Subject
Re: VN and Freud
From
Date
Body
Jansy Mello: I have the impression that Jim Twiggs ( following Boyd and Don
Johnson) considers it necessary that a good writer be a
good, even wise, individual, one who doesn't entertain preposterous beliefs or
adhere to extremist political views.
JT: First, a simple correction: "text not texture" in my message should, of
course, have been "not text, but texture." I apologize if this slip caused any
confusion.
Second, Jansy is wrong in thinking that I share Boyd's views about the
importance of VN's personal and metaphysical beliefs. Quite the contrary. But
because Boyd is VN's biographer and best-known interpreter, his views on the
matter have to be considered in any discussion. That's all I meant. I stated my
own thoughts very straightforwardly in a message of January 23. 2010:
I think most of what [Boyd] has presented as Nabokov's "deep" side is indeed
shopworn, and was shopworn long before Nabokov came on the scene. As Boyd has
described it in the pages I've read by him, the "philosophy" is a hodgepodge of
familiar ideas--a bit of Ancient Wisdom here (Gnosticism, neo-Platonism, etc.),
a spot of pseudo-science there (Blavatsky, Steiner, Dunne, Ouspensky, et al.),
pretty standard intimations of immortality and nature mysticism, and some ideas
about design that have been around for a very long while.
This isn't to say that I don't think there's depth in Nabokov. Pale Fire is a
deep novel indeed, a novel that I greatly admire, but I don't think Boyd has the
handle on what the depth consists of.
Because the problem is so beautifully and concisely stated by D. Barton Johnson,
it's worth quoting again the passage that Boyd was responding to:
Much of Nabokov’s work is best understood in terms of the possible survival of
the individual consciousness (personality and memory) after death. Death is,
speculatively, merely the dividing line between levels of consciousness. These
levels (or worlds), one exercising a degree of influence over the events in the
other, form the basic conceptual categories underlying most, if not all of
Nabokov’s work. Much of the technical virtuosity in Nabokov’s work is in aid of
hinting at this relationship between dimensions. This approach, sometimes known
as the ‘metaphysical’ (as opposed to the earlier ‘metaliterary’) . . . dominated
the 1990s. It is the matrix for most current criticism and is, in my view,
basically sound, a productive paradigm for continued research. . . . My present
discomfort stems from the thought that this dominant critical paradigm
discourages critics and readers from attending to the very concrete details that
constitute the basis of Nabokov’s stature as an artist. They also tend to ignore
the wit and humour that are so central to his work. For the sake of argument,
let us suppose that Nabokov is in fact a ‘dirty’ writer who sometimes appeals to
the reader’s prurience; let us assume that his values are sometimes less than
humanistic, and that his other worlds philosophy is, in itself, badly shopworn.
Would acknowledging such assumptions significantly diminish our delight? Would
Nabokov be less the consummate artist? Apart from whatever heuristic value they
may have, our reigning paradigms should be regarded with scepticism, lest they
deflect attention from the area of Nabokov’s greatest originality--the
brilliance of his style and wit. --Johnson and Boyd, “Prologue: The Otherworld,”
in Nabokov’s World, Vol. 1: The Shape of Nabokov’s World (Palgrave-Macmillan,
2002), p. 23.
Jim Twiggs
________________________________
From: Jansy <jansy@AETERN.US>
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Sent: Fri, February 25, 2011 6:58:23 AM
Subject: Re: [NABOKV-L] VN and Freud
Jim Twiggs:One thing I’m especially curious about is how TK, and also JF and
anyone else who cares to comment, might connect Shade’s “text not texture”
insight with his stated belief at the end of the poem that Hazel “somewhere is
alive.” ...And anyhow, what started off as thoughts about “life everlasting”
has turned into thoughts about design (and the possibility of poetry). Unless
I’ve missed or forgotten something, it’s not till the end of the poem that
immortality re-enters the picture. Once again, what’s the connection? As for
Yeats and VN, the question of VN’s own beliefs is of some importance because
Brian Boyd has made it so:.
JM: I have the impression that Jim Twiggs ( following Boyd and Don
Johnson) considers it necessary that a good writer be a
good, even wise, individual, one who doesn't entertain preposterous beliefs or
adhere to extremist political views. Dante's Divine Comedy was construed around
a Copernican (Catholic Church) vision of the Earth as the center of the
universe. Conan Doyle was convinced that fairies roamed the English
countryside. Why spiritualism or a belief in metempsychosis should be anathema
in a writer?
Besides, Nabokov seldom states his beliefs unambiguously ( "tatata...tata"). He
mocks things he takes seriously and he is serious about derisory matters. The
assertion that "Hazel somewhere is alive" has a very ironical coloring (he
pairs it with his certainty that he, Shade, will wake up the next day...)
whereas Kinbote, for all his madness, shows a reasonable knowledge about St.
Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, including a respectful attitude towards other
pepople's epiphanies ( he might not be as enemical to T.S.Eliot religious
choices as Shade might be). .
Search the archive Contact the Editors Visit "Nabokov Online Journal"
Visit Zembla View Nabokv-L Policies Manage subscription options
All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both
co-editors.
