Subject
Fwd: RE: the mulberry bush,and perhaps the walrus (Lucette &
posthumous frenzy?)
posthumous frenzy?)
From
Date
Body
Dear List,
I have enjoyed Eric's thread, and the other colorful ADA threads entangling in
cyberspace. I hadn't yet noted the connection between the earlier mulberries
and rue du Murier, so thank you very much, Eric, since it was plainly intended
by VN (without ALL of the implications Eric sketches, nevertheless, I suspect).
But what especially tickles me is that he is able to extend this pattern in a
passage that bears no superficial resemblance or apparent connection to the
earlier mulberry soap or leavesdropping, while at the same time very exactly
recording the back entrance to the Montreux Palace and the public toilet on the
corner of rue du Murier and the avenue des Alpes, and its vegetation, as they
were in the late 1960s (much has changed since, though the sequoia and the
toilet are still there, as I recall):
A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent sequoia
(which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"--if they remarked it at
all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where a princely
paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on its incongruous
terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its heart-shaped dark
green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast arabesques of shadow onto the
south side of its trunk. A ginkgo (of a much more luminous greenish gold than
its neighbor, a dingily yellowing local birch) marked the corner of a cobbled
lane leading down to the quay.
Brian Boyd
________________________________
From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of Donald B. Johnson
Sent: Mon 2/21/2005 6:14 AM
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject: the mulberry bush,and perhaps the walrus (Lucette & posthumous frenzy?)
From: Earl Sampson
Just a small clarification, which does not, and is not intended to, detract in
any way from Eric's suggestive commentary, nor from any of the other
fascinating postings on the mulberry theme: the tree here is not a mulberry,
but a completely different tree, the paulownia - hence "absurdly misnamed" and
Ada's contemptuous snort. See my note "The Tree With the Heart-Shaped Leaves in
_Pnin_" in The Nabokovian No. 31. The point for the present discussion, of
course, is that Nabokov deliberately introduces the mulberry theme, though
there is no actual mulberry tree present, very likely for the reasons suggested
by Eric.
"Donald B. Johnson" wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from naiman@socrates.berkeley.edu -----
> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 17:19:54 -0800
> From: Eric Naiman <naiman@socrates.berkeley.edu>
> >From Eric Naiman:
>
> In light of the earlier discussion of the mulberry soap, it is worth
> noticing its last usage in the novel:
>
> A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent
> sequoia (which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"-if they
> remarked it at all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where
> a princely paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on
> its incongruous terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its
> heart-shaped dark green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast
> arabesques of shadow onto the south side of its trunk.
>
> We should definitely read this passage in keeping with Brian Boyd's reading
> of III.8 -- to note the presence of Lucette that seems to be ignored by the
> adulterous lovers. He points to the grebes with crests seen a few pages
> later as evidence of Lucette's continued existence in the text. This
> passage, with its reference to the mulberry and the W.C. seems to refer to
> that earlier bathing passage, and we should note the generous leaf-dropping
> that Boyd sees as a Lucette marker elsewhere in the book. Note, too, that
> Lucette -- or Van? -- gives this passage a shimmer of indecency evident
> once we see the reference to the earlier passage. (boxwood-lined path,
> l-eban-ese cedar, the mulberry "standing in state" (as was the soap -- see
> also the bawdy Malrow passage on 377 where Van is cursing "the condition
> in which the image of the four embers of a vixen's cross had not solidly
> put him": "One of the synonyms of "condition" is "state," and the
> adjective "human" may be construed as "manly" etc.
>
> I wonder about passages like this whether they might not show that Lucette
> has been unable to overcome her Ophelian frenzy in death. If she is
> responsible for that phallic walrus -- as Boyd suggested in his recent post
> -- and she is still obsessed with mulberries standing in state, is her
> generous "blessing" of Van and Ada's reunin at Mon Trou as comforting an
> ending as it might once have seemed. Or might her "blessing" of Van and
> Ada's reunion be even more disturbing -- is she not ever-present, a kind of
> necessary third, observing the lovers just as she did earlier as a child.
> If we accept the notion that Lucette's ghost -- or else -- going back to
> what Van tells the dying Phillip -- pieces of Lucette -- bless or haunt the
> period after her death (including the writing of the entire manuscript)
> don't we have to see the novel as stating emphatically that yes, there is
> lust after death, a kind of disembodied existence where we will only have
> words to play with and will suffer the hell(?) of being continually aroused?
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> EDNOTE: From the ever fertile mind of Eric Naiman. Malrow (Malraux) indeed!
