Subject
Alexander Dolinin replies to Carolyn Kunin's defense of Michael
Maar
Maar
From
Date
Body
EDNOTE. Alexander Dolinin is among the most respected Nabokov scholars. As a man who has focussed special attention to Nabokov's use of "third-rate" literature, he writes with particular authority on the von Lichberg "Lolita" and its possible relevance to Nabokov book.
----- Original Message -----
From: dolinin
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Zimmer am Maar
I am afraid I can not join Ms. Kunin in congratulating Mr. Maar on his nice find because, from the point of view of Nabokov scholarship, it is trivial and not very interesting. What he actually discovered is that the title of Nabokov's novel (and hence the name of its heroine) coincide with the title and the name in a very bad German short story. I don't understand what all this fuss is about because such coincidences (whether they are "borrowings" or not) are quite common in the history of literature. For example, the Russian title of VN's first novel "Mashen'ka" and the name of its heroine repeat those of Apollon Maikov's novel in verse but this fact is hardly worth mentioning because the two texts (both, of course, love stories), exactly like the two Lolitas, don't have anything else in common though the probability of Nabokov's having known Maikov's novel is manytimes higher than in Mr.Maar's shaky case. What I think Mr.Maar should have done is to have written a two-page note for The Nabokovian, presenting his minor discovery as an addition to a rather long list of various Lolitas and Lolas that preceeded Nabokovs novel, and to be satisfied with Nabokov scholarscongratulations.
As for the ways Nabokovs genius worked, I would be the last one to ignore his attention to third-, forth-, and fifth-rate literature because ten years ago I wrote about it in an article on a Russian source of Lolita someone has already mentioned on Nabokov-L. Let me quote myself on the subject:
Nabokov was keenly interested not only in major, accepted authors he deemed unworthy of their reputation and strove to dethrone, but also in third-rate literature proper, without any pretensions to greatnessin such popular, paraliterary or marginal genres as detective story, thriller, sensational novel, fantasy, humoristic writings and even soft pornography. Texts belonging to these genres usually have a very short life-span; after a while their individual characteristics are obliterated from the readersmemory; they merge with their peers, dissolving into an anonymous mass, not unlike folklore, of standard plots, situations, characters, stylistic clichés. It is from this anonymous mass of forgotten texts that Nabokov preferred to draw ideas for his works because a lucky catch in the sea of bad literature could be transformed beyond recognition and interwoven into a new context without participating in intertextual dialogue. Non-existent in the cultural memory, a third-rate book remains irrelevant both for a text and its reader, insofar as any association it is able to evoke refers not to itself but rather to its genre matrix.
I discussed a very bad Russian story about a pedophile who kidnaps a twelve-year old girl (like H.H., he calls her his fairy-tale princess) to experience a paradise on earthas a curious example of Nabokovs strategy towards pulp fiction.Nabokov, I wrote, could afford a kind of pity towards such literary failures and non-persons as a pathetic Russian author glorifying pedophiles in his idiotic story (or, for this matter, a pathetic German author of Lolita whatever his name) because he knew for certain that they would be remembered owing only to HIS creative whim in brief notes to HIS texts. Ten years ago I couldnt imagine that even serious literary scholars would soon be ready to betray the work of genius for their ten seconds of glory and discuss Nabokovs Lolita in their overblown articles on Mr. Nobodys or Ms.Somebodys trash.
----- Original Message -----
From: Carolyn Kunin
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 4:12 PM
Subject: Zimmer am Maar
Does one (do I?) dare to say this to the List? Perhaps from a literary point of view there is no question of plagiarism, but legally? I wonder. Only a trial (and I do think there are grounds) would decide the question legally. I certainly hope it doesn't come to that.
Professor Zimmer writes
In the name of intertextuality [Maar] should have presented his nice find in a manner that would have prevented everybody but the boldest blockheads from getting it the wrong way. That is, he should not have emphasized the vague parallels between v.Lichberg's and Nabokov's "Lolita" without emphasizing the much greater differences, even as far as the basic plot is concerned.
"Nice find"? Surely it is more than that. "Vague parallels"? They really are more than that. Had Professor Zimmer himself made the "nice find" he could have treated it as he liked. But I don't think he is right to chide Mr Maar.
I think Michael Maar has made an important discovery and I think he has handled it very well, and I congratulate him on both counts.
I hope someone will take this seriously. It could lead to very important understanding of Nabokov's genius.* Too bad that Professor Zimmer is so dismissive. I hope someone else with a good knowledge of German literature and Nabokov's work will do more research.
I hope I am not alone among the List members in congratulating Michael Maar on a really important find, handled very well indeed.
