comrades turned on me at this point and how within me the blood rose and fell from suppressed rapture and from fear of expressing that rapture—and now I think of how little I know, how easy it is for me to make some idiotic blunder in describing my father’s researches. (Chapter Two)
The last days of March in pre-Revolutionary Russia correspond to mid-April in Western Europe. By the first yellow butterfly Fyodor means a common brimstone (Gonepteryx rhamni). Its Russian name, limonnitsa, comes from limon (lemon). In a letter of Nov. 25, 1892, to Suvorin Chekhov compares his story Palata No. 6 (“Ward Six,” 1892) to sladkiy limonad (a sweet lemonade) and says that the works of contemporary artists lack the alcohol that would intoxicate the reader/viewer:
Вас нетрудно понять, и Вы напрасно браните себя за то, что неясно выражаетесь. Вы горький пьяница, а я угостил Вас сладким лимонадом, и Вы, отдавая должное лимонаду, справедливо замечаете, что в нем нет спирта. В наших произведениях нет именно алкоголя, который бы пьянил и порабощал, и это Вы хорошо даете попять. Отчего нет? Оставляя в стороне "Палату No 6" и меня самого, будем говорить вообще, ибо это интересней. Будем говорить об общих причинах, коли Вам не скучно, и давайте захватим целую эпоху. Скажите по совести, кто из моих сверстников, т. е. людей в возрасте 30--45 лет, дал миру хотя одну каплю алкоголя? Разве Короленко, Надсон и все нынешние драматурги не лимонад? Разве картины Репина или Шишкина кружили Вам голову? Мило, талантливо, Вы восхищаетесь и в то же время никак не можете забыть, что Вам хочется курить. Наука и техника переживают теперь великое время, для нашего же брата это время рыхлое, кислое, скучное, сами мы кислы и скучны, умеем рождать только гуттаперчевых мальчиков, и не видит этого только Стасов, которому природа дала редкую способность пьянеть даже от помоев. Причины тут не в глупости нашей, не в бездарности и не в наглости, как думает Буренин, а в болезни, которая для художника хуже сифилиса и полового истощения. У нас нет "чего-то", это справедливо, и это значит, что поднимите подол нашей музе, и Вы увидите там плоское место. Вспомните, что писатели, которых мы называем вечными или просто хорошими и которые пьянят нас, имеют один общий и весьма важный признак: они куда-то идут и Вас зовут туда же, и Вы чувствуете не умом, а всем своим существом, что у них есть какая-то цель, как у тени отца Гамлета, которая недаром приходила и тревожила воображение. У одних, смотря по калибру, цели ближайшие -- крепостное право, освобождение родины, политика, красота или просто водка, как у Дениса Давыдова, у других цели отдалённые -- бог, загробная жизнь, счастье человечества и т. п. Лучшие из них реальны и пишут жизнь такою, какая она есть, но оттого, что каждая строчка пропитана, как соком, сознанием цели, Вы, кроме жизни, какая есть, чувствуете ещё ту жизнь, какая должна быть, и это пленяет Вас.
It is easy to understand you, and there is no need for you to abuse yourself for obscurity of expression. You are a hard drinker, and I have regaled you with sweet lemonade, and you, after giving the lemonade its due, justly observe that there is no spirit in it. That is just what is lacking in our productions—the alcohol which could intoxicate and subjugate, and you state that very well. Why not? Putting aside "Ward No. 6" and myself, let us discuss the matter in general, for that is more interesting. Let ms discuss the general causes, if that won't bore you, and let us include the whole age. Tell me honestly, who of my contemporaries—that is, men between thirty and forty-five—have given the world one single drop of alcohol? Are not Korolenko, Nadson, and all the playwrights of to-day, lemonade? Have Repin's or Shishkin's pictures turned your head? Charming, talented, you are enthusiastic; but at the same time you can't forget that you want to smoke. Science and technical knowledge are passing through a great period now, but for our sort it is a flabby, stale, and dull time. We are stale and dull ourselves, we can only beget gutta-percha boys, and the only person who does not see that is Stasov, to whom nature has given a rare faculty for getting drunk on slops. The causes of this are not to be found in our stupidity, our lack of talent, or our insolence, as Burenin imagines, but in a disease which for the artist is worse than syphilis or sexual exhaustion. We lack "something," that is true, and that means that, lift the robe of our muse, and you will find within an empty void. Let me remind you that the writers, who we say are for all time or are simply good, and who intoxicate us, have one common and very important characteristic; they are going towards something and are summoning you towards it, too, and you feel not with your mind, but with your whole being, that they have some object, just like the ghost of Hamlet's father, who did not come and disturb the imagination for nothing. Some have more immediate objects—the abolition of serfdom, the liberation of their country, politics, beauty, or simply vodka, like Denis Davydov; others have remote objects—God, life beyond the grave, the happiness of humanity, and so on. The best of them are realists and paint life as it is, but, through every line's being soaked in the consciousness of an object, you feel, besides life as it is, the life which ought to be, and that captivates you.