The
> mulberry tie-in is intriguing and merits investigation. Cf. those ginko
leaves.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >From Eric Naiman:
>
> In light of the earlier discussion of the mulberry soap, it is worth noticing
its last usage in the novel:
>
> A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent
sequoia (which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"-if they
remarked it at all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where a
princely paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on its
incongruous terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its
heart-shaped dark green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast arabesques
of shadow onto the south side of its trunk.
>
> We should definitely read this passage in keeping with Brian Boyd's reading of
III.8 -- to note the presence of Lucette that seems to be ignored by the
adulterous lovers. He points to the grebes with crests seen a few pages later
as evidence of Lucette's continued existence in the text. This passage, with
its reference to the mulberry and the W.C. seems to refer to that earlier
bathing passage, and we should note the generous leaf-dropping that Boyd sees
as a Lucette marker elsewhere in the book. Note, too, that Lucette -- or Van?
-- gives this passage a shimmer of indecency evident once we see the reference
to the earlier passage. (boxwood-lined path, l-eban-ese cedar, the mulberry
"standing in state" (as was the soap -- see also the bawdy Malrow passage on
377 where Van is cursing "the condition in which the image of the four embers
of a vixen's cross had not solidly put him": "One of the synonyms of
"condition" is "state," and the adjective "human" may be construed as "!
manly" etc.
>
> I wonder about passages like this whether they might not show that Lucette has
been unable to overcome her Ophelian frenzy in death. If she is responsible for
that phallic walrus -- as Boyd suggested in his recent post -- and she is still
obsessed with mulberries standing in state, is her generous "blessing" of Van
and Ada's reunin at Mon Trou as comforting an ending as it might once have
seemed. Or might her "blessing" of Van and Ada's reunion be even more
disturbing -- is she not ever-present, a kind of necessary third, observing the
lovers just as she did earlier as a child. If we accept the notion that
Lucette's ghost -- or else -- going back to what Van tells the dying Phillip --
pieces of Lucette -- bless or haunt the period after her death (including the
writing of the entire manuscript) don't we have to see the novel as stating
emphatically that yes, there is lust after death, a kind of disembodied
existence where we will only have words to play with and will suffe!
r the
> hell(?) of being continually aroused?
----- End forwarded message -----
----- End forwarded message -----
I have enjoyed Eric's thread, and the other colorful ADA threads entangling in
cyberspace. I hadn't yet noted the connection between the earlier mulberries
and rue du Murier, so thank you very much, Eric, since it was plainly intended
by VN (without ALL of the implications Eric sketches, nevertheless, I suspect).
But what especially tickles me is that he is able to extend this pattern in a
passage that bears no superficial resemblance or apparent connection to the
earlier mulberry soap or leavesdropping, while at the same time very exactly
recording the back entrance to the Montreux Palace and the public toilet on the
corner of rue du Murier and the avenue des Alpes, and its vegetation, as they
were in the late 1960s (much has changed since, though the sequoia and the
toilet are still there, as I recall):
A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent sequoia
(which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"--if they remarked it at
all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where a princely
paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on its incongruous
terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its heart-shaped dark
green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast arabesques of shadow onto the
south side of its trunk. A ginkgo (of a much more luminous greenish gold than
its neighbor, a dingily yellowing local birch) marked the corner of a cobbled
lane leading down to the quay.
Brian Boyd
________________________________
From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of Donald B. Johnson
Sent: Mon 2/21/2005 6:14 AM
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject: the mulberry bush,and perhaps the walrus (Lucette & posthumous frenzy?)
From: Earl Sampson
Just a small clarification, which does not, and is not intended to, detract in
any way from Eric's suggestive commentary, nor from any of the other
fascinating postings on the mulberry theme: the tree here is not a mulberry,
but a completely different tree, the paulownia - hence "absurdly misnamed" and
Ada's contemptuous snort. See my note "The Tree With the Heart-Shaped Leaves in
_Pnin_" in The Nabokovian No. 31. The point for the present discussion, of
course, is that Nabokov deliberately introduces the mulberry theme, though
there is no actual mulberry tree present, very likely for the reasons suggested
by Eric.
"Donald B. Johnson" wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from naiman@socrates.berkeley.edu -----
> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 17:19:54 -0800
> From: Eric Naiman <naiman@socrates.berkeley.edu>
> >From Eric Naiman:
>
> In light of the earlier discussion of the mulberry soap, it is worth
> noticing its last usage in the novel:
>
> A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent
> sequoia (which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"-if they
> remarked it at all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where
> a princely paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on
> its incongruous terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its
> heart-shaped dark green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast
> arabesques of shadow onto the south side of its trunk.
