Subject
Nabstract:Blackwell, AATSEEL95
Date
Body
EDITOR'S NOTE: NABOKV-L continues its series of abstracts from the 1994
MLA-AATSEEL conventions. DBJ
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Black Holes, Fissures, and Pauses: Paradox and Negativity in Nabok{v
by Stephen Blackwell, Indiana University <shblackw@indiana.edu>
Nabokov's fascination with paradox originates from his early
interest in negative space and negative features, especially in
the works of Bely, Gogol', and Pushkin. There, we find a
consistent emphasis on the "interspaces" of the works, rather
than on plot or theme. In INVITATION TO A BEHEADING, the main
character has a primarily paradoxical status in his society,
since he acquires heightened significance from his lack of
meaning (transparency) in that world. INVITATION is filled with
paradoxes of various dimensions, culminating with Cincinnatus's
simultaneous dying-and-not-dying at the novel's close. By
choosing this double meaning rather than deciding on a single,
life-or-death interpretation of the novel's conclusion, we
embrace the moment's paradoxicality. Likewise, THE GIFT is
fundamentally paradoxical, since it is 1) about its own creation
and 2) calls itself a distortion of itself, thereby becoming a
variant of the "liar's paradox." If we accept these and other
paradoxes as undecidable, anomalous points inexplicable in the
terms of the novels or of literary criticism, then we open
important perspectives on the implied world view behind the works
themselves.
The issue of paradox relates vitally to two recent
discussions within Nabokov scholarship: 1) the role of free will
versus a deterministic fate in Nabokov's works and 2) the
implications of Nabokov's alleged tyrannical control over every aspect
of the literary moment. Determinism and tyranny both rely on the
perfection of some kind of system. As Godel's incompleteness
theorem demonstrates, no complex system is ever complete: all
have gaps, which tend to show up as paradoxes. Within this
context, one not alien to Nabokov's sensibilities, paradoxes can
indicate limits of the systems Nabokov himself was creating.
Whatever control he achieves, he never conceals the inevitability
of self-contradiction. If a totalizing system represents control
and restriction, paradox represents freedom and escape. Nabokov
thus demonstrates the impossibility of successful totalitarianism,
even the impossibility of denying free will. Wherever we find
paradox, there we find the freedom in the Nabokovian text.
MLA-AATSEEL conventions. DBJ
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Black Holes, Fissures, and Pauses: Paradox and Negativity in Nabok{v
by Stephen Blackwell, Indiana University <shblackw@indiana.edu>
Nabokov's fascination with paradox originates from his early
interest in negative space and negative features, especially in
the works of Bely, Gogol', and Pushkin. There, we find a
consistent emphasis on the "interspaces" of the works, rather
than on plot or theme. In INVITATION TO A BEHEADING, the main
character has a primarily paradoxical status in his society,
since he acquires heightened significance from his lack of
meaning (transparency) in that world. INVITATION is filled with
paradoxes of various dimensions, culminating with Cincinnatus's
simultaneous dying-and-not-dying at the novel's close. By
choosing this double meaning rather than deciding on a single,
life-or-death interpretation of the novel's conclusion, we
embrace the moment's paradoxicality. Likewise, THE GIFT is
fundamentally paradoxical, since it is 1) about its own creation
and 2) calls itself a distortion of itself, thereby becoming a
variant of the "liar's paradox." If we accept these and other
paradoxes as undecidable, anomalous points inexplicable in the
terms of the novels or of literary criticism, then we open
important perspectives on the implied world view behind the works
themselves.
The issue of paradox relates vitally to two recent
discussions within Nabokov scholarship: 1) the role of free will
versus a deterministic fate in Nabokov's works and 2) the
implications of Nabokov's alleged tyrannical control over every aspect
of the literary moment. Determinism and tyranny both rely on the
perfection of some kind of system. As Godel's incompleteness
theorem demonstrates, no complex system is ever complete: all
have gaps, which tend to show up as paradoxes. Within this
context, one not alien to Nabokov's sensibilities, paradoxes can
indicate limits of the systems Nabokov himself was creating.
Whatever control he achieves, he never conceals the inevitability
of self-contradiction. If a totalizing system represents control
and restriction, paradox represents freedom and escape. Nabokov
thus demonstrates the impossibility of successful totalitarianism,
even the impossibility of denying free will. Wherever we find
paradox, there we find the freedom in the Nabokovian text.