I'd forgotten that Carolyn Kunin asked me if I could say a little
more about my comment that Nabokov uses the method that Kinbote
condemns in Eystein. With my arm being twisted like that, what
choice do I have.

In n. 130, Kinbote tells us that the Soviets are searching for
the Crown Jewels behind a picture by Eystein, "a prodigious master
of the trompe l'oeil". He adds that Eyestein "resorted to a
weird form of trickery", incorporating into the painting the
very material he's painting. "This device which was apparently
meant to enhance the effect of his tactile and tonal values had,
however, something ignoble about it and disclosed not only an
essential flaw in Eystein's talent, but the basic fact that
'reality' is neither the subject nor the object of true art
which creates its own special reality having nothing to do with
the average 'reality' perceived by the communal eye."

If we apply this to literary art, what is the equivalent?
I think it's incorporating real or "found" writing into one's
text. But that's exactly what Kinbote and Nabokov do when
they include quotations, the longest of which is the
paragraph from F. K. Lane's last manuscript. So Kinbote is
inconsistent and I don't think VN can agree with him.

I suspect that Kinbote misunderstands the purpose of this
trick. Eystein didn't need to enhance his "values" (art-
crit jargon?), and that's not why Nabokov uses quotations.
Eystein may have been boasting--"Perhaps my portraits aren't
good portraits, but you can't tell my painted velvet from
real." Nabokov, I imagine, wants the connections to real
people's ideas as well as to his inventions and doesn't want
to miss any resources.

This leads to something else. I assume New Wye is "pale fire"
reflecting our world and Zembla has the same relationship to
New Wye. Above that, I'm glad others have suggested that
Nabokov is saying our world is the reflection of a higher one,
but what's below that? If it's the representational artists
with which Kinbote provides Zembla--Eystein, Arnor, Hodinski
the forger, maybe Conmal--they all seem to raise interesting
points about art and "reality". Arnor uses a real cup and
shoe to find the real girl to match his imagination, while
Hodinski's creations may well have been taken for reality.
But there I run out of ideas. Does anyone have any thoughts
on this?

All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both co-editors.