>
> We should definitely read this passage in keeping with Brian Boyd's reading
> of III.8 -- to note the presence of Lucette that seems to be ignored by the
> adulterous lovers. He points to the grebes with crests seen a few pages
> later as evidence of Lucette's continued existence in the text. This
> passage, with its reference to the mulberry and the W.C. seems to refer to
> that earlier bathing passage, and we should note the generous leaf-dropping
> that Boyd sees as a Lucette marker elsewhere in the book. Note, too, that
> Lucette -- or Van? -- gives this passage a shimmer of indecency evident
> once we see the reference to the earlier passage. (boxwood-lined path,
> l-eban-ese cedar, the mulberry "standing in state" (as was the soap -- see
> also the bawdy Malrow passage on 377 where Van is cursing "the condition
> in which the image of the four embers of a vixen's cross had not solidly
> put him": "One of the synonyms of "condition" is "state," and the
> adjective "human" may be construed as "manly" etc.
>
> I wonder about passages like this whether they might not show that Lucette
> has been unable to overcome her Ophelian frenzy in death. If she is
> responsible for that phallic walrus -- as Boyd suggested in his recent post
> -- and she is still obsessed with mulberries standing in state, is her
> generous "blessing" of Van and Ada's reunin at Mon Trou as comforting an
> ending as it might once have seemed. Or might her "blessing" of Van and
> Ada's reunion be even more disturbing -- is she not ever-present, a kind of
> necessary third, observing the lovers just as she did earlier as a child.
> If we accept the notion that Lucette's ghost -- or else -- going back to
> what Van tells the dying Phillip -- pieces of Lucette -- bless or haunt the
> period after her death (including the writing of the entire manuscript)
> don't we have to see the novel as stating emphatically that yes, there is
> lust after death, a kind of disembodied existence where we will only have
> words to play with and will suffer the hell(?) of being continually aroused?
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> EDNOTE: From the ever fertile mind of Eric Naiman. Malrow (Malraux) indeed!
The
> mulberry tie-in is intriguing and merits investigation. Cf. those ginko
leaves.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >From Eric Naiman:
>
> In light of the earlier discussion of the mulberry soap, it is worth noticing
its last usage in the novel:
>
> A boxwood-lined path, presided over by a nostalgic-looking sempervirent
sequoia (which American visitors mistook for a "Lebanese cedar"-if they
remarked it at all) took them to the absurdly misnamed rue du Mûrier, where a
princely paulownia ("mulberry tree!" snorted Ada), standing in state on its
incongruous terrace above a public W.C., was shedding generously its
heart-shaped dark green leaves, but retained enough foliage to cast arabesques
of shadow onto the south side of its trunk.
>
> We should definitely read this passage in keeping with Brian Boyd's reading of
III.8 -- to note the presence of Lucette that seems to be ignored by the
adulterous lovers. He points to the grebes with crests seen a few pages later
as evidence of Lucette's continued existence in the text. This passage, with
its reference to the mulberry and the W.C. seems to refer to that earlier
bathing passage, and we should note the generous leaf-dropping that Boyd sees
as a Lucette marker elsewhere in the book. Note, too, that Lucette -- or Van?
-- gives this passage a shimmer of indecency evident once we see the reference
to the earlier passage. (boxwood-lined path, l-eban-ese cedar, the mulberry
"standing in state" (as was the soap -- see also the bawdy Malrow passage on
377 where Van is cursing "the condition in which the image of the four embers
of a vixen's cross had not solidly put him": "One of the synonyms of
"condition" is "state," and the adjective "human" may be construed as "!
manly" etc.
>
> I wonder about passages like this whether they might not show that Lucette has
been unable to overcome her Ophelian frenzy in death. If she is responsible for
that phallic walrus -- as Boyd suggested in his recent post -- and she is still
obsessed with mulberries standing in state, is her generous "blessing" of Van
and Ada's reunin at Mon Trou as comforting an ending as it might once have
seemed. Or might her "blessing" of Van and Ada's reunion be even more
disturbing -- is she not ever-present, a kind of necessary third, observing the
lovers just as she did earlier as a child. If we accept the notion that
Lucette's ghost -- or else -- going back to what Van tells the dying Phillip --
pieces of Lucette -- bless or haunt the period after her death (including the
writing of the entire manuscript) don't we have to see the novel as stating
emphatically that yes, there is lust after death, a kind of disembodied
existence where we will only have words to play with and will suffe!
r the
> hell(?) of being continually aroused?
----- End forwarded message -----
----- End forwarded message -----