Carolyn
* The great student of gypsy life, Walter Starkie, heard a gypsy in the Balkans play the scrappy tune that he immediately recognized was the base original on which Beethoven created one of the glories of melody (opening of his 6th symphony). I heard Professor Starkie play that forgettable tune at UCLA many years ago, and it only lead me to appreciate Beethoven's genius more.
----- Original Message -----
From: dolinin
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Zimmer am Maar
I am afraid I can not join Ms. Kunin in congratulating Mr. Maar on his nice find because, from the point of view of Nabokov scholarship, it is trivial and not very interesting. What he actually discovered is that the title of Nabokov's novel (and hence the name of its heroine) coincide with the title and the name in a very bad German short story. I don't understand what all this fuss is about because such coincidences (whether they are "borrowings" or not) are quite common in the history of literature. For example, the Russian title of VN's first novel "Mashen'ka" and the name of its heroine repeat those of Apollon Maikov's novel in verse but this fact is hardly worth mentioning because the two texts (both, of course, love stories), exactly like the two Lolitas, don't have anything else in common though the probability of Nabokov's having known Maikov's novel is manytimes higher than in Mr.Maar's shaky case. What I think Mr.Maar should have done is to have written a two-page note for The Nabokovian, presenting his minor discovery as an addition to a rather long list of various Lolitas and Lolas that preceeded Nabokovs novel, and to be satisfied with Nabokov scholarscongratulations.
As for the ways Nabokovs genius worked, I would be the last one to ignore his attention to third-, forth-, and fifth-rate literature because ten years ago I wrote about it in an article on a Russian source of Lolita someone has already mentioned on Nabokov-L. Let me quote myself on the subject:
Nabokov was keenly interested not only in major, accepted authors he deemed unworthy of their reputation and strove to dethrone, but also in third-rate literature proper, without any pretensions to greatnessin such popular, paraliterary or marginal genres as detective story, thriller, sensational novel, fantasy, humoristic writings and even soft pornography. Texts belonging to these genres usually have a very short life-span; after a while their individual characteristics are obliterated from the readersmemory; they merge with their peers, dissolving into an anonymous mass, not unlike folklore, of standard plots, situations, characters, stylistic clichés. It is from this anonymous mass of forgotten texts that Nabokov preferred to draw ideas for his works because a lucky catch in the sea of bad literature could be transformed beyond recognition and interwoven into a new context without participating in intertextual dialogue. Non-existent in the cultural memory, a third-rate book remains irrelevant both for a text and its reader, insofar as any association it is able to evoke refers not to itself but rather to its genre matrix.
I discussed a very bad Russian story about a pedophile who kidnaps a twelve-year old girl (like H.H., he calls her his fairy-tale princess) to experience a paradise on earthas a curious example of Nabokovs strategy towards pulp fiction.Nabokov, I wrote, could afford a kind of pity towards such literary failures and non-persons as a pathetic Russian author glorifying pedophiles in his idiotic story (or, for this matter, a pathetic German author of Lolita whatever his name) because he knew for certain that they would be remembered owing only to HIS creative whim in brief notes to HIS texts. Ten years ago I couldnt imagine that even serious literary scholars would soon be ready to betray the work of genius for their ten seconds of glory and discuss Nabokovs Lolita in their overblown articles on Mr. Nobodys or Ms.Somebodys trash.
----- Original Message -----
From: Carolyn Kunin
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 4:12 PM
Subject: Zimmer am Maar
Does one (do I?) dare to say this to the List? Perhaps from a literary point of view there is no question of plagiarism, but legally? I wonder. Only a trial (and I do think there are grounds) would decide the question legally. I certainly hope it doesn't come to that.
Professor Zimmer writes
In the name of intertextuality [Maar] should have presented his nice find in a manner that would have prevented everybody but the boldest blockheads from getting it the wrong way. That is, he should not have emphasized the vague parallels between v.Lichberg's and Nabokov's "Lolita" without emphasizing the much greater differences, even as far as the basic plot is concerned.
"Nice find"? Surely it is more than that. "Vague parallels"? They really are more than that. Had Professor Zimmer himself made the "nice find" he could have treated it as he liked. But I don't think he is right to chide Mr Maar.
I think Michael Maar has made an important discovery and I think he has handled it very well, and I congratulate him on both counts.
I hope someone will take this seriously. It could lead to very important understanding of Nabokov's genius.* Too bad that Professor Zimmer is so dismissive. I hope someone else with a good knowledge of German literature and Nabokov's work will do more research.
I hope I am not alone among the List members in congratulating Michael Maar on a really important find, handled very well indeed.
Carolyn
* The great student of gypsy life, Walter Starkie, heard a gypsy in the Balkans play the scrappy tune that he immediately recognized was the base original on which Beethoven created one of the glories of melody (opening of his 6th symphony). I heard Professor Starkie play that forgettable tune at UCLA many years ago, and it only lead me to appreciate Beethoven's genius more.