Humbert's first love, Annabel Leigh is Humbert's coeval. In the fatal summer of 1923 Humbert (who was born in Paris, in 1910) and Annabel are thirteen. Dolores Haze (Lolita's full name) is only twelve when, in the last days of May, 1947, thirty-seven-year-old Humbert comes to Ramsdale (a small town in New England) and falls in love with her. In his humorous story Zhenshchina s tochki zreniya p’yanitsy (“Woman as Seen by a Drunkard,” 1885) Chekhov compares girls younger than sixteen to aqua distillatae (distilled water). In the above quoted letter to Suvorin Chekhov asks Suvorin if Repin's or Shishkin's pictures have turned his head. A Russian realist painter, Ilya Repin (1844-1930) is the author of Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on 16 November 1581 (a painting made between 1883 and 1885). According to John Ray, Jr. (the author of the foreword to Humbert's manuscript), Humbert Humbert had died in legal captivity, of coronary thrombosis, on November 16, 1952, a few days before his trial was scheduled to start:
“Lolita, or the Confession of a White Widowed Male,” such were the two titles under which the writer of the present note received the strange pages it preambulates. “Humbert Humbert,” their author, had died in legal captivity, of coronary thrombosis, on November 16, 1952, a few days before his trial was scheduled to start. His lawyer, my good friend and relation, Clarence Choate Clark, Esq., now of the District of Columbia bar, in asking me to edit the manuscript, based his request on a clause in his client’s will which empowered my eminent cousin to use the discretion in all matters pertaining to the preparation of “Lolita” for print. Mr. Clark’s decision may have been influenced by the fact that the editor of his choice had just been awarded the Poling Prize for a modest work (“Do the Senses make Sense?”) wherein certain morbid states and perversions had been discussed.
As pointed out by Alain Champlain, in VN's entomological paper Some new or little known Nearctic Neonympha there are several references to Poling:
Neonympha dorothea edwardsi n. subsp.
[…]
Male, holotype, labelled: “Gila Co. Ariz. June 1902, O.C. Poling,” ex A.g. Weeks Coll., Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Mass.;[…] Paratypes: 3 males “Gila Co. Ariz. June 1902, O.C. Poling,” ex A.G. Weeks Coll., Mus. Comp. Zool.;
(P 256)
Neonympha dorothea avicula n. subsp.
[…]
Fifteen smallish specimens, twelve males, three females (Carn. Mus.), from Paradise, Ariz. taken by Poling late in the season (August–October) represent a certain transition from edwardsi to avicula;
(PP 257-258)
Poling made his discoveries in Arizona (a state where VN worked on Lolita while on leave of absence from the university). Describing his first road trip with Lolita across the USA, Humbert mentions Arizona and California:
At inspection stations on highways entering Arizona or California, a policeman’s cousin would peer with such intensity at us that my poor heart wobbled. “Any honey?” he would inquire, and every time my sweet fool giggled. I still have, vibrating all along my optic nerve, visions of Lo on horseback, a link in the chain of a guided trip along a bridle trail: Lo bobbing at a walking pace, with an old woman rider in front and a lecherous red-necked dude-rancher behind; and I behind him, hating his fat flowery-shirted back even more fervently than a motorist does a slow truck on a mountain road. Or else, at a ski lodge, I would see her floating away from me, celestial and solitary, in an ethereal chairlift, up and up, to a glittering summit where laughing athletes stripped to the waist were waiting for her, for her. (2.2)