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/
Johnson) considers it necessary that a good writer be a
good, even wise, individual, one who doesn't entertain preposterous beliefs or
adhere to extremist political views.
JT: First, a simple correction: "text not texture" in my message should, of
course, have been "not text, but texture." I apologize if this slip caused any
confusion.
Second, Jansy is wrong in thinking that I share Boyd's views about the
importance of VN's personal and metaphysical beliefs. Quite the contrary. But
because Boyd is VN's biographer and best-known interpreter, his views on the
matter have to be considered in any discussion. That's all I meant. I stated my
own thoughts very straightforwardly in a message of January 23. 2010:
I think most of what [Boyd] has presented as Nabokov's "deep" side is indeed
shopworn, and was shopworn long before Nabokov came on the scene. As Boyd has
described it in the pages I've read by him, the "philosophy" is a hodgepodge of
familiar ideas--a bit of Ancient Wisdom here (Gnosticism, neo-Platonism, etc.),
a spot of pseudo-science there (Blavatsky, Steiner, Dunne, Ouspensky, et al.),
pretty standard intimations of immortality and nature mysticism, and some ideas
about design that have been around for a very long while.
This isn't to say that I don't think there's depth in Nabokov. Pale Fire is a
deep novel indeed, a novel that I greatly admire, but I don't think Boyd has the
handle on what the depth consists of.
Because the problem is so beautifully and concisely stated by D. Barton Johnson,
it's worth quoting again the passage that Boyd was responding to:
Much of Nabokov’s work is best understood in terms of the possible survival of
the individual consciousness (personality and memory) after death. Death is,
speculatively, merely the dividing line between levels of consciousness. These
levels (or worlds), one exercising a degree of influence over the events in the
other, form the basic conceptual categories underlying most, if not all of
Nabokov’s work. Much of the technical virtuosity in Nabokov’s work is in aid of
hinting at this relationship between dimensions. This approach, sometimes known
as the ‘metaphysical’ (as opposed to the earlier ‘metaliterary’) . . . dominated
the 1990s. It is the matrix for most current criticism and is, in my view,
basically sound, a productive paradigm for continued research. . . . My present
discomfort stems from the thought that this dominant critical paradigm
discourages critics and readers from attending to the very concrete details that
constitute the basis of Nabokov’s stature as an artist. They also tend to ignore
the wit and humour that are so central to his work. For the sake of argument,
let us suppose that Nabokov is in fact a ‘dirty’ writer who sometimes appeals to
the reader’s prurience; let us assume that his values are sometimes less than
humanistic, and that his other worlds philosophy is, in itself, badly shopworn.
Would acknowledging such assumptions significantly diminish our delight? Would
Nabokov be less the consummate artist? Apart from whatever heuristic value they
may have, our reigning paradigms should be regarded with scepticism, lest they
deflect attention from the area of Nabokov’s greatest originality--the
brilliance of his style and wit. --Johnson and Boyd, “Prologue: The Otherworld,”
in Nabokov’s World, Vol. 1: The Shape of Nabokov’s World (Palgrave-Macmillan,
2002), p. 23.
Jim Twiggs
________________________________
From: Jansy <jansy@AETERN.US>
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Sent: Fri, February 25, 2011 6:58:23 AM
Subject: Re: [NABOKV-L] VN and Freud
Jim Twiggs:One thing I’m especially curious about is how TK, and also JF and
anyone else who cares to comment, might connect Shade’s “text not texture”
insight with his stated belief at the end of the poem that Hazel “somewhere is
alive.” ...And anyhow, what started off as thoughts about “life everlasting”
has turned into thoughts about design (and the possibility of poetry). Unless
I’ve missed or forgotten something, it’s not till the end of the poem that
immortality re-enters the picture. Once again, what’s the connection? As for
Yeats and VN, the question of VN’s own beliefs is of some importance because
Brian Boyd has made it so:.
JM: I have the impression that Jim Twiggs ( following Boyd and Don
Johnson) considers it necessary that a good writer be a
good, even wise, individual, one who doesn't entertain preposterous beliefs or
adhere to extremist political views. Dante's Divine Comedy was construed around
a Copernican (Catholic Church) vision of the Earth as the center of the
universe. Conan Doyle was convinced that fairies roamed the English
countryside. Why spiritualism or a belief in metempsychosis should be anathema
in a writer?
Besides, Nabokov seldom states his beliefs unambiguously ( "tatata...tata"). He
mocks things he takes seriously and he is serious about derisory matters. The
assertion that "Hazel somewhere is alive" has a very ironical coloring (he
pairs it with his certainty that he, Shade, will wake up the next day...)
whereas Kinbote, for all his madness, shows a reasonable knowledge about St.
Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, including a respectful attitude towards other
pepople's epiphanies ( he might not be as enemical to T.S.Eliot religious
choices as Shade might be). .
Search the archive Contact the Editors Visit "Nabokov Online Journal"
Visit Zembla View Nabokv-L Policies Manage subscription options
All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both
co-editors.
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/