Subject
NATASAHA: Babikov's essay and RLSK
From
Date
Body
Babikov about Natasha's visions: "She later admits that she made the
whole
thing up along with the other supernatural experiences. But at the end
of
the story, when Natasha meets the ghost of her father, whose death she
would learn about only in a few minutes, we recognize that she did not
lie
the first time, but that she did the second."
I think Babikov is wrong: she lied neither the first nor the second
time;
Wolfe and Natasha are on the same wavelength on the subject of the
relations between visions and imagination: "...I had the impression that
it
had really happened." "That's just it,"Wolfe said, beaming.)
Laurence Hochard
JA: ...to sugget that imagination is more real than genuine experience
(which I don't buy).
JM: Wolfe's productions are distinct from Natasha's trances and this is
why
I don't think "this same shared taste for the product of imagination
(poetry) is what seals their love."
I think the relationship between Natasha and Wolfe can be related to the
relationship between Clare and Sebastian in RLSK: "She entered his life
without knocking as one might step into the wrong room BECAUSE OF ITS
VAGUE
RESEMBLANCE to one's own. [...] She had imagination [...] She possessed,
too,THAT REAL SENSE OF BEAUTY which has far less to do with artthan with
the CONSTANT READINESS to discern the HALO AROUND THE FRYING PAN or the
likeness between a weeping-willow and a Skie terrier."
Natasha's and Wolfe's fantasies / visions are different, it is very
true,but there IS a "vague resemblance" : both revel in imagination and
use
it NOT as a PATHETIC way of escaping reality, but as the only valid way
to
cope with it.
The friend in Bombay can see only the frying pan ("work-related
squabbles... etc..." in other words what most people take for "real
experience" or "reality")and NOT the HALO around it, while Wolfe can see
this halo and communicate it to Natasha, even if he never went to
Bombay.
It is not "poetry VERSUS "the things...."" but poetry AS the MEANS to
cope
with this reality, a means which enables Wolfe and Natasha to outlive
their
condition of poor penniless emigrés and NOT to be engulfed by it.
Laurence Hochard
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/
whole
thing up along with the other supernatural experiences. But at the end
of
the story, when Natasha meets the ghost of her father, whose death she
would learn about only in a few minutes, we recognize that she did not
lie
the first time, but that she did the second."
I think Babikov is wrong: she lied neither the first nor the second
time;
Wolfe and Natasha are on the same wavelength on the subject of the
relations between visions and imagination: "...I had the impression that
it
had really happened." "That's just it,"Wolfe said, beaming.)
Laurence Hochard
JA: ...to sugget that imagination is more real than genuine experience
(which I don't buy).
JM: Wolfe's productions are distinct from Natasha's trances and this is
why
I don't think "this same shared taste for the product of imagination
(poetry) is what seals their love."
I think the relationship between Natasha and Wolfe can be related to the
relationship between Clare and Sebastian in RLSK: "She entered his life
without knocking as one might step into the wrong room BECAUSE OF ITS
VAGUE
RESEMBLANCE to one's own. [...] She had imagination [...] She possessed,
too,THAT REAL SENSE OF BEAUTY which has far less to do with artthan with
the CONSTANT READINESS to discern the HALO AROUND THE FRYING PAN or the
likeness between a weeping-willow and a Skie terrier."
Natasha's and Wolfe's fantasies / visions are different, it is very
true,but there IS a "vague resemblance" : both revel in imagination and
use
it NOT as a PATHETIC way of escaping reality, but as the only valid way
to
cope with it.
The friend in Bombay can see only the frying pan ("work-related
squabbles... etc..." in other words what most people take for "real
experience" or "reality")and NOT the HALO around it, while Wolfe can see
this halo and communicate it to Natasha, even if he never went to
Bombay.
It is not "poetry VERSUS "the things...."" but poetry AS the MEANS to
cope
with this reality, a means which enables Wolfe and Natasha to outlive
their
condition of poor penniless emigrés and NOT to be engulfed by it.
Laurence Hochard
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/